Showing posts with label Capitol Hill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Capitol Hill. Show all posts
Saturday, October 12, 2019
Jane Fonda arrested in climate protest at US Capitol
Oscar-winner Jane Fonda was arrested Friday outside the US Capitol where she was protesting climate change and demanding action to protect the environment.
The 81-year-old film star, longtime activist and exercise guru was taken into custody with several others after 10 minutes of protesting on the Capitol steps, video posted on Fonda's Facebook page showed.
"Today, the United States Capitol Police arrested 16 individuals for unlawfully demonstrating on the East Front of the US Capitol," a police spokeswoman said in a statement that did not identify those detained.
Fonda, dressed in a bright red overcoat, chanted climate action slogans before she was handcuffed and led away to cheers from fellow protesters.
The protest may become a familiar site on Capitol Hill.
Fonda recently told the Los Angeles Times that she was moving to Washington for four months, fully committed to fighting global warming with a passion similar to that of Swedish teenager and climate activist Greta Thunberg.
Speaking to a small gathering before her arrest, Fonda decried the "man-made crisis" of climate change and said she and other activists would be returning to Capitol Hill "every Friday at 11:00, rain or shine or snow or blizzard or whatever," for a series of rallies.
"This is a collective crisis that demands collective action now," she said.
Climate change has emerged as a prominent issue in US politics, and several candidates seeking the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination have released major and ambitious climate action platforms.
Fonda starred in US movie classics like "9 to 5" and "On Golden Pond," as well as the recent Netflix series "Grace and Frankie."
She won best actress Academy Awards for 1971's "Klute" and "Coming Home," from 1978.
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
In dramatic testimony, Mueller says he did not exonerate Trump
WASHINGTON - Former US Special Counsel Robert Mueller on Wednesday defended the integrity of his Russia investigation during a dramatic congressional hearing and reiterated that he had not cleared President Donald Trump of obstruction of justice or, as the president has said, totally exonerated Trump.
Mueller appeared for eagerly anticipated testimony at the first of two back-to-back congressional hearings that carry high stakes for Trump and Democrats who are split between impeaching him or moving on to the 2020 election.
The former FBI director, who spent 22 months investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US election and Trump's conduct, appeared first before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. The committee's Democratic chairman, Jerrold Nadler, praised Mueller and said no one, including Trump, is "above the law."
Mueller, 74, was surrounded by news photographers as he took his place in the packed hearing room, showing little apparent emotion as he scanned the scene.
"Obstruction of justice strikes at the core of the government's efforts to find the truth and to hold wrongdoers accountable," Mueller testified.
Trump has claimed that the Mueller inquiry resulted in the president's "complete and total exoneration." Asked by Nadler if he had exonerated Trump, Mueller said, "No."
Mueller, accused by Trump of heading a "witch hunt" and trying to orchestrate a "coup" against the Republican president, said his inquiry was conducted in "a fair and independent manner" and that members of the special counsel's team "were of the highest integrity."
"Let me say one more thing," Mueller said. "Over the course of my career, I have seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The Russian government's effort to interfere with our election is among the most serious."
In a comment sure to disappoint Republicans, Mueller said he would not answer questions about the origins of the Russia probe in the FBI before he was named to take over the inquiry in 2017 or about a controversial dossier compiled by a former British intelligence agent
Mueller was set to testify later in the day before the House Intelligence Committee. Democrats control the House, while Trump's fellow Republicans control the Senate.
The hearing provided Democrats a chance to air publicly and in plain language the key findings of the sometimes dense Mueller report. Democrats entered the hearings hoping Mueller's testimony would rally public support behind their own ongoing investigations of the president and his administration. Democrats are deeply divided over whether to launch the impeachment process set out in the US Constitution for removing a president from office for "high crimes and misdemeanors."
Mueller's inquiry detailed numerous contacts between Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and Russia at a time when the Kremlin was interfering in the 2016 US election with a scheme of hacking and propaganda to sow discord among Americans and boost Trump's candidacy.
Mueller's investigative report said the inquiry found insufficient evidence to establish that Trump and his campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Russia. The report did not reach a conclusion on whether Trump committed the crime of obstruction of justice in a series of actions aimed at impeding the inquiry, but pointedly did not exonerate him. Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee, subsequently cleared the president of obstruction of justice.
The Justice Department has a longstanding policy against bringing criminal charges against a sitting president.
'PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS'
In his opening statement, Mueller reiterated that his team had decided not to make a determination on the question of obstruction. "Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. That was our decision then and remains our decision today," Mueller said.
Nadler said in his opening statement that Mueller conducted the inquiry with "remarkable integrity" and was "subjected to repeated and grossly unfair personal attacks."
"Although department policy barred you from indicting the president for this conduct, you made clear that he is not exonerated. Any other person who acted in this way would have been charged with crimes. And in this nation, not even the president is above the law," Nadler said.
But Republican congressman John Ratcliffe accused Mueller of exceeding his authority in the report's extensive discussion of potential obstruction of justice by Trump after the special counsel made the decision not to draw a conclusion on whether Trump committed a crime. Ratcliffe agreed that Trump was not above the law, but said the president should not be "below the law" either.
The committee's top Republican, Doug Collins, said the facts of the Mueller report are that "Russia meddled in the 2016 election. The president did not conspire with Russians. Nothing we hear today will change those facts."
"The president watched the public narrative surrounding the investigation assume his guilt while he knew the extent of his innocence," Collins said. "The president's attitude towards the investigation was understandably negative, yet the president did not use his authority to close the investigation."
Collins asked Mueller a series of rapid-fire questions.
"That went a little fast for me," Mueller told Collins at one point.
Ahead of the hearing, Republicans objected to Democrats on the two committees allowing Aaron Zebley, the former deputy special counsel who had day-to-day oversight of investigations in the inquiry, to accompany Mueller.
"This was specifically NOT agreed to, and I would NEVER have agreed to it," Trump wrote on Twitter on Wednesday morning before the hearing began. Trump also complained that Mueller had not investigated various of the president's foes including 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and, referring to the former special counsel, "HIMSELF."
Trump has repeatedly assailed the inquiry as a "witch hunt" and an attempted "coup," accused Mueller of having conflicts of interest and called the special counsel's team of lawyers "thugs" with a Democratic political agenda. Trump is hoping to move beyond the Russia investigation as he runs for re-election in 2020, with a large field of Democratic candidates competing for their party's nomination to challenge him.
Mueller's investigation led to criminal charges against 34 people and three Russian entities. People who were convicted at trial or pleaded guilty included Trump's former campaign chairman and other aides.
The Justice Department on Monday sent a letter telling Mueller to limit his testimony to merely discussing what is written in the report, a directive that the two committee chairmen rejected as exceeding the department's authority.
Mueller appeared for his testimony reluctantly and only after being subpoenaed.
Until Wednesday, Mueller had not faced questioning in public about his findings. He remained silent when the Justice Department on April 18 released a redacted version of his 448-page investigation report, which the special counsel had submitted to Attorney General Barr the prior month. Mueller made a nine-minute statement to reporters on May 29 at the Justice Department but took no questions.
Mueller, who served as Federal Bureau of Investigation director from 2001 to 2013 under presidents in both parties, was named as special counsel by the Justice Department in May 2017 to take over the FBI's Russia probe after Trump fired James Comey as the agency's chief. Mueller's inquiry lasted 22 months.
With a no-nonsense reputation, Mueller is a Marine Corps combat veteran from the Vietnam War who later served as a federal prosecutor and became the architect of the modern FBI after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
Fed chair nominee Powell defends push to review financial regulations
WASHINGTON - Jerome Powell, President Donald Trump's choice to lead the US Federal Reserve, defended plans to potentially lighten regulation of the financial sector during a controversy-free hearing on his nomination to take over the central bank.
Tapped to replace current chair Janet Yellen, Powell on Tuesday skirted several efforts by members of the Senate Banking Committee to draw him into the debates preoccupying Capitol Hill.
Powell refused to analyze the impact of proposed tax cuts or, as some of his colleagues at the Fed have done, argue for more immigration to boost the labor force. He said economic growth was likely bound in a range of between 2 and 2.5 percent annually, short of Trump's 3 percent goal, without a jump in productivity that many economists regard as unlikely.
In general the 64-year-old lawyer stuck close to script, reciting the current Fed consensus that interest rates are due to continue rising gradually, that the course of inflation remains a mystery, and that weak wages and low labor force participation indicate the jobs market still has room to improve.
Early in his time as a governor, Powell, a lawyer who has spent the bulk of his career in the private sector as an investment banker, shared some conservative concerns about the extent of the Fed's crisis response.
But he ultimately came to agree that the benefits of current Fed policy, with years of loose money allowing time for displaced workers to trickle back to the job market, outweighed the risks - and that future crisis would require the Fed, as he said in his opening statement, "to respond decisively."
The sharpest and most detailed exchanges involved financial regulation, an area Powell has focused on during his years as a Fed governor and where he said it was time to take a pause and evaluate where things stand eight years after the end of a deep 2007 to 2009 recession.
"I am not characterizing what we are doing as deregulation...It is looking back and making sure what we did makes sense," Powell told the committee. "It does not help anyone for banks to waste money."
Powell said he wanted to be sure regulations were "tailored" to the size and role of different institutions, perhaps allowing smaller banks more latitude to trade securities and make other investments, and decreasing the frequency and intensity of "stress tests" for all but the largest financial companies.
In a statement that may surprise some analysts and regulatory experts, he declared the problem of banks that were "too big to fail" all but solved. Asked if any firms were still so large that their collapse would cause wide-ranging harm to the financial system, he responded "I would say no to that."
Over the course of the roughly 2-hour hearing none of the senators voiced opposition to Powell, though the back and forth over regulation prompted Democrats to question whether he would coddle Wall Street, while Republicans wondered if the Fed would go far enough in lightening the burden on financial businesses.
No Senate committee or floor vote has been scheduled yet, but Powell is expected to win confirmation before Yellen's term expires in early February.
There was no obvious market reaction to Powell's appearance in Congress. Analysts, meanwhile, noted the near-rote response to some questions and wondered what that portends when Powell - who would be the first non-economist to hold the top Fed job since the 1970s - confronts conditions that require him to improvise.
Trump nominated Powell from a list of 5 finalists that included Yellen, seeing in him a way to extend Fed policies that have driven unemployment to 4.1 percent and the stock market to record highs, but without having to renominate a veteran of prior Democratic administrations.
Powell's hearing "contained few signs that he will bring any new thinking or a change of approach," wrote Michael Pearce, US economist for the Capital Economics consulting firm, referring to the nominee as "closely guarded" in his reiteration of existing Fed talking points. "We are increasingly worried that a policy mistake in either direction is possible in the years ahead."
Compared to some other confirmation hearings in the Trump era, however, Powell's was an almost congenial affair. During 5 years as a Fed governor, with deep ties to the region as a Maryland native and former Treasury Department official, he has built relationships with both Democrats and Republicans on the panel who said they respected his work.
Perhaps as a result, much of the questioning involved efforts to draw him out on issues like whether the tax plan being debated on Capitol Hill would - as Republicans argue - boost economic growth, or simply explode the debt as Democrats contend.
Powell dodged, resorting to a common Fed stance that tax and spending policy is up to elected leaders and outside the Fed's authority.
"I am not an expert on what analysis is out there," Powell said.
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Global stocks pressured by Trump health care setback
NEW YORK - Global stock markets were pressured Tuesday by worries about President Donald Trump's agenda after a proposed health care reform measure collapsed in Congress, raising concerns about prospects for his tax reform.
Bourses in Paris and Frankfurt shed more than one percent, while London and Tokyo also retreated.
US stocks were mixed, with the Nasdaq rising to a fresh record. The tech-rich index was lifted by Netflix, which soared 13.5 percent on blowout earnings that also propelled Amazon, Facebook and Tesla Motors, among others.
But the Dow retreated, and the dollar fell against the euro as currency traders slashed the odds of a generous US tax cut that had been expected in the Trump era.
"Dysfunction, drama and ethical issues in the White House have combined with Republican infighting on Capitol Hill to bog down the policy agenda," said a note from Charles Schwab.
"There's growing concern among congressional Republicans that the much-anticipated policy changes will need to be significantly scaled back -- or that they may not happen at all."
The latest round of Trump doubts was induced by Senate Republican leaders' decision to abandon efforts to repeal Obamacare following opposition from within their own party.
Since Trump's election victory in November, the dollar has soared along with global markets on hopes his big-spending, tax-cutting policies would fire up the world's top economy and fan inflation. But seemingly never-ending crises have hobbled his presidency from the start.
"The failure of the latest attempt at healthcare legislation further reduced already very low odds of any meaningful legislation on taxes or infrastructure spending and marked the latest blow to the concept of the 'Trump reflation trade,'" said Omer Esiner, analyst at Commonwealth Foreign Exchange.
"In a week void of any major economic reports in the US, the latest signs of legislative morass in Washington took center stage to send the dollar broadly lower."
The euro broke above the $1.15 mark for the first time since last June, with eyes on the European Central Bank's policy meeting Thursday.
While ECB chief Mario Draghi is not yet expected to announce any tightening measures, there is speculation the central bank will begin winding down its stimulus program as the eurozone economy improves.
The pound retreated on official data showing annual British inflation unexpectedly slowed to 2.6 percent in June, dimming the prospect of a Bank of England interest rate hike any time soon.
KEY FIGURES AT AROUND 2045 GMT (4:45 a.m. Wednesday in Manila)
New York - DOW: DOWN 0.3 percent at 21,574.73 (close)
New York - S&P 500: UP 0.1 percent at 2,460.61 (close)
New York - Nasdaq: UP 0.5 percent at 6,344.31 (close)
London - FTSE 100: DOWN 0.2 percent at 7,390.22 (close)
Frankfurt - DAX 30: DOWN 1.3 percent at 12,430.39 (close)
Paris - CAC 40: DOWN 1.1 percent at 5,173.27 (close)
EURO STOXX 50: DOWN 1.1 percent at 3,128.83 (close)
Tokyo - Nikkei 225: DOWN 0.6 percent at 19,999.91 (close)
Hong Kong - Hang Seng: UP 0.2 percent at 26,524.94 (close)
Shanghai - Composite: UP 0.4 percent at 3,187.57 (close)
Euro/dollar: UP at $1.1554 from $1.1479
Pound/dollar: DOWN at $1.3042 from $1.3057
Dollar/yen: DOWN at 112.03 from 112.61
Oil - Brent North Sea: UP 42 cents at $48.84 per barrel
Oil - West Texas Intermediate: UP 38 cents at $46.40 per barrel
source: news.abs-cbn.com
Sunday, May 1, 2016
Obama takes final bow at star-studded Washington dinner
WASHINGTON - With seven performances under his belt, U.S. President Barack Obama will try one last time to bring the house down at the annual White House correspondents' dinner on Saturday, a night of playful ribbing of both politicians and the news media.
The black-tie event, which Obama has previously joked is "a night when Washington celebrates itself," brings together journalists and media moguls, Hollywood stars and policy wonks and the powerbrokers from Capitol Hill.
For Obama, who is scheduled to speak around 10:20 p.m. ET (0220 GMT Sunday), it will be his final correspondents' dinner as a sitting president. Comedian Larry Wilmore, who hosts a show on the cable outlet Comedy Central, will take to the podium after the president's remarks.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters on Friday not to rule out surprises from Obama, who has polished his comedic timing over seven prior dinner appearances.
"I know that the president will certainly poke a little fun at himself," Earnest said, adding that he thought some "good-natured ribbing of his friends will occur as well."
In previous years, Obama has taken on Washington gridlock, political rivals and presidential hopefuls with usually light-hearted, but sometimes pointed, jokes.
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump, who won't be at the dinner, could surface in Obama's monologue.
Back in 2011, when Trump was weighing a 2012 presidential run and was in the ballroom, Obama skewered him for questioning whether the president was born in the United States. He then speculated about the change the real estate mogul would bring to the White House, including bikini-clad women in the front fountain and gold columns by the entryway.
Wilmore, who has been working on his jokes with a small team for the last month, said he plans to talk about the presidential election and Obama's legacy. "I'll definitely bring up race," Wilmore, who is African-American, told cable network C-SPAN. "That's going to be an issue in a lot of different ways."
The dinner, a long-standing tradition, has morphed from a relatively low-key gathering of journalists and their sources into a glamorous red-carpet affair.
Invitees this year include singer Aretha Franklin, actor Morgan Freeman and Super Bowl MVP Von Miller of the Denver Broncos. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is expected to attend, but his rival Hillary Clinton is not.
The dinner has drawn criticism from some who feel that partying with sources is not conducive to hard-hitting journalism.
C-SPAN and a number of other cable outlets plan live coverage.
(Reporting by Megan Cassella; Editing by Tim Ahmann and Mary Milliken)
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Friday, October 23, 2015
Clinton deflects Republican criticism in marathon Benghazi hearing
* Clinton calls accusations on security "personally painful"
* No new revelations by Clinton, 2016 Democratic front-runner
* Rep. Cummings calls panel a "taxpayer-funded fishing expedition"
* Chairman Gowdy says investigation not about Clinton
WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton passed a tough political test on Thursday, calmly deflecting harsh Republican criticism of her handling of the deadly 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, during a testy 11-hour hearing in Congress.
In testimony that stretched deep into the night, the former secretary of state rejected Republican accusations that she ignored requests for security upgrades in Libya and misinformed the public about the cause of the attack by suspected Islamist militants that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi.
Clinton, 67, stayed out of the political fray during several heated arguments between Republicans and her Democratic allies and remained composed under aggressive questioning from Republican lawmakers.
The long hearing uncovered no new revelations in a deadly incident that has been the subject of a half-dozen other congressional investigations and an independent inquiry.
Clinton said it was "personally painful" to be accused of ignoring security upgrades that could have saved the life of ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans at the diplomatic compound.
"I've thought more about what happened than all of you put together," she told the Republican-led special panel. "I've lost more sleep than all of you put together. I've been racking my brain about what could have been done, should have been done."
The appearance before the Benghazi panel was a critical hurdle for Clinton, who has been on a hot streak since turning in a strong performance at last week's first Democratic debate and after Wednesday's news that her strongest potential challenger, Vice President Joe Biden, will not seek the Democratic nomination for the November 2016 election.
Even some Republicans said Republican lawmakers had swung at Clinton and missed with their aggressive questioning.
"They forget Secretary Clinton has been dealing with hostile committees longer than most of them have been in politics at any level," Texas-based Republican strategist Joe Brettell said.
CLINTON: NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR SECURITY
Representative Trey Gowdy, chairman of the special panel, acknowledged to reporters afterward that Clinton's testimony was not significantly different than her previous testimony on the incident.
Clinton defended her leadership in Libya as America's top diplomat and denied longstanding Republican allegations that she personally turned down requests to beef up security in Benghazi.
"I was responsible for quite a lot," Clinton said. "I was not responsible for specific requests and security provisions."
Clinton told the panel the attacks must not discourage U.S. action globally and said the incident already had been thoroughly investigated.
"We need leadership at home to match our leadership abroad, leadership that puts national security ahead of politics and ideology," Clinton said in a veiled reference to the political controversy that has dogged the panel.
Opinion polls show Americans deeply split along partisan lines over the probe. A Reuters/Ipsos poll this week found 35 percent of respondents viewed the Benghazi hearings as mostly or completely valid. The percentage among Republicans was 67 percent, independents 39.6 percent and Democrats 16.5 percent.
The panel has spent 17 months looking into the attacks at the U.S. mission compound. Clinton's long-awaited testimony was the most high-profile appearance yet before a committee that has already interviewed more than 50 witnesses.
At one point, Clinton impassively stacked papers while Gowdy and senior Democrat Elijah Cummings argued loudly over Cummings' request that the closed-door testimony of Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal before the committee in June be publicly released.
Clinton listened intently, head in hand, as Gowdy heatedly questioned her about the constant emails she received from Blumenthal. Republicans noted that Stevens, the ambassador, did not even have Clinton's email address.
"You didn't need my email address to get my attention," Clinton said.
CUMMINGS WANTS END TO COMMITTEE
Cummings said congressional Republicans set up the panel for a partisan witch hunt.
"They set them loose, Madame Secretary, because you're running for president," he told Clinton, calling for an end to the "taxpayer-funded fishing expedition." He said the committee had spent $14.7 million of taxpayer money over 17 months.
"Your testimony has gone on longer than all our other hearings combined," Democratic Representative Adam Schiff told Clinton.
Republican Representative Jim Jordan said Clinton had misleadingly implied after the attack that it was a reaction to an anti-Muslim video. Clinton, who denies suggesting the video was the cause, said the accusation had been proven false by other investigations.
Clinton's appearance before the panel follows months of controversy about her use of a private home email server for her State Department work, a disclosure that emerged in part because of the Benghazi committee's demand last year to see her official records.
Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, has been on the defensive over a series of comments from his fellow Republicans implying the committee's real aim was to deflate Clinton's poll numbers.
"Madame Secretary, I understand some people - frankly in both parties - have suggested this investigation is about you. Let me assure you it is not," Gowdy told Clinton. "Not a single member of this committee signed up for an investigation into you or your email system."
Clinton said the emails being made public and examined by the committee did not encompass all of the work she did as secretary of state.
"I don't want you to have a mistaken impression about what I did and how I did it," she said. "Most of my work was not done on emails with my closest aides, with officials in the State Department, officials in the rest of the government."
She cited communications through secure phone calls, in-person conversations and top-secret documents.
A 2012 report by a government accountability review board sharply faulted State Department officials for providing "grossly" insufficient security in Benghazi, despite upgrade requests from Stevens and others in Libya. (Additional reporting by Ginger Gibson, Alana Wise and Megan Cassella; Editing by Howard Goller and Leslie Adler)
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Thursday, November 6, 2014
After midterms, race for the White House is on
Let the campaign begin.
Fresh off the resounding Republican win in midterm elections, all eyes -- and political minds -- in Washington are now narrowing in on the 2016 presidential election.
For the Democrats, smarting from a sound Republican beating, Hillary Clinton -- the former secretary of state and former first lady -- is not officially a candidate, but is the presumptive nominee.
For the Republicans, things are not as simple. A dozen names are in play, but no one has emerged as a favorite.
Voters will elect the 45th president of the United States of November 8, 2016. The two main parties will stage their primaries in the early part of that year.
But the months ahead are crucial -- candidacies will be announced, rallies will be held, horse-trading will happen behind closed doors... and campaign funds will be raised.
While Tuesday's big win for Republicans is a major slap in the face to Democrats, who lost control of the Senate, it is not necessarily bad news for Clinton if she decides to make another run for the White House, eight years after losing to Barack Obama in the primaries.
The Republicans about to reign supreme on Capitol Hill will provide the 67-year-old Clinton with strong fodder for her eventual campaign platform.
The former senator from New York will seek to exploit the internal rifts in a Republican party still struggling to assimilate a feisty Tea Party contingent with little desire to stay in line with veteran leaders.
Republican Senator Rand Paul, one of those weighing a White House run, did not wait long to launch the first salvo in the White House battle.
"Tuesday's biggest loser is @HillaryClinton," Paul said on Twitter soon after the Republican victory was clear.
The Kentucky senator then posted a series of photos on Facebook showing Clinton stumping for Democratic candidates who lost on Tuesday -- with the hashtag #HillarysLosers.
Will she or won't she?
"After a historic rebuke in yesterday’s midterms, the Obama-Clinton policies will be on the ballot again in 2016," the Republican National Committee said in a research memo listing how the former rivals are inextricably linked.
The RNC went on to argue that the numbers don't add up for sending another Democrat to the White House.
Indeed, rarely does one party win three consecutive terms at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. In the past 60 years, it has only happened once, when George H.W. Bush succeeded Ronald Reagan.
Clinton is expected to make her intentions known in early 2015. While her actions seem to telegraph her plans to run, some doubt remains.
The wife of former president Bill Clinton has said she plans to enjoy her new role of grandmother -- her daughter Chelsea gave birth to Charlotte in September -- before making any decisions on her future in politics.
If she decides not to run, the Democrats could find themselves in a tough spot, as she has so dominated the 2016 conversation for the past year.
Vice President Joe Biden, who is five years older than Clinton, has left his options open and made it clear he would like another crack at the White House, but Washington insiders think it's unlikely.
Tuesday's shock election of a Republican governor in Maryland has weakened the chances of outgoing Democrat Martin O'Malley, another hopeful.
Jeb Bush on the fence
On the Republican side, rarely has a race been as open.
First question mark: former Florida governor Jeb Bush, the son of George H.W. Bush and the brother of George W. Bush. After 41 and 43, the Bush family could see president number 45.
But Jeb -- more of a centrist than his brother -- is hesitant.
Earlier this year, his mother Barbara made known her mixed feelings about political dynasties -- the Kennedys, the Bushes, the Clintons.
"This is a great country. And if we can't find more than two or three families to run for higher office, that's silly," she said.
Since then, she hasn't said much.
A bunch of other names are in the mix: Senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas, and a host of governors -- Chris Christie (New Jersey), Rick Perry (Texas), Scott Walker (Wisconsin) and Bobby Jindal (Louisiana).
Former Arkansas governor Mick Huckabee is also regularly listed as a possible candidate.
Mitt Romney, who lost the Republican primary to Senator John McCain in 2008 and the election to Obama in 2012, has resurfaced.
Romney has initially ruled out another run, but lately has been more vague in his public comments on the matter.
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
GM chief Barra: I am deeply sorry
WASHINGTON - General Motors Co CEO Mary Barra on Tuesday called her company's slow response to faulty ignition switches linked to at least 13 deaths "unacceptable," but could not give U.S. lawmakers many answers as to what went wrong.
After taking an oath at a House of Representatives panel, Barra kicked off the contentious hearing by declaring, "I am deeply sorry" for the company's failure to respond quickly to the safety problem and subsequent deaths.
The questioning became contentious at times but it did not appear to rattle the GM chief executive, who rose to her current job in January. However, she repeatedly did not provide the answers House Energy and Commerce panel lawmakers were seeking, citing the company's ongoing internal investigation.
Still, during a nearly three-hour appearance on Capitol Hill, Barra testified again and again that GM had taken steps to prevent future safety problems from occurring. She labored to remind lawmakers that the so-called "new GM" she heads was nothing like the "old GM" that failed to deal with faulty ignition switches for more than a decade.
Barra was called to testify as part of congressional probes into GM's delayed recall of 2.6 million vehicles that could have faulty ignition switches that unexpectedly cause engines to stall and prevent air bags from deploying and power brakes and power steering systems to operate normally.
Barra also announced the company had hired a well-known consultant, Kenneth Feinberg, to examine what steps, if any, GM might take for families of crash victims. Safety advocates said the move indicated the company was exploring setting up a victims' compensation fund.
For all the claims of GM having a new culture, however, Barra and the three executives seated behind her in the hearing room have notched more than 120 years of combined employment with the automaker.
Asked whether GM previously had a culture that would have put cost considerations over safety, Barra responded, "We are doing a complete investigation but I would say in general we have moved from a cost culture, after the bankruptcy, to a customer culture. We have trained thousands of people in putting the customer first."
GM emerged from bankruptcy in 2009 with the help of a $49.5 billion U.S. taxpayer bailout.
Representative Henry Waxman, a veteran Democrat who has spearheaded past attempts to tighten U.S. laws on automotive safety, bluntly told Barra: "Because GM didn't implement this simple fix when it learned about the problem, at least a dozen people have died in defective GM vehicles."
Barra is scheduled to testify on Wednesday to a Senate panel, which also is investigating her company's handling of the defective ignition switches. The company also faces a criminal probe by the U.S. Department of Justice.
GM first learned of a problem with its ignition switches on Chevrolet Cobalts, Saturn Ions and other models in 2001, documents have shown, but took no steps to recall any cars until this past February.
Lawmakers are investigating why GM and regulators missed or ignored numerous red flags that faulty ignition switches could unexpectedly turn off engines during operation and leave airbags, power steering and power brakes inoperable.
David Friedman, acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, tried to fend off suggestions that the agency failed to spot the problem, saying, "I wish these crashes were as simple as they seem to be."
Instead, Friedman said GM failed early on to share links it had established between the ignition switch problem and the non-deployment of air bags during crashes.
'HORRIFIC STORIES'
Families of victims killed in crashes involving GM cars held an emotional meeting with Barra in the company's Washington offices on Monday night.
The drama inside the packed hearing room, named the "John D. Dingell" room after the Michigan Democrat with a long history of advocating for GM, was heightened by more than 10 photographs of accident victims displayed against one of the walls. Some victims were from home states of members of Congress serving on the committee holding Tuesday's hearing.
Many family members have tried, unsuccessfully, to convince Barra to urge consumers to park all recalled cars and avoid driving them until repairs are made.
Laura Christian, whose daughter Amber Rose was killed in a 2005 Chevy Cobalt in Maryland, said in an interview after the meeting, "Everybody was crying the entire time" during the meeting. "There were horrific stories."
Barra reiterated during her testimony that it was safe to continue driving the recalled cars as long as no keys or other items are attached to the lone key inserted into the ignition.
GM's shares closed down 8 cents at $34.34 on the New York Stock Exchange on Tuesday.
On Monday the company said March sales rose 4 percent from a year ago, beating analysts' predictions of a 0.5 percent increase.
Industry analysts and some GM dealers, however, raised concerns that all the publicity about recalls could begin eroding sales in April.
Republicans and Democrats on the panel, who usually are at odds on most issues, were united in aggressively challenging Barra and GM's performance.
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, a Republican, told Barra: "With a two-ton piece of high-velocity machinery, there is zero margin for error; product safety is a life or death issue. But sadly, vehicle safety has fallen short."
Barra calmly reiterated that the issue of defective ignition switches only came to her attention on Jan. 31.
She had few answers for lawmakers wanting to know who made the decision to quietly revise the design of the faulty switch in 2006, and why GM did not take more seriously dozens of reports of keys unintentionally moving to the "off" position, sometimes at high speeds.
Barra said she will learn more from an internal probe led by Anton "Tony" Valukas, who chairs the law firm Jenner & Block.
"We will learn from this and we will make changes and we will hold people accountable," she said.
Under intense grilling by lawmakers, Barra said she found employee statements "disturbing" that cost considerations may have discouraged the prompt replacement of faulty ignition switches linked to recall of 2.6 million vehicles.
"I find that statement to be very disturbing. As we do this investigation and understand it in the context of the whole timeline - if that was the reason the decision was made, that is unacceptable. That is not the way we do business in today's GM."
On one of the most sensitive issues in the congressional investigation of GM, lawmakers asked Barra why the company would have included ignition switches in its cars even though they did not fully meet the company's specifications, as revealed in documents handed over to lawmakers this week.
"There is a difference between a part not meeting specifications and it being defective," Barra responded.
Pressed on whether the switch was acceptable from a safety and functionality perspective, Barra said: "As we clearly know today, it is not."
source: www.abs-cbnnews.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)