The draft-Carson movement gears up for a run.

Mike Theiler / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The man behind the Draft Ben Carson for President Committee has launched a new super PAC that will snap into action when Carson announces a presidential bid, he said on Monday.

Documents filed with the Federal Election Commission show that The 2016 Committee was registered in December. Its designated agent is Vernon Robinson, a conservative political activist and former Congressional candidate who is also the campaign director for the draft Carson PAC, from which he has made hundreds of thousands of dollars.

According to Robinson, the super PAC will begin its activities when Carson announces a run, thereby ending the draft campaign.

"The 2016 Committee is the name of the committee that will operate upon Dr. Carson's announcement," Robinson said. Like the Draft Ben Carson for President Committee, The 2016 Committee is an independent super PAC, and in practice the differences will be small — basically, it will be the same entity under a different name. "Only two things are going to change," Robinson said. "A, the committee will not have 'Draft Ben Carson' in its name. And B, it won't be drafting him because he'll already be a candidate."

Asked whether the super PAC's existence means Carson is definitely running, Robinson said, "There's big indicators that he's going to run, but I don't have any more inside information than anybody else does."

"We're staying ahead of the game," he said.

The other head honcho of the draft-Carson movement, John Philip Sousa descendant John Philip Sousa IV, is not listed on the registration form, though Robinson said he will continue his involvement. The draft movement has been growing a political operation in early primary states, hiring activists in Iowa, South Carolina, and regional directors around the country.

The Draft Ben Carson for President Committee has raked in huge amounts of cash, receiving $12,027,461 according to the latest FEC tally. It has also spent nearly as much as it's taken in: $11,265,270.

h/t Carrie Levine

The rest of the state gets marriage equality on Jan. 6, but, following a state judge’s ruling on Monday, same-sex couples are marrying in Miami-Dade County.

Melanie and Vanessa Alenier

Jonathan Kendall/Miami New Times

WASHINGTON — Following a hearing on Monday morning, same-sex couples were allowed to begin marrying in Florida's Miami-Dade County — a little more than 12 hours before marriage equality begins in the rest of the state.

Although a federal court injunction goes into effect on Tuesday, which will lead to clerks throughout the state allowing same-sex couples to marry in Florida, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel ended the stay in a state court marriage case that only addresses marriage licenses in the county.

"OK, I'm lifting the stay," Zabel said at the conclusion of arguments on the issue this morning. The judge went on to perform the first marriage of a same-sex couple to take place in Florida, as she performed the ceremony for two of the plaintiffs in the case, Cathy Pareto and Karla Arguello.

As the Miami Herald reported, "Clerk of Courts Harvey Ruvin said same-sex marriages would begin at 2 p.m. Same-sex marriages performed out of state will also be recognized in Miami-Dade, effective immediately."

The Miami-Dade case same-sex couple plaintiffs before this morning's hearing: Todd and Jeffrey Delmay, Cathy Pareto and Karla Arguello, Vanessa and Melanie Alenier, and Don Johnston and Jorge Diaz.

Courtesy of Equality Florida

Watch this Associated Press video from this morning's arguments over lifting the stay in Miami-Dade County:

youtube.com

View Entire List ›

Josh Earnest warns that boosting Scalise to House leadership could make it tougher for the GOP to expand its base.

Jim Bourg / Reuters

WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday that electing Rep. Steve Scalise to the position of House Majority Whip reflects on the Republican conference's priorities and values and suggested it could threaten the party's efforts to "broaden their appeal."

"There's no arguing that who Republicans decide to elevate into a leadership position says a lot about what the conference's priorities and values are," he said. "And ultimately, Mr. Scalise reportedly described himself as 'David Duke without the baggage.' So it will be up to Republicans to decide what that says about their conference."

With Republicans looking to "broaden their appeal," to minority groups that generally aren't part of their base, Earnest said, "it will ultimately be up to individual Republicans in Congress to decide whether or not elevating Mr. Scalise into leadership will effectively reinforce that strategy."

House Republicans are rallying behind Scalise's campaign for the Whip position — the third-highest position in the House GOP leadership after Speaker and Majority Leader — despite a controversy over Scalise's political past, when he spoke before a white supremacist meeting as a state legislator in 2002. Scalise apologized for the 2002 appearance, claiming he was not aware of the views of the audience, and condemned the racial views of David Duke and other white supremacists.

Democrats have called on Republicans to vote against Scalise for the leadership position, but Republican leadership has publicly stuck by him.

Lyft responds to a request from Sen. Al Franken for more information on its privacy practices. Uber responded to a similar request last month.

Getty Images Justin Sullivan

WASHINGTON — Lyft said in a letter to Sen. Al Franken it no longer needs to access journalist data to show off its product.

"In our early days we were eager to demonstrate the community behind Lyft for those interested in learning more," Lyft said in the letter. "Today, we have better ways of showcasing the platform's community and this type of access is prohibited without consent."

In the letter, Lyft states internal software now restricts access to customer data only to "teams that need it as part of their daily work."

The letter lists at least six different teams, including the Analytics and Driver Retention teams, that can still access customer trip data. Outside of those teams, Lyft says, teams must request access to full data — a tiered system installed by Lyft just days after a Re/code report on the company's data practices and after BuzzFeed News reported that rival Uber had accessed a reporter's trip logs.

Lyft executives also write that the company now records when employees access data.

Franken said in a statement he is pleased that Lyft responded but said the company still left some unanswered questions.

"I believe that Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, and that right includes the ability to control who is getting your personal location information and who it's being shared with," Franken said in a statement. "I was pleased to receive a response from Lyft, and I appreciate the company's effort to provide thorough answers. I look forward to further discussing these matters — for example, how and why Lyft retains customer data and how access to customer records is determined."

Uber, Lyft's chief competitor in the ridesharing app industry, said in its own letter to Franken last month that an employee accessed a BuzzFeed News reporter's information because she was "30 minutes late" to a meeting.

In Lyft's letter, signed by Lyft CEO Logan Green and President John Zimmer, the company also implicitly references concerns over Uber's use of personal data.

"As recent events in our industry have made clear, customers may be justifiability concerned about a company making improper use of their trip data," the letter said. "We've taken this opportunity to reevaluate our own restrictions and protections to ensure that we are doing everything we can to keep our customers' trip data safe."

Read the full letter here:

Two decades ago, Jeb Bush wrote there should be no special rights for LGBT people. “This opinion editorial from 20 years ago does not reflect Gov. Bush’s views now, nor would he use this terminology today,” a spokeswoman said.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Jeb Bush has said gay couples shouldn't be "discriminated against." He has argued that same-sex parents who "love their children with all their heart and soul" are "examples to others." And he has warned that the Republican Party, whose nomination he may seek next year, is too often labeled "anti-gay."

The former Florida governor hasn't changed his position on same-sex marriage. He opposes it, and has since he first ran for office more than 20 years ago.

But Bush's recent, somewhat sympathetic language about LGBT rights provides a marked contrast to his early comments on the issue — more in rhetoric than policy.

During his first and unsuccessful bid for governor in 1994, Bush argued in an editorial that LGBT people do not deserve special legal protection. "We have enough special categories, enough victims, without creating even more," he wrote.

In the editorial, published in the Miami Herald that summer, Bush drew a parallel between legal protection for gays and the question, "[Should] sodomy be elevated to the same constitutional status as race and religion? My answer is No."

"The statement that the governor must stand up for all people on all matters is just silly," Bush wrote, arguing that government does not defend every Floridian "with equal verve and enthusiasm." He listed a string of examples: "Polluters, pedophiles, pornographers, drunk drivers, and developers without proper permits."

Bush wrote the piece in response to a Herald editorial suggesting that he and his opponent in the Republican primary, Ander Crenshaw, held views on homosexuality that made them bigots. (The editorial focused on Crenshaw, now a congressman, but singled out Bush for reportedly saying employers and landlords should have the right to reject employees or tenants because of their sexuality.)

In a statement to BuzzFeed News, a spokeswoman for Bush said the governor no longer holds the views in the editorial and would not use the language today.

"Gov. Bush believes that our society should have a culture of respect for all people, regardless of their differences, and that begins with preventing discrimination, including when it comes to sexual orientation," said Kristy Campbell, Bush's spokeswoman. "This opinion editorial from 20 years ago does not reflect Gov. Bush's views now, nor would he use this terminology today."

On Sunday, asked about a federal court injunction allowing same-sex marriage in Florida, Bush said same-sex marriage should be decided at the local level. That statement comes as court rulings across the country have introduced legalized marriage for same-sex couples in many states over the last year.

The next day, Bush made fuller remarks to the New York Times and said that the "rule of law" must be respected "regardless of our disagreements."

The 1994 editorial is one of the more striking examples of the conservative language with which Bush used to speak about LGBT issues — rhetoric that perhaps matched the time, but has shifted drastically since he won his race for governor in 1998.

"The only thing that seems to have changed is his tone," said Nadine Smith, the executive director of Equality Florida, a leading LGBT rights group in the state.

Smith, a longtime activist in Florida, has followed Bush's stance on LGBT policy closely since his first run for governor. She recalled a 1994 ballot measure he supported that sought to ban state laws protecting gays from discrimination.

The constitutional amendment, ultimately thrown out by the Florida Supreme Court on procedural grounds, was proposed by David Caton, the founder of the American Family Association, a Tampa-based group. (In the summer of 1994, Caton's group endorsed Bush over Crenshaw, his opponent in the Republican primary, according to news coverage at the time.)

And at times, Bush found himself on the defense for his support for polices like the Caton ballot measure. During his first campaign for governor, according to news accounts at the time, he responded "sternly" to a lesbian couple heckling him at an event, saying, "I don't believe we need to create another category of victims."

Bush long used the language of victimization to describe LGBT activism.

In his 1995 book, Profiles in Character, Bush described the "gay rights movement," "feminist movement," and "black empowerment movement" as "modern victim movements."

These activists, he wrote, "have attempted to get people to view themselves as part of a smaller group deserving of something from society."

During his two terms as governor, from 1999 to 2007, Bush maintained his views on same-sex marriage. Ahead of a 2008 campaign for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Florida — already illegal in the state at the time — Bush initially maintained that such a proposal would be unnecessary. He later backed the ban.

Bush announced last month he would "actively explore" a White House run.

Should he launch a campaign, Bush would face likely candidates such as Sens. Marco Rubio and Rand Paul, as well as Gov. Chris Christie. There is no possible presidential contender on the Republican side who publicly supports legalized marriage for same-sex couples.

The full text of Bush's 1994 editorial reads as follows:

The Miami Herald
June 22, 1994 — Wednesday

JEB BUSH: NO SPECIAL LEGAL STATUS FOR GAYS

Re the June 20 Herald editorial Bigotry and its mouthpieces about the gubernatorial candidates' position on homosexuality and special legal rights for homosexuals: Homosexuality is wrong, but it is also wrong to discriminate against homosexuals in employment, housing, etc., solely on the basis of sexual preference. I have employed homosexuals and continue to do so. Therefore, I take vigorous exception to your characterization of me as a bigot.

However, I do not believe that government should create a new class of citizens with special legal rights.

It is disingenuous of you to write that "the governor must stand up for and represent all the people of the Sunshine State on all matters." You imply that discrimination is always wrong, yet government and individual Floridians discriminate every day in innumerable ways. Government discriminates against bank robbers, drug dealers, litterbugs, and homeowners who repair their seawall without a permit, just to name a few. Yours is not a reasoned argument reflecting reality.

The governor — and the government — do not defend the conduct of every Floridian with equal verve and enthusiasm. Polluters, pedophiles, pornographers, drunk drivers, and developers without proper permits receive — and deserve — precious little representation or defense from their governor. The statement that the governor must stand up for all people on all matters is just silly.

The public policy question is whether homosexuals deserve special legal protection from otherwise legal, private acts of discrimination, which protections are not available to smokers, drinkers, children, redheads, Midwesterners, Democrats, veterans, nudists, etc. Or, to put it another way, should sodomy be elevated to the same constitutional status as race and religion? My answer is No. We have enough special categories, enough victims, without creating even more.

Jeb Bush
Coral Gables

Spokesman Josh Earnest revealed the president’s position at a news conference Tuesday.

Obama in December

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

President Obama would veto a bill authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline if it is passed by Congress, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a news conference Tuesday.

The White House has consistently objected to congressional efforts to force approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, which has been under examination by the State Department since the start of Obama's administration. Administration officials have said that an ongoing legal battle in Nebraska over the pipeline's route must be resolved before the administration can complete its work on weighing the impacts and benefits of Keystone XL.

The issue has both staunch supporters and sharp critics, particularly from environmental activists. Republicans, who officially took control of both houses of congress Tuesday after routing Democrats in the November elections, have vowed to make approving the pipeline a top priority.

A Keystone bill failed in the final days of Congress in 2014. As the AP reports, "but the Congress that convened Tuesday is Republican-controlled and new Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said the pipeline bill will be among the first issues voted on."

The veto promise does not end the battle over Keystone XL. Obama has expressed skepticism at the economic benefits promised by pipeline supporters, but has repeatedly said the administration will not rule on whether or not it can be built until after the long State Department process is complete. Activists in the president's base who are committed to stopping Keystone XL have vowed to keep up their vocal protest campaign until a final administration decision has been made, and supporters of the pipeline hope that their increased numbers in the new congress make it impossible for the White House to stop them.

This is a breaking news story, please check back here or at BuzzFeed News on Twitter for updates.

LINK: Top White House Adviser: “We Believe In The Process” On Keystone

View Entire List ›

The Ohio congressman will wield the speaker gavel for the third term, presiding over the largest Republican majority since 1928.

Joshua Roberts / Reuters

John Boehner was re-elected speaker of the House on Tuesday, overcoming opposition from a small group of conservative Republicans.

Boehner won re-election with 216 votes. Twenty-five Republicans did not vote for Boehner.

Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert, Florida Rep. Ted Yoho, and Rep. Daniel Webster, also from Florida, mounted attempts to unseat Boehner, a popular goal of the more conservative wing of the party who see the Ohio Republican as too willing to compromise on core principles.

Despite Boehner's victory, the conservative opposition to him foreshadows larger challenges he and his leadership team will face as they begin the new term, which includes passing legislation that will address President Obama's executive actions on immigration policy.

Said one member, “If something else comes out, it’s over.” Incoming chair G.K. Butterfield delivers sharp speech on race and inequality.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise

Jim Bourg / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Rep. G.K. Butterfield on Tuesday declared black America in a state of emergency as it was a century ago, speaking at a ceremony installing the North Carolina Democrat as the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus.

CBC members said his speech — against the backdrop of political fallout from House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise's acknowledgement he gave a speech to a white supremacist group in 2002 — represented a moral and political compass for the 114th Congress.

Four prominent CBC members in attendance declined to go on the record about Scalise and whether Speaker John Boehner was right in defending him on the eve of his vote to remain Speaker of the House.

But those members, who spoke anonymously because they were not prepared to go public with their sentiment regarding the issue, hesitated to call for Scalise's resignation. Instead, they all said Scalise deserved the benefit of the doubt — unless there are more revelations about Scalise.

Said one member, "If something else comes out, it's over."

Asked what he thought would become of Scalise and whether the Republican leadership would force him out, Rep. Chaka Fattah said, "I'm not into personalities." He added that he has met with Scalise on occasion and knows him personally. "I'm focused on the agenda. And we have some big concerns about [Republicans'] agenda."

"These are the kind of things where the media gets on it—" said Fattah, waving his hands.

Rep. John Lewis, a major figure of the civil rights movement, told the Huffington Post he thinks Scalise should apologize to Congress. "I think somehow and in some way, he should come clean and say what he did and apologize to members of Congress, to his colleagues on both the Republican and the Democratic side of the aisle," Lewis said.

Butterfield's speech Tuesday touched on his personal history and the legacy of the Jim Crow South.

"We saw racism at its worst," said Butterfield in the speech, adding that railroad tracks had divided his hometown of Wilson, North Carolina, where citizens did not enjoy basic services like paved streets. Working daily to support the Jim Crow economy, Butterfield said, those before him "were relegated to second-class citizenship."

Butterfield said the unbearable conditions he and other baby boomers experienced shaped him and made him "determined to fight every day to expose and evict racism and discrimination wherever they exist."

"And so if anyone has any doubts," his voice rising, "that this chairman and this Congressional Black Caucus will have any reluctance to fight for our communities, you are mistaken."

Butterfield's presence, Fattah said, is the ideal counter to the new Republican Congress, which he argued would stand in the way of changes to the criminal justice system, mending mistrust between police and black America, and solving income inequality, which Butterfield said would be a top priority.

"He's got a steadfastness and an intellectual heft that I think is going to be useful as we navigate our way through some of these issues," Fattah said.

Biden had to swear in all the elected and reelected Senators on Tuesday.

On Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden swore in members of the Senate that were either newly elected or reelected. As is the custom, senators are joined by their families for a photo op after the ceremony.

Larry Downing / Reuters

As has also become the custom, Biden jokes around with the family, often giving some members a hug or kiss.

But Sen. Chris Coons' daughter wasn't fully into Biden's charm.

After Biden inaudibly whispered something in her ear for a few seconds, he went in for the kiss. And it didn't quite go as planned.

View Entire List ›

Doing what Mitch McConnell did: keep his caucus united for two years and cause big problems for the party in control. It looks like Reid is doing exactly what he did in 2005.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid

Joshua Roberts / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Following President Obama's election in November 2008, Mitch McConnell huddled with his colleagues to map out a simple plan to bring Republicans back into relevancy: stand united against anything the new president and his majorities in Congress wanted.

McConnell and his colleagues couldn't stop the eventual passage of Obamacare. But their united opposition — which held despite repeated efforts by former Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus to pick off deal-making moderates in McConnell's conference — not only undermined the law's effectiveness, they set the tone for the next four years on Capitol Hill.

With Obama entering the homestretch of his presidency, perhaps the biggest unanswered question is whether Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid can replicate McConnell's tight control on his conference and create an effective blockade of Republican legislation over the next 18 months.

Reid's ability to keep moderates and progressives in line on issues large and small could have an enormous impact on the 2016 election. A Senate that is plunged repeatedly into ugly partisan fights could create perpetual crises for presidential hopefuls like Sens. Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz.

"This is not Senator Reid's first rodeo. He's been an incredibly effective leader both in the majority and the minority," a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide said Tuesday of Reid's abilities to keep his caucus in line.

It appears that Reid may be pulling a page from his own minority leader playbook already this year.

Despite opposition from the White House to upcoming bills on the Keystone XL pipeline and the medical device tax in Obamacare, both likely to have enough Democratic support to pass the Senate, and Reid appears content to let them pass with nominal opposition and little arm twisting.

That's eerily similar to how Reid opened up his tenure as the new minority leader in 2005. Then, with Republicans riding high from their 2004 drubbing of Senate Democrats, former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist quickly pushed through two long-sought-after Republican bills: a measure overhauling the nation's bankruptcy laws and a bill to limit class-action lawsuits. Both measures were hotly opposed by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, but enjoyed some support from moderates, and Reid essentially allowed them to move through the chamber without much of a fight in a show of deference to the 2004 election.

Then Democrats closed ranks. President George W. Bush made their job easier by focusing all of his political capital on a bid to change Social Security, but even lower-profile bills ground to a halt. Before the end of the year it became commonplace for Frist to come to the floor to lament the slow pace of legislating in the Senate.

Democrats close to Reid said to expect a similar dynamic. "Once we get past the low-hanging fruit, the contrasts between Republicans and Democrats are going to be much starker" and Reid's conference will become increasingly united, one former Reid aide said.

When the Democrats will attempt to do that is unclear — though one possibility is when the funding for the Department of Homeland Security runs out in February. The measure was originally designed to give Republicans time to determine how to defund the Obama administration's executive actions on immigration.

Obama will veto any bill that limits his ability to put the immigration actions into effect, and Democrats will likely try to attack Republicans on the issue as extreme.

But if Republicans can craft bills that attack the actions in such a way as to pressure moderate Democrats — for instance, one leadership aide said the bill could include explicit language regarding funding for undocumented sexual predators — it could be the first test of Reid's ability to control his conference.

That ability could also be tested by a handful of other issues. Sen. Elizabeth Warren briefly exerted pressure late last year over a measure that helped Citigroup — she and a handful of other lawmakers represent a real division in how Democrats approach financial issues. Additionally, trouble could come in the form of an Iran sanctions bill or any effort by Republicans to undo Obama's recent executive orders relating to Cuba, both of which will have natural support inside his conference.

But the biggest wild card facing Reid over the next year will be the House. If Republicans opt to ship over high-profile measures that dismantle environmental and labor regulations, tie Obama's hands on immigration, or repeatedly include Obamacare repeal language, you can expect Reid's conference to rally around him — and to a lesser degree the president.

House Republican leaders are, perhaps predictably, bullish.

In his speech accepting the speakership, Speaker John Boehner pointed to the low-hanging fruit the next several weeks are front-loaded with, arguing, "We'll begin our work on this common ground … Then we'll invite the president to support and sign these bipartisan initiatives into law."

"This will be a good start — and more. It will be a sign the logjam is breaking. And it will be a foundation on which to address the bigger challenges," he added.

But Boehner's sunny words are belied by the reality that despite having a sizable majority to operate with, he still has little control over dozens of his most conservative members — nearly all of whom have been the monkey wrench in his legislative machine since he became Speaker in 2010.

For four years Boehner has seen his most carefully laid plans dashed when conservatives, often riled up by outside forces like Heritage Action and Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, threaten primary challenges against any Republican who falls in line with leadership. Although leadership aides insist a growing majority of the GOP conference is ready to find ways to pass bills that can pass the House, the Senate, and at least occasionally get signed into law by Obama, they acknowledge the Trouble Maker Caucus of conservatives is not.

That dynamic was underscored Tuesday when Boehner saw 25 of his fellow Republicans cast protest votes during the speaker election — including a dozen members who voted for Rep. Daniel Webster, a two-term backbencher who is hardly a household name in conservative circles, let alone the broader public. Even Rep. Scott Rigell, a Virginia Republican not known as a hardliner, voted for Webster despite being given a plum spot on the House Appropriations Committee by Boehner late last year.

"The 25 of us who voted the way we did, we represented the frustration of the American people. I'm surprised we didn't get to 30 to be honest with you," said North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones, a perpetual Boehner antagonist.

Mainstream Republicans, however, downplayed the significance of the rebels.

"I think there are people that want to put more meaning to it than it should have. The key thing is Boehner got 216 votes," said Rep. Steve Stivers.

"I think once you get past this vote we're all one team and move forward. We have to get 218 together of 246 on any vote. That's not that different from last Congress," Stivers added.

“If it is determined that additional citations or attribution are required, the appropriate revisions will be made in subsequent printings.”

Ben Carson Facebook

Several sections of potential Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson's 2012 book America the Beautiful were plagiarized from various sources, BuzzFeed News has found.

In many cases Carson cites the works that he plagiarizes in endnotes, though he makes no effort to indicate that not just the source, but the words themselves, had been taken from different authors.

The case is similar to a 2013 report from BuzzFeed News that found Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul plagiarized in his book while citing the works he copied in the footnotes. Paul's book was eventually updated to include attribution.

In one instance, Carson cites wholesale from an old website that has been online since at least 2002, Socialismsucks.net.

In another example, he plagiarizes from two authors whose works he mentions in passing at earlier points in the book: Cleon Skousen, a conservative historian who died in 2006, and Bill Federer, another conservative historian, who Carson thanks in the acknowledgements for helping get his book published.

Carson's book sold less than 1,000 copies when it was first published in 2012, according to the New York Times' 2013 profile of Carson. After his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast in 2013 exploded on YouTube the book sold 46,000 copies in six weeks, the Times reported.

Carson recently said a decision on a 2016 presidential run is coming before May, and has previously said "the chances are reasonably good" that he will run for president.

In a phone call, Federer told BuzzFeed News he did not care that Carson had copied from his book.

"That's fine," said Federer, who noted his book states he grants permission to duplicate text as long as proper attribution is given.

Federer told BuzzFeed News he had given Carson some of his books when they served together on the board of Regent University.

Besides being a historian, Federer is a former Republican congressional candidate from Missouri. Federer is the author of numerous books, such as Endangered Speeches — How the ACLU, IRS & LBJ Threaten Extinction of Free Speech, and Three Secular Reasons Why America Should be Under God.

"I gave him some of my books, and he was kind enough to give me an acknowledgement," said Federer.

"Permission is granted to duplicate 10,000 words or less, provided acknowledgement is given to" Federer's book, reads a line in the front matter of Federer's book.

Sam Wells, the owner and creator of SocailismSucks.net, confirmed he wrote the text Carson plagiarized in his book.

"The comments at the bottom of the page are mine," he told BuzzFeed News.

Other sources taken nearly verbatim include a CBS News article, a Liberty Institute press release, a local newspaper article, and various internet sites.

In Carson's book, he writes about being caught plagiarizing in college and being given the chance to rewrite the paper after it was discovered.

Not long after that, when I was a psychology major delving into the mysteries of the human mind, I stepped unknowingly into yet another moral dilemma. During my research for one of the papers in an advanced psychology course, I found some passages that seemed particularly appropriate, and I included them in my writing. I did not, however, indicate that this was the work of someone else; frankly, I had never even heard of the term plagiarism. When the professor asked me to make an appointment to discuss my paper, I was befuddled . When I stepped into his office, however, I could immediately sense the weight of the moment. He pointed out that I had plagiarized and told me that the consequences for doing so normally included expulsion. I could see all of my dreams of becoming a doctor dashed by my stupidity. Even though I did not know the implications of plagiarism, I certainly should have known inherently that what I was doing was wrong. I had done it before without consequences and probably would have continued doing it if I had not been caught. Fortunately for me, the professor was very compassionate, realized that I was naïve, and gave me a chance to rewrite the paper. This raises another question: Is ignorance an acceptable excuse for unethical behavior?

Zondervan, a Christian publishing company and division of Harper Collins that published Carson's book, didn't respond to emails or calls asking about the book.

An email to Harper Collins was likewise not returned.

Carson's representative Sealey Yates, who functions as his lawyer and literary agent, said they had "begun to review the materials" provided by BuzzFeed News but had "not been able to communicate with the publisher's editorial staff."

"If it is determined that additional citations or attribution are required, the appropriate revisions will be made in subsequent printings," Yates said. "Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention."

View Entire List ›

The Fraternal Order of Police represents more than 330,000 officers.

Adrees Latif / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The nation's largest police union Tuesday called on Congress and the Obama administration to expand federal hate crimes laws to cover law enforcement officers.

In separate letters to President Barack Obama and Congressional leadership, Fraternal Order of Police President Chuck Canterbury argued if targeting people because of "race, color, creed, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability" leads to a higher penalty, so should attacks explicitly targeting members of the law enforcement community.

"Now Americans who choose to be law enforcement officers, who choose to serve their communities and put their lives on the line for their fellow citizens, find themselves hunted and targeted just because of the uniform they wear," Canterbury said in the letter.

The letter also notes the union has tried to address the hate crime definition with Congress in the past, but has so far been unsuccessful.

Canterbury issued a statement about the issue Monday, but the letters, dated Tuesday, represent a formal call for action.

"My thoughts and prayers over the past few weeks have been with the families of officers who were, with malice and forethought, gunned down just because they served as police officers," Canterbury said in his statement Monday. "Enough is enough! It's time for Congress to do something to protect the men and women who protect us."

According to Canterbury's letter, there were 47 law enforcement officers killed by gunfire in 2014, nine of which were "ambush killings," including NYPD Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu, who were killed in Brooklyn several weeks ago.

"We do not accept that our uniforms alone make us targets because someone was driven to rage over a perceived injustice or desires to strike a blow against our civil government," the letter said.

You can read the letters here:

View Entire List ›

“The First Amendment is designed to ensure a robust debate and refusing to publish the cartoons that are the alleged reason for this brutal act of murder and terror is inconsistent with the spirit of a free debate.”

Gary Cameron / Reuters

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz said Wednesday that it is "unfortunate" that some media outlets are censoring controversial cartoons published by the French satirical newspaper attacked by terrorists.

Gunmen on Wednesday executed a deadly attack at the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo, the French newspaper known for portraying Muhammad, and others, in controversial ways on its cover. After the attack, some media outlets have opted to crop or blur the cartoons in their coverage.

"The attack in Paris is heartbreaking," Cruz told BuzzFeed News. "It is a reminder of the global threat we face and the enormous peril presented by radical Islamic terrorists. It is unfortunate to see media outlets engaging in censorship."

"The First Amendment is designed to ensure a robust debate and refusing to publish the cartoons that are the alleged reason for this brutal act of murder and terror is inconsistent with the spirit of a free debate," he said.

LINK: Some Outlets Are Censoring Charlie Hebdo’s Satirical Cartoons After Attack

LINK: 12 Striking Charlie Hebdo Front Covers

View Entire List ›

“Well, all that I can do is get in trouble by answering that question…”

w.soundcloud.com

Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky says House Republicans have done a better job than Democrats at refreshing their leadership ranks over time and urged his party to follow suit.

"Well, all that I can do is get in trouble by answering that question," said Yarmuth on the Joe Elliott Show on 970WGTK Wednesday. "I have been one who has talked about our leadership on a number of occasions, about our need to get newer faces representing our party. And it's not a reflection on Nancy, it's not reflection on Steny Hoyer or on Jim Clyburn or on any of those leaders who are all very competent and have done great service to the country, but Republicans have been much better at bringing up new faces and refreshing their leadership group over the last few years. We need to refresh our leadership group."

Yarmuth added he "didn't have any option" but to vote for Pelosi as Minority Leader.

House Democrats re-elected Pelosi as Minority Leader in November, as well as all other senior Democratic leaders.

A three-judge panel struggled Wednesday with a law the court saw as having troubling provisions — and a lower court’s order stopping enforcement of those provisions that the appeals court saw as being too broad.

Women with the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health demonstrate outside of 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015, in New Orleans.

AP Photo/Jonathan Bachman

NEW ORLEANS — Texas' strict abortion law was back in court Wednesday, where a three-judge panel expressed skepticism about two parts of the law — but also about the broad trial court order striking down those provisions.

With the specter of the Supreme Court looming, the 5th Circuit of Appeals considered the constitutionality of parts of the law signed by Gov. Rick Perry in 2013. HB2, as the law is known, instituted new regulations for abortion providers in the state of the Texas and banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

"We're not here to make abortion policy for America," Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod told the lawyer for Texas abortion providers, noting that the court is "just an inferior court."

Despite her attempt to dismiss the national concerns, the front-row reserved seating in the courtroom for regional and national media and the full courtroom signaled just how closely the law is being watched.

The judges were looking at two provisions of the law: one requiring all doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital and another requiring all facilities in which abortions are performed to meet the state's standards for ambulatory surgical centers (ASC), where outpatient surgery is performed.

These two regulations, abortion providers have argued, will leave fewer than 10 abortion providers in the state, and only in major metropolitan areas.

Specifically, the judges have to address whether they will strike down the provisions in full, in part, or not at all. Additionally, the judges must decide whether they will take action statewide or just in certain areas most impacted by the provisions.

All three judges on the panel — Elrod was joined Judges Edward C. Prado and Catharina Haynes — were appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush, a former Texas governor himself. But the questions on Wednesday, particularly from Haynes but at points from Elrod, suggested a discomfort with the obstacles the law would place in the way of women seeking abortions in Texas.

"I still don't understand why 7,000 square feet is more sterile than 3,000 square feet?" an exasperated Haynes asked the state lawyer, Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell, at one point, referencing the increased physical space required under the ASC standards.

At the same time, however, Haynes later drilled the plaintiffs' lawyer, Stephanie Toti from the Center for Reproductive Rights, on the lower court's decision to invalidate all of the ASC requirements, rather than going through to determine which aspects of those requirements specifically created an unconstitutional "undue burden."

At one point, when Toti responded that there were many provisions at issue and it would have taken two months to go through all of them, Elrod shot back, "Why wasn't there a two-month trial then?"

By issuing a broad ruling halting enforcement of all of the ASC requirements statewide, the state argued that U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel ignored abortion law's severability clause, which says that an unconstitutional part of the law can be cut while the rest of the law can continue to be enforced. The plaintiffs' lawyer, however, countered that the ASC requirements all are linked together and a recent Supreme Court ruling "makes clear" that judges shouldn't "rewrite" statutes in order to save them from invalidation.

Although the court appeared willing to consider a statewide, facial injunction stopping at least some of the ASC building requirements from going into effect — a debate that, within the 5th Circuit, Elrod said comes down to whether a "large fraction" of women are impacted by the law — it was not clear, if it did so, whether the court would address that in its ruling or send the case back to the trial court to determine which specific parts of the ASC requirements were unconstitutional. None of the panel appeared to be willing to continue the lower court's injunction of the admitting privileges provision. The admitting privileges portion of Yeakel's ruling has been stayed pending appeal.

Even if the court declines to stop enforcement of either or both provisions statewide, the panel appeared concerned with the impact of both provisions specifically on clinics in El Paso and McAllen, two areas where the provisions would have the result of eliminating the availability of abortion providers in the state for hundreds of miles. The court could separately rule that the provisions are unconstitutional as applied to the clinics in those cities, a possibility that even the state only countered minimally.

A mid-2014 report found that Democratic party spending was woefully short when it came to minority vendors. Six months later, Democrats are meeting with Hispanic-business owners and have Latino hires in the pipeline, but not much else to show.

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

In September, a parade of executives from companies like BP, Verizon, and American Airlines walked into a conference room at the Grand American Hotel in Salt Lake City. The executives were there to meet with leaders from the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce to discuss improving diversity.

One other group shuffled into the room for their own meeting on the topic: officials from the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The Democrats were just months removed from a damaging report by the group PowerPAC+ — the report revealed that only 1.7% of the $500 million the DNC spent on consulting went to businesses that are minority-owned or a minority principal.

In Salt Lake, DNC national political director Raul Alvillar, and Albert Morales in Hispanic engagement, told officials with the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce that bringing on minority, and in this case Latino vendors, was a priority. But the Democratic officials also said they were looking for the best candidates for the jobs.

Since then, Democratic officials have repeatedly met with Hispanic-owned businesses. The problem, others say, is that six months later, the meetings have happened, but minority vendors still have not been officially contracted by the DNC.

At the September meeting, USHCC president Javier Palomarez was frank but also offered to help.

"The DNC has had an abysmal track record of working with Hispanic business owners," Palomarez told BuzzFeed News. But as he often does with top companies, he saw the opportunity to surface Hispanic-owned businesses onto the DNC's diversity list, because he believes "Latino" is too often missing from the diversity conversation.

For their part, the two officials who went to Utah in September, Alvillar and Morales, have repeatedly met with at least four Hispanic-owned businesses. Those include, Yesmin Asmar, who owns event planning company Elite Global; Jeff Vigil, whose platform MyBusinessMatches.com serves like an eHarmony for businesses, linking up firms; and Carmen Castillo, the first Hispanic woman in the U.S. to run a billion dollar company, SDI International. DNC officials have also met with polling firm Latino Decisions to explore bringing them on to do work for the party.

When criticism followed the diversity report's release, the Congressional Black Caucus was said to be helping to find black-owned businesses for Democrats. But it's unclear what progress has been made on the issue.

Former CBC chair Marcia Fudge, who earlier told Politico it was clear the Democrats had no interest in addressing the issue, deferred to new chair G. K. Butterfield's office now. Butterfield's office did not respond to requests for comment by time of publication.

Angela Rye, a former CBC executive director, said the organization has often sought to help the DNC with this issue but there hasn't been much activity since the report came out this summer, adding that her understanding is that the DNC does not believe the report is accurate or comprehensive.

She said her stance is one many who care about the issue share.

"I am ready to help them, minority vendors are not hard to find," Rye said. "Talented staffers, folks that left the Obama campaign, I eagerly await their call. Whether doing media buys or polling or whatever. I'm happy to help them identify people."

Rye said a changing country needs a mindful and different approach.

"You have to meet people where they are and it is challenging — if not impossible — to do that while failing to hire people who look like them," she said. "You cannot remedy a problem you refuse to acknowledge exists."

Rye pointed to the idea of a yearly diversity vendors fair, supported by Congressional Hispanic Caucus and CBC members, as something that was presented but never went anywhere.

While the Hispanic business owners BuzzFeed News spoke to said they felt good about the possibility of securing a DNC contract after repeated meetings, DNC spokesperson Rebecca Chalif said the meetings thus far have been to grow relationships for the future.

"At the DNC we are always working to expand our relationships with minority owned businesses and will continue to look for new and innovative ways to bring more people from diverse backgrounds into the party," she said in a statement. "We know that one of the Democratic Party's greatest strength is our diversity and we work every day to ensure that the party's business practices live up to our commitment to that principle."

A source familiar with the process said the DNC has reached out to Hispanic, black, and Asian business owners.

Unlike the DNC, which has different types of vendors at all times, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) only contracts vendors during campaign season, which means their timeline is a little different.

But many point to the DCCC's new chair, New Mexico Rep. Ben Ray Luján, as a crucial move, placing a Latino congressman as the top campaign official for 2016's House campaigns.

In a statement, Luján told BuzzFeed News efforts will be undertaken to increase diversity.

"I am deeply committed to ensuring the DCCC takes all possible measures to increase diversity and create equitable opportunities for all people," he said. "We have been conducting a thorough evaluation of existing processes and working closely with the CBC, CHC and CAPAC to share best practices and ensure opportunities. We look forward to using the momentum of a new year and a new cycle to implement improved diversity practices."

A source with knowledge of DCCC matters told BuzzFeed News high-profile Latino hires are already in the pipeline at the DCCC.

Still, a top Latino strategist familiar with Democratic diversity hiring initiatives, who asked to remain anonymous to speak frankly, said the party has to change course fast.

"The 2014 election cycle should be enough proof for the party committees to dramatically change their approach to diversity. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars with little to no results. It only makes sense to proactively engage with people who understand these communities deeply. That requires systemic program change in the party and should start now, not after Labor Day in 2016," the strategist said.

Aimee Allison, senior vice president of PowerPac+, which released the initial report, said her group will meet with Democratic Party officials and activists in the coming weeks to give recommendations on how to "engage and respond to voters of color."

"We believe this transformation is part of a suite of changes the Democratic party will need to make to win and be successful moving forward," she told BuzzFeed News.

Allison said the CBC passed a resolution that it will present to the California State Democratic Party asking for a similar state party spending audit and believes the trend will continue anywhere that people of color make up significant voting blocks.

She also took on the idea that their report was not comprehensive enough.

"One of the recommendations will likely be to continue expanding research reporting in spending as one measure," she said. "The criticism that it's not comprehensive, well heck, no one has ever done it. It's not like this information is easy to find," she said, adding that the definition of what a minority vendor is wasn't even held to the highest and most difficult standard to reach.

Chuck Rocha, a veteran political strategist who runs one of the few Latino-owned political consulting firms in D.C., said he has seen changes from Democrats. Whereas it used to be difficult for him to get a meeting with the DNC, he said that's no longer the case. He also said there isn't much business to go around right now with the election over and 2016 campaigns far out.

"When that work starts happening, if it goes to another vendor, then we'll know all those meetings were for naught," he said.

When the spending report came out, the DNC pushed back, saying minority vendors aren't the only measure of success, sharing statistics on the hiring of minorities.

Allison said hiring minorities on staff is necessary but not sufficient.

"The DNC has a lot more work to do — none of the committees have an open contracting process," she said. "It's a systemic problem with the party. The DNC is going to need to go further than hiring a handful of people. It's about cultivating relationships on the ground with people working with people of color.

With minorities making up 40% of the party's base, she said, the success of the Democratic Party is at stake.

The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce president Palomarez said his is "not a civil rights organization, we're about business," but pointed to studies that show diversifying the business supply chain makes companies more profitable.

Carmen Castillo, one of the business owners who has met with the DNC, drew parallels between business and politics.

"You have to understand the country is changing so rapidly and that the only way to keep up is to do business with diverse suppliers," she said.

Rye was more direct.

"These people are part of the American fabric whether we're talking about black or brown people," she said. "Asian populations have been ignored. These are people who are a part of your base. If you want to be effective in communicating to your base; black, brown people, young women, you need to ensure you are hiring people who represent the best and the brightest in those spaces."

“It’s that overall policy which invites retaliation, and they see us as intruders.”

View Video ›

Former Republican presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul says bad foreign policy is to blame for the Paris terrorist attack on the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo that left at least 12 dead and 11 wounded.

"Well, you know, partially what the Secretary of State said is true — this is pretty obscene, when it comes to violence, and libertarians are pretty annoyed by anybody who initiates violence," said Paul on NewsMaxTV's Steve Malzberg Show Wednesday. "This is pretty bad."

Paul said the context for the attack, however, was France's involvement in the Middle East.

"But in the context of things, France has been a target for many, many years, because they've been involved in foreign affairs in Libya, and they really prodded us along in — recently in Libya, but they've been involved in Algeria, so they've had attacks like this, you know, not infrequently. So, it does involve, you know, their foreign policy as well. When people do this, you know, the rejection of the violence has to be made, and with that I agree."

"I put blame on bad policy that we don't fully understand, and we don't understand what they're doing because the people who are objecting to the foreign policy that we pursue, they do it from a different perspective," Paul added. "They see us as attacking them, and killing innocent people, so yes, they, they have — this doesn't justify, so don't put those words in my mouth — it doesn't justify, but it explains it."

Paul said it was the West's overall foreign policy which "invites retaliation."

"And this is why we say if we had somebody do to us what we have done to so many countries in the Middle East, and how many people we've killed, and sending over drones, and bombing, being involved in all these wars, and supporting dictators one week, and taking away the support — and the stupidity of us sending all those weapons into Syria, ending up in the hands of ISIS — and right now we're even sending more weapons! You know, because ISIS took all the American weapons. It's that overall policy which invites retaliation, and they see us as intruders. But it's a little bit more complex, you know, when they hit us, either here at home, and hit civilians, and what's happening in France. But I don't think you can divorce these instances from the overall foreign policy."

Paul cited the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks as an example of attack occurring because of a foreign policy.

"Yeah, but I don't think that's the real reason things happen, because we've been conditioned to believe that the only reason 9/11 happened is that we are free and prosperous. I don't believe that for a minute," said Paul.

"For our foreign policy I think it's blowback. I think it's very clearly evidenced by our own government — the radicals taking over in Iran in 1979 was a building-up of anger over the Shah, that we put in place in 1953! You know, it had to do with oil, and it had to do with the abuse of the Shah, and finally the radicals, so they — you know, when we get involved and set up dictators that the people don't like, they get pretty angry at us."

“The fact is it’s coming from the Muslim community and it shows that the NYPD and Ray Kelly were right for so many years when they were really saturating areas where they thought the threat was coming from.”

w.soundcloud.com

Republican Rep. Peter King says the Paris terrorist attack on the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo proves the New York City Police Department was right to spy on Muslim residents of New York City.

"This obviously, with so many people involved, with so much precision, this makes it clear that you can't have enough cops to protect every soft target, certainly in big cities you can't and what all is going to stop it is intelligence," said King. "That is getting information ahead of time by having a informers, by being on the ground, by being in the communities where the threat is going to come from, and that is going to be the Muslim community," King said on the John Gambling Show on AM 970 The Answer.

The Long Island Republican cited the attack as proof the NYPD under Ray Kelly was right to spy on Muslim communities.

"That's where the threat is going to come from and we have to put the New York Times aside, we have to put the Associated Press aside and all the bleeding heart politically correct people who say we can't be emphasizing one community over the other. The fact is it's coming from the Muslim community and it shows that the NYPD and Ray Kelly were right for so many years when they were really saturating areas where they thought the threat was coming from."

Following Sept. 11, the NYPD used undercover police officers and paid informants they called "rakers" and "mosques crawlers" to compile data and trawl through Muslim neighborhoods. The Rakers would hang out in local businesses and write reports on goings-on.

The NYPD's spying did not produce a single lead or terrorism case, the Associated Press has previously reported.

King previously said the shootings in the Canadian parliament in October was cause for "all out" surveillance on Muslims.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is currently deciding whether to run for president in 2016.

Andrew Kaczynski's Inbox

Here's where the link goes in the email:

Via healthrevelations.net

The book’s publisher says it will update future printings. “I apologize, and I am working with my editors to rectify the situation,” Carson tells BuzzFeed News.

Ben Carson Facebook

Dr. Ben Carson apologized Thursday for instances of plagiarism in his 2012 book, America the Beautiful, uncovered by BuzzFeed News. Zondervan, the HarperCollins Christian publishing division, added in a statement that updates would be made in future printings of the book.

"I attempted to appropriately cite and acknowledge all sources in America the Beautiful, but inadvertently missed some. I apologize, and I am working with my editors to rectify the situation," Carson said in a statement to BuzzFeed News.

BuzzFeed News detailed on Tuesday several sections of plagiarism in Carson's book, including an old website from the early 2000s, SocialismSucks.Net. Other sources plagiarized by Carson include a book by conservative historian W. Cleon Skousen, a Liberty Institute press release, several blog articles, and a CBS News article.

"It has become apparent that further source citation is appropriate in Dr. Carson's America the Beautiful," a Zondervan spokesman told BuzzFeed News. "Any necessary updates will be made in subsequent printings."

The book did not sell well initially, but after his speech at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast went viral, the book's sales rapidly increased. As of this week, according to BookScan data, America the Beautiful has sold 60,000 hardcover copies and 280,000 paperback copies.

One author whose work Carson copied also put out a statement defending Carson — conservative historian Bill Federer, who said BuzzFeed News misrepresented the copied material.

"I feel grossly misrepresented in the BuzzFeed article," said Federer said in a statement provided to BuzzFeed News by Carson's attorney and literary agent. "Errata is not plagiarism. Any missing attributions were simply editor's oversight. It is disingenuous for the writer of the BuzzFeed article to level the accusation of plagiarism against Dr. Carson."

"I told him that I hoped he would find them interesting and that he had full permission to use any of the material in the books as he liked," Federer added in his statement on Thursday. "With 16 acknowledgments and citations, it is clear that Dr. Ben Carson made significant effort to make correct attribution. Indeed, his extensive acknowledgments have resulted in numerous people contacting me to purchase my book."

In the Tuesday post, BuzzFeed News noted that while Carson's book cited Federer, the book does not make clear that the words are copied. BuzzFeed News also noted on Tuesday that Federer was not concerned about the issue, and in his book grants permission to duplicate up to 10,000 words with acknowledgement.

Federer served on the board of Regent University with Carson and had previously told BuzzFeed News he had given Carson some of his books.