An Ohio veteran had his microphone cut off during his speech honoring the role Black people played in the formation of Memorial Day. Ana Kasparian, Francesca Fiorentini, and Dr. Rashad Richey discuss on The Young Turks. Watch LIVE weekdays 6-8 pm ET. http://youtube.com/tyt/live
Peter Navarro, assistant to the president and director of the office of trade and manufacturing policy, joins CNBC’s “Squawk Box” team to discuss reports the U.S. is considering restrictions on Chinese companies and the latest in the trade talks with China.
Kirsten Gillibrand did a town hall on Fox News. There were few moments where things got a little testy.
Chris Wallace cut her off when she criticized FoxNews for 6.5 hours of coverage of coverage of “infanticide”.00:00>> Kirsten Gillibrand had her town hall on FOX News.And look, there’s been a debate about whether or not it makes sense to do a town hall onFOX News.Elizabeth Warren believes that it legitimizes FOX and it helps them sell ads and I thinkthat’s a fair point to make.Whereas others think it’s important to go on this platform and try to convince Republicanvoters to support them.>> Which is not gonna happen, but anyway.So during this town hall Chris Wallace is hosting, and there were a few moments wherethings got a little fiery.Let’s show you the first example.>> I can tell you, before President Trump gave his State of the Union, Fox News talkedabout infanticide.Infanticide doesn’t exist.>> Senator, Senator I just want to say we brought you here>> I know, I just- >> For an hour, we have given you->> I respect that.>> We are treating you very fairly.I understand that maybe to make your credentials with the Democrats who are not appearing onFox news, you’re gonna attack us.I’m not sure it’s frankly very polite when- >> Okay, I’ll do it in a polite way.>> We’ve invited you to be here.>> I’ll do it in a polite way, but it’s a chore for me.>> Well, I just think- >> It’s to a point->> I just think why don’t we- >> I’m answering your question.>> Instead of talking about Fox News why don’t you answer question?>> The debate about whether or not women should have reproductive freedom has turned intoa red herring debate.And what happens on Fox News is relevant, because they talked about infanticide for6.5 hours, 6.5 hours.>> Good for her.>> So, she was told to be polite.I mean that wasn’t his exact wording, but he called her impolite and then she said,okay, I’ll say it in a polite way.No, don’t say it in a polite way.No.Listen to me, Fox.You want Democratic candidates to go on your town halls and help you guys with advertisers?Fine, but they get to say what they want to say.You don’t like it, Chris Wallace?I mean do you remember, I don’t know if you guys remember, Candy Crowley.Her entire career on CNN was destroyed because she fact checked, by the way, correctly fact-checkedcandidates during a debate, right?This was years ago.I don’t even remember which candidates were involved, I even remember exactly what happened.But I do remember that she very, in my opinion, like meekly fact-checked.And then that was it, she’s gone.She is not on CNN obviously.What is Chris Wallace doing?Don’t tell her to polite!Don’t even imply that she needs to be polite.She’s there, during a town hall, and this.Anyway, it makes me so irritated because it is not your place to interrupt her and tellher what she can and can’t say as a candidate agreeing to do a town hall on your network.>> Yep, nope.Kinda reminds me of this past week when the gentleman ran onstage while Harris was theretrying to speak.It’s that continued narrative we see of men stepping up and stepping in, in a way to tryto discredit a woman or try to push her in a direction as opposed to letting her haveher own autonomy and use her own voice.And also the whole Be Polite narrative, isn’t that same framework of just smile more?>> Totally, totally.>> Yeah.>> It’s like do you want her to spell propaganda or to share facts?Because the focus shouldn’t have been on whether she was polite or not, but whether she wasspouting truth, and it sounds like it, that’s exactly what she was doing.And just because Wallace was not content with that doesn’t mean he should have opened hisdamn mouth.>> The point of this town hall is not to hear about how, what this candidate is saying ishurting Chris Wallace’s feelings or Conservative’s feelings.The point of the town hall is for the candidate to put their policies out there and show voterswho they are.So if conservatives voters don’t like who she is or what she has to say, they’re notgonna vote for her, we’re done with it, right?>> Right.>> But you don’t get to decide what she can say and what she can’t say.She’s agreed to do this town hall, you guys have been crying like little children overthe Democrats who don’t wanna do their town halls on your network.And now you have the audacity to tell a woman who’s running for president to be polite?>> The only thing is that the continuous interruption- >> Yes.>> They didn’t do that to Bernie.>> No.>> Cuz Bernie didn’t have it, and people call Bernie rude, but Bernie is not rude, Bernieis just standing his ground.If she would have been in any way, if she would’ve popped off in any way, then it would’vebeen she is an angry woman.There’s no way to win in that situation.>> So true.>> You just got to ride hard.You just cannot, and good for her that she just kept going and she didn’t let him, butthe network that has Laura Ingraham is telling people to be polite, shut up and dribble?Are you kidding me?>> Exactly.>> Elizabeth Warren was wise for not going on that network, cuz there’s just nothingthat you can say to truly communicate without being shut down or trying to be shut downor intimidated in some way when you’re trying to share the facts and the truth.>> But I don’t know, Adrianne- >> Meghan McCain is thinking that it’s nota good idea because you’re alienating an entire group of people by not going on network.>> Do not politicize it.>> My God.>> So anyway, now I’m being catty.But let’s go to the second video because it went on.>> So what I mean by our future is female, is that we want more women’s voices heard.I was so inspired by the 2018 election.Those 120 women who ran in the red and purple places across the country broke through.Our first two Muslim American women, our first two Native American women.Young women, diverse women.And so we want women to have a seat at the table.>> What about men?>> They’re already there.Do you not know?>> So.>> I guess what I’m asking is are we part of the future, too?05:52>> Yes, you’re already there.So it’s not, it’s not meant to be exclusionary, it’s meant to be inclusionary.>> Okay.>> So we’re just wanna have a couple more chairs for the rest of us.>> All right, we’re not threatened.>> No, you sound pretty threatened.What about men?What’s gonna happen to us?>> All lives matter.>> At the table.You guys have made bulk of the decisions.You represent the majority of representatives and senators in Congress.What do you talk?We haven’t had a single female president.What are you talking about?>> No, no, but he wants to make sure he’s not gonna be excluded from the future.Give me a break, come on.And let her speak.And I do really hope that the women who were there in the audience and hopefully some ofthe men, it really resonated with them to the extent to which Wallace was interruptingher and really how demeaning that is.And I just really hope that that spoke volumes to them.>> What about men?I’ll tell you, look at all of the social ills of the world, and they’re usually connectedto men.How about we open the doors for women and let them bring their compassion and humanity,and probably resolve a lot of these issues?And I dare to say that I didn’t know, I thought Nikki Haley was Native American.But I know that women are not innately evil like some of these men.So I’m saying that here today, I’m going out on a limb as the comedian that I am, you saywhat about men?Look at the world, what about men?>> Yeah.>> And something that I actually really like, at Georgetown University a political scientistthere went and did a research study.And found that women legislators sponsor more bills, pass more laws, get more money fortheir districts.They work harder.Maybe because we women have been forced to work twice as hard to get opportunities, butwomen actually work harder for you as leaders.So what about men?>> And we aren’t emotionally constipated.>> Yeah, definitely.And look, I just think it’s interesting how the whole issue of gender equality, it’s notabout giving one gender a leg up over the other.The way that it’s being treated as a zero-sum game, it is being treated as a threat by somemen, certainly not all, not even close to all.>> That’s right.>> And the point I wanna make is look, we’re living in the type of economy right now whereif you’re a man who is threatened by the equality and you don’t want women to have the someopportunities as you?I mean, if you’re straight and you plan on having a female partner, you need a dual incomehousehold to survive.You want those opportunities for both of you, right?>> What do they say, when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression?>> Yeah.>> So that’s what you were saying there with little Chris and his little feet were danglingon the tear.>> Yeah.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib on Friday called off her visit to the West Bank, hours after Israel ’s decision to allow her into the country on humanitarian grounds with some restrictions on what she could say and do.
Her announcement capped off two days of back-and-forth, with Israel on Thursday saying it would bar Ms. Tlaib and Rep. Ilhan Omar from the country because of their support for boycotting Israel. Israel had said last month it would allow the Congresswomen to visit but reversed course after pressure from President Trump, who said “it would show great weakness” to let them in.
It would show great weakness if Israel allowed Rep. Omar and Rep.Tlaib to visit. They hate Israel & all Jewish people, & there is nothing that can be said or done to change their minds. Minnesota and Michigan will have a hard time putting them back in office. They are a disgrace!
Ms. Tlaib had filed a humanitarian appeal to Israel, promising not to promote boycott activities and abide by restrictions while visiting her family in the West Bank. She said it might be her last chance to see her elderly grandmother. But she said Friday she didn’t want to visit under the conditions imposed by Israel, who she accused of “silencing me and treating me like a criminal.
“I have decided that visiting my grandmother under these oppressive conditions stands against everything I believe in—fighting against racism, oppression & injustice,” she said in a tweet.
Silencing me & treating me like a criminal is not what she wants for me. It would kill a piece of me. I have decided that visiting my grandmother under these oppressive conditions stands against everything I believe in–fighting against racism, oppression & injustice. https://twitter.com/RashidaTlaib/status/1162341203406401536 …Rashida Tlaib
When I won, it gave the Palestinian people hope that someone will finally speak the truth about the inhumane conditions. I can’t allow the State of Israel to take away that light by humiliating me & use my love for my sity to bow down to their oppressive & racist policies. https://twitter.com/RashidaTlaib/status/1162333169846247425 …18.9K people are talking about this
Israel’s announcement Friday had partially walked back Israel’s decision Thursday to block Ms. Tlaib, a Palestinian-American representing Detroit, and Ms. Omar, a Somali-American representing Minneapolis, from entering Israel for a visit to Jerusalem and the West Bank that was to begin Sunday.
Israeli Interior Minister Aryeh Deri, who said he authorized Ms. Tlaib’s entry into Israel on humanitarian grounds, wrote on Twitter that the congresswoman’s “hatred of Israel outweighs her love for her grandmother.”
The episode was the latest round in Mr. Trump’s feud with Ms. Tlaib and Omar, who, along with New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley, make up a group of women of color in Congress calling themselves ‘The Squad.’ Mr. Trump has repeatedly targeted them at rallies and on Twitter as being anti-Israel, which they deny.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
How will the events of the past two days affect U.S.-Israel relations? Join the conversation below.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R. Fla.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Israel’s decision to bar the Congresswomen is a mistake. “Being blocked is what they really hoped for all along in order to bolster their attacks against the Jewish state,” he said.
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi said the decision was a sign of weakness, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said it believed every member of Congress should be able to travel to Israel.
Democratic leaders have expressed concern over Ms. Tlaib and Ms. Omar’s views on Israel, which are problematic for a party that has identified as pro-Israel.
Ms. Omar has said lawmakers’ support for Israel is motivated by money, which critics slammed as anti-Semitic. She later apologized for the comments after Mrs. Pelosi rebuked her.
Ms. Tlaib has slammed Israel’s policies toward Palestinians and has said she supports a one state solution, in which Israelis and Palestinians living in Israel would have equal rights and representation. Israel fears that would be the end of its Jewish majority in the country.
Along with Ms. Omar, Ms. Tlaib was to visit Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem and Ramallah.
Ms. Tlaib came under fire from some supporters Friday after she had accepted Israel’s offer to visit her grandmother. Some Palestinians criticized Ms. Tlaib as having caved to Israeli pressure and accepting unfair demands.
Bassam Tlaib, 54, the Congresswoman’s uncle who lives in Beit Ur al-Faqua, said the whirlwind of media reports whether Ms. Tlaib would be allowed to enter Israel brought the family “from a state of happiness to anxiety.” He said he was afraid to give Ms. Tlaib’s grandmother hope that she’ll be visited by her grandchild.
“She’s is waiting to be embraced by her loved one,” Mr. Tlaib said of his mother and the congresswoman’s grandmother.
The power of vulnerability: TEDx Houston (2011)
(Jan 2011) Brené Brown studies human connection — our ability to empathize, belong, love. In a poignant, funny talk at TEDxHouston, she shares a deep insight from her research, one that sent her on a personal quest to know herself as well as to understand humanity. A talk to share.
Listening to shame | Brené Brown (2012)
- Vulnerability is not weakness. It is our most accurate measure of courage.
- Vulnerability is the birthplace of
- creativity, and
Shame: has focus on self. Guilt is focus on behavior.
- Shame has two scripts:
- You are never good enough.
- Who do you think you are?
- Shame is correlated with:
- eating disorders.
- Shame is organized by gender:
- For women is not being able to do it all perfectly while never letting them see you sweat.
- Shame for men is appearing weak.
- Shame is fed by
- silence, and
The antidote to Shame is Empathy.
Brené Brown: Create True Belonging and Heal the World with Lewis Howes (2017)
Whenever there is not love and belonging there is suffering.
- Belonging is being part of something bigger than yourself, but belonging is also the courage to stand alone.
- Belonging never asks us to change who we are.
- Fitting in can mean betraying yourself if it asks us to change who we are to belong.
Teams and Groups can deliver the illusion of belonging.
If you become so adaptable that the goal of adapting is to make you like me, you betray yourself.
There are two kinds of kids:
- Kids who ask for help
- Kids who don’t
Lewis: my way was of asking was getting angry, mad, and lashing out, turning fear into rage and ploughing over others
- In 3rd or 4th grade, Lewis was shamed by getting picked last in a dodgeball game
- He turned his loss into fuel for athletics, eventually playing football in the NFL.
- He felt like every loss was an attack on his life because he feared he couldn’t be accepted.
- Involves: uncertainty, risk, and emotional exposure
- You can’t be a courageous leader if you aren’t willing to be uncomfortable
The ability to opt-out of talking about Charlottesville and having it “not affect her” is the definition of privilege.
- Charlottesville is about powerlessness
I can’t imagine a way though the next decade that doesn’t involve dealing with pain. (34 min)
James Baldwin: people hold on to their hate so stubbornly because once they let it go their is nothing but pain.
After a difficult breakup while at college, Lewis took out his rage on the football field.
Every social crisis, almost without exception, is about our inability to deal with our pain:
- Opioids: physicians
- Medicated, addicted, in debt, obese.
Our inability to deal with pain and vulnerability is what leads to many problems.
The football team that acknowledges its vulnerabilities will be more successful.
Charlottesville comes down to identity, belonging, and power.
- This is the concept of “power-over”‘s last stand
- last stands are violent, desperate
- nostalgic: “It was so much better when people knew their place”
We can’t solve the next issues with national solutions
Vulnerability is not weakness. It is about the willingness to be seen when you can’t control the outcome.
When you experience shame:
- Talk to yourself like you talk to someone you love.
- Talk to someone else: shame can not respond to being spoken
You either own your story or it owns you.
What is Greatness?
- Greatness is owning your story and loving yourself though that.
Brené Brown Shows You How To “Brave the Wilderness” (2017)
(Warning: There is swearing in this video)
Dehumanization is not a social justice tool (15 min)
Police-Protester Dichotomy: shaming us for not hating the right people.
I’m not going to let my imperfection move me away from the conversation because its too important
I contributed more than I criticized.
There is a difference between holding people accountable and shame.
Shame is not a strategy. It will hurt them and you. Shame begets shame.
Holding people accountable is not as much fun as raging against them.
There should be more tools in your tool bag than shame and coddling. (25 min)
We need to understand how scarcity affects the way we lead and teach, we have to engage with vulnerability and we need to learn how to recognize and combat shame. What would it mean for our schools and classrooms if we showed up for tough, honest conversations about what it takes to bring our best, most authentic selves to work? These conversations may sound risky and vulnerable, but risk and vulnerability are essential to courageous schools. A daring classroom is a place where both teachers and students commit to choosing courage over comfort, choosing what is right over what is fun, fast or easy and practicing values rather than professing them.
Shame can not survive being spoken because it depends upon you thinking you are alone.
The antidote to share is empathy.
Shame is fed by empathy:
Perspective taking: take the perspective of others
Every time someone talks about hate, substitute the word “pain”.
In response to the emerging evidence that Donald Trump directed and participated in the commission of federal crimes, all too many Republicans are wrongly comforting themselves with political deflection and strained legal argument. The political deflection is clear, though a bit bizarre. The recent wave of news about Trump’s porn payoffs is somehow evidence that investigators and critics are “shifting focus” from the Russia investigation to alleged campaign-finance violations.
It’s almost as if the campaign-finance news is taken as some sort of evidence that Mueller’s core investigation is faltering, so the media and investigators have to find something to use to attack Trump.
But the campaign-finance investigation has little to do with Mueller. It’s run by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, and — besides — what do we want federal prosecutors to do when they discover evidence of unrelated crimes when engaged in a different investigation? Let bygones be bygones? Or refer that evidence to the proper jurisdiction — as Robert Mueller’s office did — for further investigation and potential prosecution?
.. The current wave of news reports is largely driven by court filings, and those court filings don’t represent a shift in law-enforcement focus on Trump but rather an arena of additional inquiry. The sad reality is that the Trump operation was a target-rich environment for any diligent investigator.
.. The Edwards prosecution failed not as a matter of law but of fact. The prosecution simply didn’t produce sufficient evidence to prove its case. Here’s Conway, Katyal, and Potter on the contrasts between the Edwards and Trump cases:
A key witness, Bunny [Mellon], was 101 years old and too frail to show up at trial. There were no written legal agreements providing money in exchange for silence, as there are in Trump’s case, and no threats by the mother of the child to go public immediately if the funds were not received. That’s why one juror told the media that the evidence wasn’t there to show even that Edwards intended the money to go to Rielle Hunter. In contrast, in a bombshell disclosure this week, the public learned that AMI, the parent corporation of the National Enquirer, is cooperating with the prosecution and has stated that the payments were made to influence the 2016 election. And even more worrisome for Trump, reports emerged Thursday that Trump was the third person in the very room where Cohen and David Pecker (the head of AMI) discussed the hush money payments — making it very hard for Trump to assert a non-campaign-related purpose
..So far, the best available evidence indicates that Trump’s commitments to Stormy Daniels didn’t exist “irrespective” of his campaign but rather because of his campaign. That’s Michael Cohen’s assertion. That’s AMI’s assertion. The affairs were relatively old — and so was the threat to his family — but the payments were new, rendered at a crucial time in a very close presidential contest.
.. Moreover, Cohen has indicated that prosecutors have a “substantial amount of information” that corroborates his testimony. And what is that information? Well, as the Wall Street Journal has already reported:
Mr. Trump was involved in or briefed on nearly every step of the agreements. He directed deals in phone calls and meetings with his self-described fixer, Michael Cohen, and others. The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan has gathered evidence of Mr. Trump’s participation in the transactions
Here is the fundamental reality, Republicans — there is already far more evidence of legal culpability against Trump than ever existed against Edwards, and a federal judge permitted the Edwards case to go to trial. It is true that, if Trump does eventually face indictment, a different judge may have a different view of the law, but if Trump is counting on a favorable legal ruling, he’s playing a dangerous game indeed.
.. Campaign-finance law is constructed from the ground up to require candidate transparency and guard against corruption. Thus, it is purposefully very hard for candidates to find a way to legally and quietly use substantial sums of money to cover up dirty deeds. In his essay, Smith argues, “Indeed, it is quite probable that many of those now baying for Trump’s scalp for illegal campaign contributions would be leading a charge to prosecute Trump for illegal ‘personal use’ of campaign funds had he made the payments from his campaign treasury.”
That’s likely correct — and evidence that campaign-finance law is working as intended. In other words, if you’re a campaign-finance lawyer, and a candidate asks your advice on how to buy the silence of a porn star and hide that payment entirely from the American people, your best response should be, “Have you considered not running for office?”