Donald Trump is a candidate for the Republican nomination be president of the United States of America. Here he is in 2005, a different time at the Emmys.
Here's Donald Trump Dressed As A Farmer Singing "Green Acres" Because Sure, Why Not?
↧
↧
Nurses Union Endorses Bernie Sanders Over Hillary Clinton
Scott Olson / Getty Images
OAKLAND, California — Bernie Sanders earned the endorsement of National Nurses United after the membership of the nation’s largest nurses union voted to back him over his Democratic rivals, leaders of the union announced at their headquarters here Monday.
The union represents more than 185,000 members. Ninety percent of them are women. Working women are a major target for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton — and she's already successfully wooed the endorsement of another huge union representing thousands of working women, the AFT. Clinton competed with Sanders as well as other Democratic candidates for the National Nurses United endorsement, filling out a questionnaire for the group and meeting with a member of its senior leadership at an AFL-CIO–sponsored Q&A session with candidates earlier this year. Sanders was the only candidate to rate 100% in the union’s survey.
A senior official at the nurses union said members and leadership picked Sanders in part due to Clinton's refusal to take a position on the Keystone XL pipeline.
“He understands the health effects of climate change,” Charles Idelson, communications director for National Nurses United, told BuzzFeed News in an interview ahead of the endorsement formal announcement. “We’re opposed the Keystone pipeline because of health impacts,” he added, citing the potential for “toxic spills” from the hundreds of miles of proposed oil pipeline.
Sanders’ support for single-payer health care and his opposition to President Obama’s trade proposals also played well with the union’s leadership, Idelson said.
Results of an internal vote among National Nurses United members showed Sanders won the "overwhelming" support of the membership, Idelson said. Leadership was also impressed by the Vermont senator, who has been a close supporter of organized labor for his decades-long political career. The endorsement is Sanders' first from a national union as a presidential candidate.
The endorsement means Sanders will be able to rely on grassroots support from the nurses on the ground in early primary states like Iowa and New Hampshire, where the union has thousands of members.
The endorsement is not expected to bring Sanders a cash windfall however.
“Our engagement with politics is less money than it is political activism,” Idelson said. The union will begin stumping for Sanders as early as Monday, with members scheduled to participate in an Iowa house party for Sanders hours after the endorsement was announced.
In a statement, the union's executive director, RoseAnn DeMoro, said supporting Sanders was a no brainer for the majority-women organization she heads.
“Bernie Sanders has a proven track record of uncompromised activism and advocacy for working people, and a message that resonates with nurses, and, as we have all seen, tens of thousands of people across the country,” she said. “He can talk about our issues as well as we can talk about our issues. We are proud to stand with him in his candidacy for president today.”
↧
Poll: Did This Congresswoman Just Eat Her Booger?
We appeal to you, the public, to resolve this burning question about a member of Congress.
A video of Rep. Ann Wagner of Missouri allegedly eating a booger has been bouncing around the Internet after getting posted on the website Digg.
A BuzzFeed News investigation, however, shows the video is inconclusive. Watch a high quality version of the clip:
buzzfeed-video1.s3.amazonaws.com
And a slow motion version of the clip, which aired on St. Louis Fox-affiliate Fox2 after the Republican debate:
buzzfeed-video1.s3.amazonaws.com
And some screen grabs of the crucial moments:
FOX2
↧
Martin O'Malley Erupts On Debate Schedule: "What The Hell Kind Of Democratic Party Is This?"
“We shouldn’t be a party that’s afraid to talk about America’s role in the world and the lessons we’ve learned from these last very hard 14 to 15 years of conflict.”
Democratic presidential candidate and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley criticized his party's debate schedule on Monday, calling the format of six debates a "sad state of affairs."
"I think that having more debates would certainly have all of the candidates take positions on issues," O'Malley said in an interview with Boston Herald Radio. O'Malley is positioning himself as a progressive alternative to Hillary Clinton, but is currently polling below 2% nationally.
"I've been very clear where I stand on Wall Street reform," he added. "I've been clear about my plan to make sure that a debt-free college degree is something that's within the means of every family in the United States, and I've been very clear about wanting to move, and putting out a plan to move our country to a 100% clean electric grid by 2050."
Last Thursday, the Democratic National Committee announced that the party will hold six primary debates. O'Malley slammed what he said was the DNC trying to stifle debate.
"And as the Democratic Party, I think it's a sad state of affairs when the DNC — it tries to insert itself to cut off a Democratic debate," he said. "We should not be a party that's afraid to talk about the ideas that will get wages going up again instead of down. We shouldn't be a party that's afraid to talk about America's role in the world and the lessons we've learned from these last very hard 14 to 15 years of conflict."
"We have better solutions for the future than the other party has, and I think we're making a huge mistake," he continued. "If we cut off debate, if we tell the people of New Hampshire that we've become such an impoverished party that we can only afford one debate before the New Hampshire primary, what the hell kind of Democratic Party is this?"
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, another underdog for the Democratic presidential nomination, also criticized the debate schedule in an interview Sunday.
↧
Clinton Signed Sworn Court Statement One Day After It Was Due To Be Submitted
A State Department spokesman said a timely email from Clinton’s lawyers was missed due to vacation schedules.
Darren McCollester / Getty Images
On Monday, the State Department submitted a sworn statement to a federal court from Hillary Clinton asserting that she had directed all emails on her private server that are public records to be turned over.
At the end of July, the court had asked for a response from the State Department by Friday, Aug. 7, as to several issues in the ongoing litigation brought by Judicial Watch. The group is seeking records, including emails hosted on Clinton's private server, from Clinton's time as secretary.
Among the responses sought by the court was the sworn statement from Clinton that she had produced "all responsive information" — as in, the relevant emails held on her private server.
Clinton's statement was not included in the State Department's initial response on Aug. 7, but it was included in a supplement submitted to the court on Monday.
However, reports over the weekend had thrown into question when the department received Clinton's statement. A spokesman told BuzzFeed News that, although submitted to court on Monday, that statement from Clinton had been received and was dated Saturday, Aug. 8.
Here's what happened, beginning with the July 31 order from the court, seeking a response from State by July 7:
As detailed in a letter from the State Department to Clinton's lawyer on Aug. 5, one of the court's requests was a sworn statement from Clinton that she had "produced all responsive information," presumably referring to emails on her private server:
↧
↧
AIPAC: We Took The "High Road" In Clash With President Over Iran Deal
WASHINGTON — AIPAC's president told activists on Monday that the lobbying group has taken the "high road" in its battle with the White House over the Iran deal and pushed back against a New York Times article detailing the fight.
"Over the weekend, the New York Times published an article about AIPAC’s relationship with President Obama and his administration. With significant media attention on this story and on AIPAC, I want to provide you with some context and reiterate our overall approach to this campaign," AIPAC president Robert Cohen wrote in an email blast to activists on Monday afternoon, obtained by BuzzFeed News. Cohen wrote that "The article reflects multiple inaccuracies stemming from claims by the administration."
"Throughout this campaign, AIPAC — along with our affiliated organization Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran — has taken the high road," Cohen wrote. "I ask that you join us in advancing this critical effort by keeping the debate about the policy, not the personalities."
Though Cohen stresses in the email that "the article’s proposition of a 'rupture' in the relationship between the president and AIPAC is an exaggeration promulgated by traditional and social media," the email is the latest salvo in a deeply tense standoff between President Obama and the powerful lobbying group, which opposes the Iran deal. Last week in a meeting with Jewish leaders, Obama accused AIPAC of spreading inaccurate information on the fact-sheets the group sends around Capitol Hill, and criticized the group for not giving administration officials more time to make their case last month, when hundreds of AIPAC activists came to Washington to lobby against the deal. Obama has also said, in a phone call to progressive groups and in a speech at American University, that many of the same people who are now opposing the Iran deal supported the Iraq War.
AIPAC has launched a massive mobilization against the deal, including launching a new group, Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran, which is expected to spend $20 million on ads opposing the deal.
The full email from Cohen to activists is below:
Over the weekend, The New York Times published an article about AIPAC’s relationship with President Obama and his administration. With significant media attention on this story and on AIPAC, I want to provide you with some context and reiterate our overall approach to this campaign.
The article reflects multiple inaccuracies stemming from claims by the administration:
AIPAC’s Credibility: Our facts are well-substantiated and accurate. AIPAC stands behind the credibility of our analysis — which the facts explicitly support, and which cites the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) for ease of reference.
CNFI Advertisement: AIPAC’s partner organization, Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran (CNFI), has run one television advertisement. This ad does not single out the president in any way. On its website, CNFI provides supporting citations for the assertions made in its ad.
AIPAC’s Willingness to Engage the Administration: For the AIPAC National Fly-In on July 28-29, the White House requested to speak to our group and we accepted. Because the administration did not have a venue that could accommodate our 700 participants for a mutually desired discussion, the White House asked to send its representatives to AIPAC’s venue. We agreed and offered the administration 30 minutes to use in any manner — which the White House likewise accepted. The administration representatives chose to speak for 45 minutes and not use any of their time for questions. AIPAC treated these speakers with great courtesy and respect.
AIPAC’s Role in the Iraq War: Leading up to the start of the Iraq War in March 2003, AIPAC took no position whatsoever, nor did we lobby on the issue.
The article highlights the great lengths to which proponents are going to make the public case for the deal with Iran.
With nearly unlimited access to Congress, national media and international leaders, the administration is leading a massive lobbying effort to win broad approval of the deal — with assistance from congressional supporters of the agreement.
In this context, our lobbying campaign is appropriate, legitimate and measured. It exemplifies the meaning of petitioning our government to address our concerns.
The article is evidence of AIPAC’s central role in creating and maintaining a vigorous debate.
It underscores AIPAC’s vital work to help members of Congress understand the loopholes in this dangerous deal, and to press them to oppose it.
We should all take pride in the significant impact of our work to shape the national debate and impact the congressional response to this bad deal.
This campaign is at the heart of AIPAC’s mission — “to strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of Israel and the United States.”
As AIPAC’s Spokesman Marshall Wittmann is quoted, “This critical national security debate is certainly not about an organization, but rather about a deal which we believe will fail to block an Iranian nuclear weapon and will fuel terrorism. We hope that all those who are engaged in this debate will avoid questioning motives and employing any ad hominem attacks.”
Finally, the article’s proposition of a “rupture” in the relationship between the president and AIPAC is an exaggeration promulgated by traditional and social media. In the piece itself, the White House correctly downplays current strains as a “policy difference.”
Throughout this campaign, AIPAC — along with our affiliated organization Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran — has taken the high road. I ask that you join us in advancing this critical effort by keeping the debate about the policy, not the personalities.
We are encouraged by recent statements by prominent members of Congress who have publicly announced their opposition to the deal. This would not be possible without your persistent and passionate activism.
Thank you for your hard work at this pivotal moment, and please continue to engage your senators and representatives at home.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Cohen
AIPAC President
↧
Bernie Sanders Delivers Long Riff About Why He’s Not An Unserious Candidate
Justin Sullivan / Getty Images
OAKLAND, Calif. — Bernie Sanders understands the haters. And he thinks he’s got them beat.
In a long, third-person narrative at the headquarters of the National Nurses United union headquarters Monday, Sanders said he’s staring down those who don’t see a chance for the self-proclaimed socialist to really compete against Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
“When I began this race people said, ‘Well, Sanders is quaint. Look at his hair. And he doesn’t dress particularly well. He’s an interesting guy, but obviously not a serious candidate. Imagine standing up for working people and taking on the billionaire class, what a laughable idea. Who’s going to support that idea?’ Sanders said. “And then the campaign progresses.”
He pointed to his growing crowds across the country — 5,000 in Denver, 7,000 in Minneapolis, 8,000 in Dallas, 10,000 in Madison, 11,000 in Phoenix, 15,000 in Seattle, 28,000 in Portland — as evidence those who dismissed him as on the fringe were making a mistake.
Sanders does not have a super PAC, does not want one, and said that’s led to him being dismissed. Those haters are wrong too, he said.
“What they are saying, and here’s the interesting point. They’re saying, ‘OK, Bernie, you’ve got all these crazy nurses with you. OK, you’ve got millions of people. But here’s the real story, Bernie. You don’t have a super PAC. Where is your billionaire to buy the election for you?’” Sanders said. “And what I have said to them is, I ain’t gonna have a super PAC. I don’t need billionaires. We have up to this point more individuals contributing to this campaign than any other campaign. And you know what the average contribution is? Average contribution is $31. So this is a people’s campaign.”
The media, a favorite target for Sanders and his supporters, just refuses to buy that his plan will work, Sanders said. They’ll be proven wrong, he told the nurses in Oakland.
“It goes without saying we’re going to be outspent. And with the media, that’s the main thing,” he said. “We will be outspent but we will raise enough to run a winning campaign because we are putting together a grassroots movement of millions of people. That’s how we’re going to win this."
↧
Seven Questions For Hillary Clinton About Not Talking Enough About Donald Trump
Not even Clinton can escape the Trump Factor. Or get to her desired talking point. “Madam Secretary, regarding Donald Trump, though…”
Brian Snyder / Reuters
EXETER, N.H. — Hillary Clinton would like to talk to you about Marco Rubio.
To be specific, she would like to really, really remind you that Rubio, the 44-year-old U.S. senator running for president, said on Friday during the first Republican debate that he opposes abortions even in cases of rape and incest.
This, given all the polls showing that a vast majority of voters feel the opposite way that Rubio does, is a development that Clinton would like to bring up on the campaign trail — just as she did, or tried to, on Monday afternoon, standing at a podium in the atrium of Exeter High School, before taking a series of questions from reporters about another topic concerning the debate: Donald Trump's suggestion that one of the moderators, Megyn Kelly of Fox News, asked tough questions because she was menstruating.
"While what Donald Trump said about Megyn Kelly is outrageous, what the rest of Republicans are saying about all women is also outrageous," Clinton said during her brief intro, surrounded by about two dozen reporters and cameramen. "They say they would force women who've been raped to carry their rapist's child."
"Megyn Kelly is a strong woman, and more than capable of defending herself against Donald Trump," Clinton said, getting that out of the way. "I'm worried about what Republican policies would do to the rest of America's women, and I will continue to speak out and speak up about that today and through the rest of this campaign — and in the white house."
But on Monday, the things Clinton would "continue to speak out and speak up about" appeared to have little to do with her own plans for speaking out and speaking up. Along with most every political figure taking questions this week, Clinton would actually be speaking out and up on Monday about Trump.
In this case, about seven times.
Q: You know Donald Trump. Does he have a serious long-standing problem with women, and what would you say to him if he were standing here right now?
I'm just going to leave my comments where they are.
I thought what he said was offensive and I certainly think that it deserves the kind of reaction that it's getting from so many others. But I think if we focus on that we're making a mistake. What a lot of the men on that stage in that debate said was offensive. And I want people to understand, if you just focus on maybe the biggest showmen on the stage, you lose the thread here. The thread is that the Republicans are putting forth some very radical and offensive positions when it comes to women's lives, women's reproductive health, women's employment, women's opportunities. So we'll let the Republicans go back and forth with each other, but I want to point out, there's really not that much difference in the policies they are proposing when it comes to women.
Q: Do you think he should apologize?
[Silence]
Q: Madam Secretary, regarding Donald Trump, though.
His language was different. You can disagree with the Republicans on Planned Parenthood and a lot of other issues. But his language. How does that differentiate him from any other candidate in either party? Is he qualified to be president of the United States? He's still continuing, he has not apologized, and he made reference today again to the "bimbo" comment regarding Megyn Kelly.
Well, the Republicans get to choose their nominee. And they will have to make that decision. But I just respectfully disagree with you. When one of their major candidates, a much younger man, the senator from Florida, says there should be no exception for rape and incest — that is as offensive and as troubling a comment as you can hear from a major candidates running for the presidency. So the language may be more colorful, and more offensive, but the thinking — the attitude toward women — is very much the same. It just is delivered in a different package. So I don't want people to be confused here about the outrageous comments by one, and just say, we're focused on this, and we're gonna let the fact that there should be no exceptions for rape or incest go unnoticed or unmentioned. I'm not gonna let that happen.
Q: With all due respect ma'am, when you refer to a woman questioner at a national debate and refer to her menstrual cycle as the reason why she asked a difficult question — don't you think that is appreciably different than a profound disagreement with the rights of women, which you have with Marco Rubio, as you've just stated?
I said it was outrageous. I said it was offensive. I stand by that.
I think more people should say the same. They should be going after him. The Republican party is gonna have to deal with him, but I just want to remind us that what they say about women — not one woman, who is perfectly capable and incredibly impressive and able to take care of herself — but all these women that I have fought for, worked for, stood up for, advocated for, and want to be a president for, who may not have the opportunity to defend themselves, who may lose the right to exercise a personal choice, if certain [one] of the Republican were to be successful — I don't want that forgotten.
So yes, I know it makes great TV. I think the guy went way overboard. Offensive, outrageous — pick your adjective. But what Marco Rubio said has as much of an impact in terms of where the Republican Party is today as anybody else on that stage. And it is deeply troubling. And it should be to the press, not just to those of who have been doing this work for so long.
Q: Secretary Clinton, Mr. Trump also made a comment basically saying that he forced you to go to his wedding by giving money to your campaign. Did you take offense to that? Is that true?
It's entertainment! I mean, look — it's all entertainment! I mean, you know, I think he's having the time of his life, you know, being up on that stage, saying whatever he wants to say, getting people excited both for an against him!
Q: are you seeing a side of him you hadn't seen before?
I didn't know him that well. I mean, I knew him! I knew him and, uh, I happened to be planning to be in Florida, and I thought it would be fun to go to his wedding because it's always entertaining. Now that he's running for president, it's a little more troubling.
Q: there's talk out there that your husband may have encouraged Trump to run.
[Silence]
Clinton ignored the last one. And when the next question came, about another topic entirely, the reply was immediate.
"Really," Clinton said. "What does Donald Trump have to say…?"
↧
Megyn Kelly Responds To Donald Trump: "I Certainly Will Not Apologize For Doing Good Journalism"
The Fox News anchor also said Monday she would not further respond to comments from the presidential candidate that attacked her personally.
Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly said Monday she will not respond to personal attacks by Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump, who sharply criticized her after last week's debate.
During Thursday's Republican presidential debate, Kelly had asked Trump to address his negative comments toward women, calling some "fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals." In response, Trump responded jokingly, "only Rosie O'Donnell."
"For the record, it was well beyond Rosie O'Donnell," Kelly said during Monday's broadcast of The Kelly File as she pressed for an answer to the question.
"I felt he was asked a tough but fair question," Kelly said. "We agree to disagree."
Andrew Harnik / AP
Following the debate, Trump said he felt the moderators' questions were "not nice," and that Kelly in particular treated him poorly. He went on to tweet and retweet rants about Kelly that called her a "bimbo," overrated, and angry.
His criticism reached a fever pitch Friday in an interview with CNN's Don Lemon, in which he said Kelly had "blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."
The candidate on Saturday tweeted he meant to say she had blood coming out of her nose, though the remark was taken by many to be a reference to menstruation. In response, Trump's top adviser parted ways with the businessman, and Trump was also disinvited from the conservative RedState gathering in Atlanta.
Kelly said Monday she had decided not to respond to the personal attacks.
"I certainly will not apologize for doing good journalism," she continued. "So I'll continue doing my job without fear or favor. And Mr. Trump, I expect, will continue with what has been a successful campaign so far."
↧
↧
State Board: Ohio Judges Cannot Refuse To Marry Same-Sex Couples
A Toledo judge who had refused to marry two women now says he would conduct such a marriage.
Jim Obergefell at the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., in June 2015.
Carlos Barria / Reuters
Ohio judges cannot refuse to marry same-sex couples, the state's professional conduct board ruled in an advisory opinion distributed on Monday.
The advisory opinion of Ohio's Board of Professional Conduct is nonbinding, the board's director, Richard Dove, told BuzzFeed News on Tuesday — but it would be instructive should an actual ethics complaint be filed against a specific judge for not performing marriages.
The opinion concludes that "[a] judge who performs civil marriages may not refuse to perform same-sex marriages while continuing to perform opposite-sex marriages, based upon his or her personal, moral, and religious beliefs, acts contrary to the judicial oath of office" and judicial and professional conduct rules.
The advisory opinion, approved by the board on Aug. 7, was a response to two inquiries presented to the board in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case out of Ohio. Toledo Municipal Judge Allen McConnell had refused to perform same-sex couples' marriages in the wake of the Obergefell decision and was among those seeking the opinion from the board.
The advisory opinion also asserts that judges who — in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling this June that struck down bans on same-sex couples' marriages — now decline to perform all marriages — opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples — "may be interpreted as manifesting an improper bias or prejudice toward a particular class." This is so, the board states, because it could be seen as being done "in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples based on [the judge's] personal, moral, or religious beliefs."
Going further, the board also states that judges who refuse to marry same-sex couples may "reasonably be perceived" to be prejudiced against gay people and, as such, have to recuse themselves from any cases involving sexual orientation-related issues.
"[A] judge's decision to decline to perform some or all marriage ceremonies, when grounded on the judge's personal beliefs, may reflect adversely on perceptions regarding the judge's performance of other judicial functions and duties," the board wrote.
The opinion notes that other similar boards in other states — including Arizona, Louisiana, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania — have reached similar conclusions.
McConnell told a Toledo-area TV station that, in light of the advisory opinion, he now will perform a wedding for a same-sex couple if requested to do so.
(h/t Gabriel Malor)
↧
Scott Walker: Hillary Clinton Policies "Dangerously Close" To Socialism
“She would take us toward European-styled healthcare. I think the one thing Bernie Sanders gets credit for, in at least being truthful in advertising. Hillary Clinton tries to claim she’s a bit more middle of the road, but her policies suggest something far different.”
Republican presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says the difference between Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is at least Sanders says he is a socialist. In an interview with the Lars Larson Show Monday, Walker said Clinton's policies are "dangerously close" to socialism.
"I will give a hat tip to Senator Bernie Sanders, not for the reasons you expect, but I at least give him credit for saying what he is: That he's a socialist," Walker said. "He actually probably proclaims it and embraces it. If you look at some of the policies that Hillary Clinton is talking about, they just run dangerously close to that."
"She's just not calling it like it is," Walker continued. "But I think you look at — you think all the way back — Hillary Clinton. We think about how bad Obamacare is, for example, and how we need to repeal that immediately to put patients and families back in charge of healthcare ... she was further than that."
Walker cited Clinton's past support for including an individual mandate in health care reform even before President Obama — who bashed the idea as a presidential candidate before accepting it as a pillar of his own plan — and her advocating of "HillaryCare" early in her husband's first term as president as examples of how far left she was on health care.
"She would take us toward European-styled healthcare," Walker said. "I think the one thing Bernie Sanders gets credit for, in at least being truthful in advertising. Hillary Clinton tries to claim she's a bit more middle of the road, but her policies suggest something far different."
Walker cited his governing policies as example of what he said was leading "through growth and through reform," noting he believed "the answer isn't more government like people like Hillary Clinton, like Bernie Sanders, like other people are proposing."
↧
Judge: After Halted Execution, Georgia Can Try Again
Georgia called off an execution after finding particles floating in its syringe. A judge ruled Monday that “if anything, [it] shows that the state is unlikely to use defective drugs.”
Georgia's pentobarbital on the date it was scheduled to be used.
Georgia Department of Corrections
Georgia's failed attempt to execute Kelly Gissendaner in March — an execution called off before officials began administering drugs — does not mean that the state is barred from trying to execute her again, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday.
U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash dismissed a lawsuit brought by Gissendaner, whose scheduled execution was stopped after state officials noticed the lethal drug had particles floating in it.
The drug came from a secret compounding pharmacy. Compounding pharmacies mix drugs for specific prescriptions, unlike drug manufacturers, and their products have a high failure rate. Gissendaner's attorney argued before the execution that this would place her at a high risk for a botched execution — and said in the lawsuit dismissed on Tuesday that what happened in March proved her point.
She also argued she was the victim of cruel and unusual punishment when the state deliberated for hours on if it would use the drugs, causing her "immense fear and anxiety." But Judge Thomas Thrash disagreed, finding that the state "did not intentionally subject [her] to uncertainty for the sake of inflicting more pain upon her."
"It is not enough to show that the State may obtain defective lethal injection drugs," the judge wrote in dismissing the case. Gissendaner "must show that there is a substantial risk that the defective drugs will be used on" her in the future.
He added that "if anything, the March 2 incident shows that the state is unlikely to use defective drugs on" her.
Gissendaner was sentenced to death for convincing her boyfriend to kill her husband, Douglas Gissendaner, in 1998.
After deliberating for 13 hours in March, the state decided it would not use the "cloudy" drugs on her. Georgia officials said they would conduct an investigation to see what went wrong, and that it would do so with transparency.
Afterward, the state announced that the likeliest cause of the drug's defectiveness was how it was stored. Georgia argued that because the drugs were stored at too cold of a temperature, the drugs "precipitated." However, the state initially attempted to withhold the results of one experiment that disagreed with that narrative, and its own expert said another cause could be errors in how the pharmacy mixed the drug.
Georgia, like many other states, conducts its lethal drug deals in secret. It has not named, and has attempted to shift blame from, its supplier. The judge acknowledged that the secrecy would make it hard for Gissendaner to make her case.
"It may be true that the [state's] secrecy is the reason [Gissendaner] cannot utilize the March 2 incident to establish an Eighth Amendment claim," the judge admitted.
But Thrash added that "an accident" isn't sufficient to show cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The March 2 incident "alone does not necessarily mean that it is significantly likely that defective drugs will be obtained again," Thrash said, adding that Gissendaner's claim amounts to speculation.
The bar for death row inmates to challenge their method of execution was set even higher after the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling made clear that inmates not only must show a method is sure or very likely to cause needless suffering — they must also produce an alternative execution method, which Gissendaner did not do. Her attorney declined to comment on the ruling.
Read the decision:
↧
Meet The Other Guy Named Donald Trump
Every day is a quiet struggle for Donald L. Trump, a highly respected doctor and cancer institute executive who happens to share a name with the loudest man in the news.
It happens nearly every day, every time he says his name over the phone or exchanges business cards or pays for a bill with his credit card. First there is the pause, then the slight smirk or raised eyebrow and finally the stale joke. Something like, "Ha ha, you're fired!"
Such is the life of Dr. Donald L. Trump, an oncologist and cancer institute executive of no relation to Donald J. Trump, the bombastic businessman and Republican presidential candidate.
Whenever Dr. Trump shows someone his passport or credit card, "80% of the time someone will make a comment or will look at me, and you know what they're thinking. I'm sure it's that way with lots of other folks who share names with famous people," he said.
"As you might imagine, it gives me a sense of what it's like for really famous people dealing with the public, because invariably people will make some joke about my name," Trump continued. "Like if I tell someone my name on the phone they will laugh or doubt my veracity, so you know it's a famous name. Think about what all of the Michael Jordans in the country must've put up with at the height of Michael Jordan's visibility. But you know mostly it's jokes, or asking for a loan, or asking who I fired lately."
Dr. Trump says he has been aware of the presence of the other, louder Trump since the mid-'80s, and the two have communicated on and off since then. But they are not related, as far as he can tell, and the similarities end at the name.
In an interview with BuzzFeed News on Monday, he was reserved, declined to comment on politics, and, unlike the real estate mogul and television star, his life has been dedicated to improving the lives of those who find themselves facing the worst challenges of their life. Just ask Donald J. Trump.
"The Roswell Park Cancer Institute is really lucky to have the other Donald Trump, but the other Donald Trump is me because you're the famous one," the reality star and real estate mogul said in a 2010 YouTube video.
Dr. Trump, who is highly respected in his field, specializes in genitourinary cancers, like prostate cancer, and has dedicated much of his career to researching the ways Vitamin D can be used to treat and prevent the disease. Until 2014, Trump was the CEO of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, which does cancer research and treatment.
And this year, he became chief executive of the Inova Dwight and Martha Schar Cancer Institute in Virginia, where he will lead an effort to develop improvements in cancer treatments through genomic research and testing.
His work as an oncologist was also what led to the convergence of his path with that of the more famous Donald Trump.
Donald J. Trump opted to participate in a 2010 event, called "Bald for Bucks," which raises money to fight cancer. The program was started more than a decade ago by a local high schooler who wanted show support for her sister who was battling cancer.
"I've been hearing your name for years and years. It's been a little bit confusing, but believe it or not, what you do in life is more important than what I do in life," Donald J. Trump stated in the video. "So I say Donald L. Trump, which is you, is probably more important than Donald J. Trump, which is me. I just want to congratulate you on the great work you've done. The shaving the head thing, and the shaving the face and everything that you're doing... Donald, I really — I'm glad it's you and it's not me."
Donald L. Trump said Donald J. Trump agreed to do the video because a friend of his had sought treatment at Roswell Park Cancer Institute for his son. The video led to the two Donald Trumps meeting for the first time.
"He demurred on actually shaving his head, but did make the video and congratulated us on our campaign," said Donald L. Trump. "A few months later I had the opportunity to go to New York City, and I stopped and said hello to him, and thanked him for his support, and that was the last time I'd interacted or heard from him."
Now Donald J. Trump is leading many Republican polls and dominating the news cycle. Dr. Trump said it would be "fair hypothesis" that this is most press Trump has ever gotten.
Dr. Trump wouldn't comment on the other Trump's politics — he's a doctor, not a talking head — but he pointed out the name was in his family first.
"I'm a medical oncologist not a political commentator, so I have nothing to say particularly about his path to the presidency," Trump said. "Although his visibility, popularity, notoriety is increasingly involved in commentary by my friends and colleagues about the commonness of our names, which I would hasten to point out my dad had first. I was Donald Trump, named after my father Donald Trump, so this side of the Trump relation had it well before Donald J. Trump."
Donald L. Trump says some of his friends, "folks who might have political views distinct from Mr. Trump," have suggested he change his name. He says people sometimes doubt his name on the phone or laugh.
While Dr. Trump has never stayed in a Trump hotel, he has eaten at a Trump restaurant. He paid with a credit card. No one noticed.
"What Shakespeare said was 'a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,'" Trump said when asked if he felt annoyed by the ever-present controversy around Donald J. Trump. "I don't — you know, there's lots of things going on, you know those names, what we were named many years ago, and it is what it is."
↧
↧
Donald Trump Made Ads For Pizza Hut
Donald the Hut.
"If we're talking about who's a spoiled brat or not, my two kids all work minimum-wage jobs. Do you think the Trump kids have been working at the local Pizza Hut? So I live a pretty ordinary life, and I'm not begrudging him his wealth but there's nothing about me or my family that's spoiled," Paul told reporters according to CNN.
Trump, however, had made ads for Pizza Hut before. For example, this one from 2000:
There was also this Pizza Hut ad he once made with his first wife Ivana.
↧
Poll: Did Donald Trump Really Not Know The Meaning Of The Stripes On The American Flag?
“I don’t know what the 13 stripes represent,” Trump said on the Colbert Report in 2008.
buzzfeed-video1.s3.amazonaws.com
That's a video of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on the Colbert Report in 2008, in which he says, "I don't know what the 13 stripes represent."
The comment came in the midst of a report on his battle with the mayor of a California town over whether he could erect a flagpole higher than the town's height limit on structures.
↧
Man Who Sued Utah For Marriage Equality Advances In Salt Lake City Council Race
Derek Kitchen came in first in a five-way primary election on Tuesday.
In October 2014, when the Supreme Court declined to hear several cases challenging bans on same-sex couples' marriages, Derek Kitchen and Moudi Sbeity — lead plaintiffs in the case challenging Utah's ban — won their case.
Moudi Sbeity, left, and Derek Kitchen take selfies at a marriage equality victory celebration on October 6, 2014 at the Salt Lake City Library.
George Frey / Getty Images
In the new year, Kitchen — with his case over — launched a run for a seat on Salt Lake City Council.
Via Facebook: votederekkitchen
On Tuesday, Kitchen came in first place in the nonpartisan primary election — garnering double the number of votes of his nearest challenger.
Via slco.org
↧
Santorum: Lack Of Interest In My Candidacy Because I've Been Out Of Spotlight
“I wasn’t somebody who had a lot of money and could just go out and run for president for the last four years.”
MANDEL NGAN / Getty Images
The 2016 Republican primary race so far has not gone as Rick Santorum might have hoped.
After finishing to second to Mitt Romney in 2012, the former senator from Pennsylvania has been lagging in the polls this time around -- finding himself relegated to the so-called "kids table" debate last week with the rest of the second tier candidates who didn't make the cut for the primetime event.
Why isn't Santorum doing better in the polls, like previous Republican presidential runner-ups have done in the past? He says he thinks he knows why: he had to work for a living after the last election.
"There's a lot that goes into how you position yourself," Santorum said on the Girard at Large radio program when asked why he was in such poor shape.
"The fact of the matter is, unlike some of the other candidates I was not in elected office. So I was not there in the national media. I didn't have a TV show. I wasn't somebody who had a lot of money and could just go out and run for president for the last four years. Karen and I have seven kids. We've got three in college and, you know, we had to go out and go back to work."
Though Santorum wasn't in the spotlight as much other candidates running (likeTed Cruz or Rand Paul), he did release two books, Blue Collar Conservatives and Bella's Gift. Santorum said he knew this race would be an uphill battle because he had been out of the public eye.
"For the last three years I've actually been earning a living. I was running a movie company for a while and involved with a technology company for a while," said Santorum. "So I've been working and when the time came around to thinking about running again, we knew we were going to be starting from scratch again because we had been out of the public eye for a while."
"I think that's a good piece of experience to bring to the table," he concluded.
↧
↧
Here’s Carly Fiorina In 2008 Offering A Blunt Assessment Of Her Time At HP
“I presided over the departure of over 20,000 people.”
MANDEL NGAN / Getty Images
Fiorina took the helm at HP at a challenging time for the tech giant. The tech bubble burst in 1999 and the company was ill-prepared for the fallout. In 2002, under Fiorina's leadership, HP merged with rival Compaq, a deal Fiorina has defended but one that has been criticized within the industry. During her six years as head of the company (she was ousted in 2005), HP laid off 30,000 employees.
On the stump now, Fiorina attempts to recast her fall from grace as an asset. "I was fired in a boardroom brawl," she often repeats in speeches and interviews, noting she "challenged the status quo." In 2005, Fiorina released her memoir Tough Choices, telling the story of her life and successful business career and how it's been argued some of HP's subsequent success is from decisions she implemented before she was fired.
Fiorina's book tour and subsequent interviews, however, offer what could be her greatest weakness -- videos and interviews of her talking candidly about her business career that stripped from context and woven into thirty second narratives could cast her record in a negative light.
This reporter for example, when researching Fiorina several months ago came across a video of Fiorina rather bluntly discussing her tenure at HP in an hour-long interview with a PBS-affiliate in 2008.
I noted this time period would be opposition researchers dream. Fiorina, without expressed political ambitions and before Mitt Romney's business record in private equity record turned Romney into a modern day robber baron, discussing massive layoffs at HP.
"When you're talking about massive layoffs, which we did on my watch, you're talking about a recognition that perhaps the work that's getting done no longer needs to be done at all or perhaps the work needs to be done somewhere else," Fiorina said.
"I presided over the departure of over 20,000 people," Fiorina noted earlier.
Here's that video:
The exchange was used in an attack by Barbara Boxer against Fiorina when she ran for the Senate in 2010. Here's how that clip played out on television:
↧
Rand Paul Does An Impression Of Donald Trump
It sounds more like Biff from Back to the Future to be honest.
Bill Pugliano / Getty Images
It was a different time, late July 2015, and Rand Paul said he would not set himself on fire to compete with Donald Trump for attention.
"I'm drawing the line at self-immolation, none of us are going to set ourselves on fire," Paul said on Boston Herald Radio at the time.
Then, a Politico story noted his campaign was in free fall. Amid lagging poll numbers, the man once dubbed the most interesting man in politics took on a new strategy: Attack The Donald.
Paul, who has called Trump a "fake conservative " and pointed out Trump's past support for liberal positions, dropped this bombshell on Wednesday morning in New Hampshire: an impression of Donald Trump saying he used donations to buy influence with politicians.
Take a listen:
↧
Huckabee: "Money's Driving" The Iran Deal
“I think money’s driving it.”
Mike Huckabee said Tuesday that the Iran agreement is about the money.
The GOP presidential candidate told Iowa radio host Simon Conway that, after reading the agreement, he "became convinced of two things," the first being that the deal was "absolutely atrocious."
"And number two: One of the reasons I'm convinced that we were rushing into this is because there is a lot of money to be made and released as a result of this agreement," Huckabee said. "I think money's driving it."
The former governor of Arkansas, who has come under fire in recent weeks for saying the deal would march Israelis "to the door of the oven," later added that the accord made clear President Obama's "disdain for Israel" and "his indifference to the danger that this brings to them."
Meanwhile, he praised New York Sen. Chuck Schumer for having "acted like an American, more than he did a Democrat" in announcing his opposition to the agreement.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
