The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Hillary Clinton

  • U.S. House panel subpoenas Bill, Hillary Clinton over Epstein probe

    U.S. House panel subpoenas Bill, Hillary Clinton over Epstein probe

    The House oversight committee yesterday issued subpoenas to Bill and Hillary Clinton as well as several former attorneys general and directors of the FBI, demanding “testimony related to horrific crimes perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein”.

    The investigative committee’s Republican chair, James Comer, sent the subpoenas in response to two motions lawmakers approved on a bipartisan basis last month, as Congress navigated outrage among Donald Trump’s supporters over the justice department’s announcement that it would not release further details about Epstein, a disgraced financier who died in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex trafficking.

    The subpoenas raise the possibility that more details will become public about Trump’s relationship with Epstein, which stretched for years but appeared to have petered out by the time Epstein was convicted of sexually abusing girls in 2008.

     Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported on the existence of a sexually suggestive sketch and lewd letter Trump sent to Epstein as a 50th birthday gift in 2003.

    The president and his allies have long flirted with conspiracy theories around Epstein’s death in federal custody, but the justice department upended those by concluding he died by suicide and a long-rumored list of his client did not exist. That prompted some Trump supporters to criticise the president for failing to make good on his pledge to bring full transparency to the case, which Democrats moved to capitalise on by pushing congressional Republicans into tricky votes intended to make the Epstein case files public.

    Read Also: 2027: Tinubu will have landslide victory, says SWAGA

    Shortly before House lawmakers left Washington DC for Congress’s August recess, the Republican congressman Scott Perry won an oversight subcommittee’s approval to compel depositions from the Clintons and the former top federal law enforcement officials in a bid to reveal more about Epstein’s activities. Democratic congresswoman Summer Lee also successfully pushed a motion to subpoena justice department files related to the case.

    In addition to the Clintons, the committee sent subpoenas to former attorneys general Jeff Sessions, Alberto Gonzales and William Barr, who served in George W Bush and Trump’s presidencies, and Merrick Garland, Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder, who served under Joe Biden and Barack Obama. Former FBI directors James Comey and Robert Mueller also received subpoenas.

    In the letter to Bill Clinton, Comer noted that the former president had flown four times on Epstein’s private jet, and repeated an allegation that he had “pressured” Vanity Fair not to publish sex trafficking claims regarding Epstein. The chair further says that Clinton was “allegedly close” with Ghislaine Maxwell, a British socialite serving a 20-year prison sentence after being convicted on sex trafficking charges related to Epstein.

    “Given your past relationships with Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell, the Committee believes that you have information regarding their activities that is relevant to the Committee’s investigation,” Comer wrote.

    In his letter to Hillary Clinton, Comer draws a more tenuous connect, writing: “Your family appears to have had a close relationship with both Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell”. In addition to details about them, Comer notes that Clinton “may have knowledge of efforts by the federal government to combat international sex trafficking operations of the type run by Mr. Epstein”.

    Comer set Bill Clinton’s deposition date as 14 October and Hillary’s as 9 October. Others who received subpoenas were given dates ranging from mid-August through early October, while US attorney general Pam Bondi has until 19 August to release documents related to the case.

    In addition to the subpoenas, Republican congressman Thomas Massie and Democrat Ro Khanna are collecting signatures for a discharge petition to force a vote on legislation compelling release of the Epstein files. That vote is not expected to happen until the House returns from recess in early September.

    Trump has authorised the justice department to request release of the transcripts from the federal grand juries that indicted Epstein and Maxwell, while last week, deputy attorney general Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell in Florida in what the White House said was a bid to uncover new details about the case.

  • Trump and his Deplorables

    Hillary Clinton had a point. In September 2016, the Democratic presidential candidate criticized some of her rival’s supporters for backing him. “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” she said at a fundraiser in New York. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”

    Clinton distinguished these people from some of Trump’s other supporters, whom she described as “people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them … and they’re just desperate for change.” She told her supporters that this latter basket included “people we have to understand and empathize with as well.” That nuance escaped the Trump campaign, which rallied around the “deplorable” label and said it showed how Clinton was out of touch. Mainstream news organizations tsk-tsked her for breaking a cardinal rule of political campaigning by criticizing the electorate.

    Two years into Trump’s presidency, “deplorable” seems almost kind. It’s clear by now that racism is an animating force of Trump’s presidency, yet many of Trump’s supporters and most of the Republican Party still back him after every bigoted slight and discriminatory policy he makes. They may not be willing to admit that they agree outright with everything he says or does, but their continued political support makes the distinction meaningless. Even those Republicans who do voice objections to Trump tend to treat each outburst as a discrete incident, thereby denying the obvious, deeper problem. At this stage, to not object to the president outright is to be complicit in his racist presidency.

    The latest evidence comes from where it often does: the president’s personal Twitter account. Speaker Nancy Pelosi sparred last week with “the squad,” a group of four progressive freshman House Democrats, leading its most prominent member, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to claim Pelosi was singling out women of color in the Democratic caucus. Trump, for whatever reason, decided to publicly defend Pelosi by saying she wasn’t a racist. When those lawmakers then criticized Trump, he responded with an extraordinary series of tweets attacking their citizenship.

    His hostility is unsurprising. The squad—which also includes congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley—represent everything that Trump is not. These young women are unsparing in their criticism of him and his presidency; Tlaib famously said they would “impeach the motherfucker” shortly after she was sworn into office in January. One can hardly blame them for their zeal, since voters first elected them to Congress in the 2018 midterms as part of the electorate’s broader rebuke of Trump.

    Even by Trump’s standards, it was an extraordinary diatribe. “Go back where you came from” is a popular taunt among white nationalists, one that’s used to instill feelings of otherness and alienation in the target. It’s also become a staple of schoolyard bullying against children of color after Trump took office. It did not matter to the president that all four of the lawmakers are American citizens, or that three out of the four were born in the United States. His underlying assertion is that they—and other nonwhite Americans—can never be full members of the American nation by virtue of their race.

    If this were the first indication that Trump harbored racist views, his remarks would have been a tremendous shock. But it was not. He announced his presidential bid by claiming Mexico was sending murderers and rapists across the border, and campaigned on banning Muslims from entering the United States. He said an Indiana-born federal judge couldn’t be fair to him because he was “Mexican.” He told lawmakers he didn’t want immigrants from “shithole countries.” He constantly taunts Senator Elizabeth Warren’s claims of Native American ancestry by calling her “Pocahontas.” He described the white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville as “very fine people.” And that’s just since 2015.

    Trump, who knows these views helped elect him, doubled down on his remarks in a press conference on Monday, rebuffing criticism that they echoed white nationalists. “It doesn’t concern me because many people agree with me,” he replied. “All I’m saying is if they want to leave, they can leave. It doesn’t say leave forever. It says leave.” Trump didn’t bother denying that his comments were racist, just that they weren’t as racist as everyone believed. His assumption that his racist views hold quiet but widespread currency is a familiar trope among racists, too. In their eyes, they are bold truth-tellers amid a silent majority that keeps quiet out of political correctness.

    Denialism abounds. Marc Short, Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff, argued that Trump couldn’t be a racist because Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao is Asian American. “So when people write the president has racist motives here, look at the reality of who is actually serving in Donald Trump’s cabinet,” he told reporters. (Chao is married to Trump’s most powerful ally in Congress, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.) Others tried to define racism down into oblivion. “Trump’s ‘go back’ comments were nativist, xenophobic, counterfactual and politically stupid,” Fox News anchor Brit Hume opined. “But they simply do not meet the standard definition of racist, a word so recklessly flung around these days that its actual meaning is being lost.” Hume did not explain how one could be a nativist xenophobe without also being racist.

    At the same time, by Monday afternoon, a number of elected Republicans chimed in to critique Trump, but not without caveats; some made sure to also criticize the four women lawmakers in question, as if to insulate themselves from potential backlash from the Republican base. “POTUS was wrong to say any American citizen, whether in Congress or not, has any ‘home’ besides the U.S.,” Texas Representative Chip Roy wrote on Twitter. “But I just as strongly believe non-citizens who abuse our immigration laws should be sent home immediately, & Reps who refuse to defend America should be sent home 11/2020.”

    Even moderate Republicans had to make clear that they were offering a qualified defense of their fellow lawmakers. Maine Senator Susan Collins alluded to the squad’s “views on socialism, their anti-Semitic rhetoric, and their negative comments about law enforcement” before admonishing Trump to “take that [tweet] down.” South Carolina Senator Tim Scott noted that the Democratic Party was “embroiled in racial controversy” before Trump’s “unacceptable personal attacks” stole the spotlight. “I couldn’t disagree more with these congresswomen’s views on immigration, socialism, national security, and virtually every policy issue,” Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey said in a statement. “But they are entitled to their opinions, however misguided they may be.”

    What could be driving such tepid responses? Maybe they really disagree with the squad’s views so strongly that they have to mention them whenever given the chance. Maybe they’re so intimidated by the Republican base’s embrace of racist politics that they don’t want to distance themselves too much from it. Maybe they’re simply worried that Trump will turn that base against them. Whatever the reason, their hesitation gives the appearance that they don’t really oppose Trump’s racism. They just want him to be quieter about it.

    •  This article was originally published in The New Republic – www.newrepublic.com

  • We’ll stop interference in 2020 US presidential election, Facebook’s Zuckerberg assures

    Facebook Inc’s Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg is confident the world’s biggest social network will do better in 2020 at stopping “bad actors’’ from manipulating the U.S. presidential election.

    “We’ve learned a lot since 2016, where, obviously, we were behind where we needed to be on defences for nation

    states trying to interfere,” he said in a “Good Morning America’’ interview released on Thursday.

    “These aren’t things that you ever fully solve, right? They’re ongoing arms races, where we need to make sure

    that our systems stay ahead of the sophisticated bad actors, who are just always going to try to game them.”

    U.S. intelligence agencies say there was an extensive Russian cyber-influence operation during the 2016 campaign aimed at helping Donald Trump, a Republican, defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

    Russia has repeatedly denied the allegations.

    Zuckerberg said that he social media giant had implemented a lot of different measures since 2016 to verify any advertiser

    who is running a political ad and create an archive so anyone could see what advertisers are running, who they are targeting and how much they are paying.

    Advertising practices at Facebook, the world’s largest social network with 2.7 billion users and 56 billion dollars in annual revenue, have been in the spotlight for two years amid growing discontent over its approach to privacy and user data.

    Read Also: Obaseki’s reforms: Facebook, MainOne to invest in Edo, says Opeke

    The company said in a congressional testimony in 2018 that Russian agents created 129 events on the network during the 2016 U.S. election campaign, shedding more light on Russia’s purported disinformation drive aimed at voters.

    “At this point, (we) have probably some of the most-advanced systems of any company or government in the world for preventing the kind of tactics that Russia and now other countries, as well, have tried,” Zuckerberg said.

    Asked if he could guarantee that there would not be interference in the election, Zuckerberg said, “What I can guarantee is that they’re definitely going to try.”

  • I won’t run for 2020 US presidential election, says Hillary Clinton

    Hillary Clinton, who lost the 2016 U.S. presidential election to Donald Trump, does not plan to run in 2020, leaving the centre-left Democratic Party’s nomination open for less-established candidates.

    “I’m not running, but I’m going to keep working and speaking and standing up for what I believe,” Clinton told broadcaster News 12 Westchester.

    The list of potential candidates for the Democratic nomination has grown in recent weeks, but the question remained open whether the former senator and secretary of state could again seek the party’s nomination.

    Although the wife of former U.S. President Bill Clinton took a larger portion of the popular vote than President Trump in 2016, she lost so-called the Electoral College vote.

    Read Also: Chimamanda ‘s view over Hillary Clinton’s bio sets twitter on fire

    Prominent U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders said in February he would run for the Democratic nomination in 2020, after losing out to Clinton in the party’s 2016 primary elections.

    While Sanders stood as the only major opposition to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democratic primaries, this year he joins an already packed field of hopefuls including Sen, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, among others.

  • New York police respond to ‘suspicious package’ in Manhattan

    New York City’s Police Department (NYPD) was responding to reports of a “suspicious package” found in Manhattan on Thursday, following a series of suspected pipe bombs sent to high-profile Democrats and critics of U.S. President Donald Trump.

    “Please avoid the area and expect a police presence and heavy traffic,’’ the NYPD wrote on Twitter.

    It was unclear whether the incident was linked to suspected package bombs intercepted in the U.S. this week, which were sent to Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton, former President Barack Obama, said broadcaster CNN and others.

    Read Also: Potential explosives sent to White House, Hillary Clinton, Obama

    Broadcaster NBC news said Thursday’s discovery was made at a site linked to Robert De Niro, citing a local law enforcement official.

    The actor owns a restaurant in Manhattan’s upmarket Tribeca neighbourhood, where the package was found, and has been critical of Trump in the past.

    Television footage showed a heavy police presence in the area.

    De Niro cursed the president on national television during the Tony Awards in June, saying “Fuck Trump” with his fist in the air.

    Trump retaliated by calling the 75-year-old veteran actor a “very low IQ individual.”

  • Potential explosives sent to White House, Hillary Clinton, Obama

    Federal authorities are investigating suspicious packages sent to the White House, former U.S. President Barack Obama and former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secret Service and official said on Wednesday.

    A suspicious package addressed to the White House was intercepted at an off-site facility, the source told the Media .

    The suspicious packages sent to the two top Democrats as well as a bomb sent to one of their major donors came roughly two weeks ahead of the high-stakes November  6 election.

    This election will determine whether Republicans maintain control of Congress in a nation that has become deeply polarized.

    The package to Clinton was found late Tuesday while the one addressed to Obama was found early Wednesday.

    Both were discovered during routine mail screenings, the Secret Service said. Both Obama and Clinton were not at risk, they added.

    The White House, in a statement, condemned the attempted attacks on Obama and Clinton.

    “These terrorizing acts are despicable, and anyone responsible will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said.

    Read Also: Guinness Nigeria declares N4.03bn dividends

    “The United States Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are investigating and will take all appropriate actions to protect anyone threatened by these cowards.”

    The FBI said it was investigating the packages.

    “The packages were immediately identified during routine mail screening procedures as potential explosive devices and were appropriately handled as such,” the Secret Service said in a statement.

    The package addressed to Clinton at her home in the New York suburb of Chappaqua was an explosive device, the media reported.

    The discovery of the packages came after a small bomb was found earlier this week at the home of billionaire liberal donor George Soros in the New York City suburb of Katonah.

    This is about 10 miles from the Clintons’ home.

    “Nothing made it to their home,” Bill Clinton’s spokesman said in an email. A spokesman for Hillary Clinton referred queries to the Secret Service statement.

    A spokeswoman for the Obamas declined to comment.

    Chappaqua police said authorities in New Castle assisted the FBI, the Secret Service and Westchester County police with the investigation into the package sent to Clinton.

    “The matter is currently under federal investigation,” the police said in a statement, referring questions to the FBI.

    The device sent to Clinton was similar to the one found on Monday at Soros’ home, the media reported, citing a law enforcement official.

  • Chimamanda displeased over preferential treatment for women

    Renowned Nigerian author and feminist, Chimamanda Adichie has expressed her misgivings over some preferential treatments given to women.

    Adichie, spoke against men opening doors for women and tragedy aids given to women and children first, because they are perceived as weak while appearing on the Trevor Noah show, a daily show and an American programme on Thursday.

    The show is an Emmy and Peabody Award-winning program that looks at the day’s top headlines through a sharp, reality-based lens.

    According to Adichie, opening the door for a woman should not be out of chivalry; rather, people should be open to helping and being courteous regardless of gender.

    She said, “I think just like holding the door shouldn’t be gender because we should open the door for everyone.

    “I hold the door for men and women. I think the idea of sort of holding the door for a woman because she is a woman, I have trouble with.

    “I’m quite happy for people to hold the door for me I hope they are not doing for the sort of idea of chivalry.

    Read Also: Women march for Ambode

    “Because chivalry is the idea of women are somehow weak and need protecting but we know that there many women who are stronger than men,” she said.

    She went on to express her disdain for the idea of people always saying women and children should be rescued first in times of tragedy, rather than saving the weak and unwell.

    Adichie said, “Which is also why I have issues with women and children when women are classified. When there is a tragedy and we say women and children should live first.

    “I think actually it is the people who are weak and unwell who should leave first,” she said.

    Reports have it that Adichie frequently comes under ‘fire’ over her unwavering feminist comments during interviews.

    Adichie trended in April when she said she was upset that the Twitter bio of former U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, began with ‘wife’ despite her numerous achievement.

    Reports have it that Adichie’s feminism campaign has been a pivotal crux of her writing as her characters centre around powerful women who are usually dwarfed by the patriarchal system in their environments.

    Her TedX talk ‘We Should All Be Feminists’ was sampled on American singer Beyonce’s hit song ‘Flawless’ and was also part of Beyonce’s performance routine at 2018 Coachella.

    In 2017, Adichie released a small book titled – ‘Dear Ijeawele or A Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions’.

    Her novel ‘Americanah’, was recognised as one of 15 remarkable books by women that are shaping the way fiction was being written and read in the 21st century.”

    NAN

  • Chimamanda ‘s view over Hillary Clinton’s bio sets twitter on fire

    Nigerian writer, Chimamanda Adichie is in the news again for her feminist views for being `upset’ by former US Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton’s usage of `wife’ on her Twitter bio.

    Adichie, who is a renowned feminist fighting for the equality of male and female genders, asked the question at a PEN World Voices Festival lecture.

    She set twitter on fire when she said that Hillary Clinton seemed to describe herself as a function of her husband, Bill Clinton.

    Reacting to the interview, some Nigerians felt she took her feminism too far, adding that the question was intrusive and Hillary has a choice on her view on being addressed as a ‘Wife’.

    Meanwhile, some others argued that the question was necessary for women to understand that they have to celebrate their achievements, not just on the home front, just like men.

    Adichie to Hillary; “In your Twitter account, the first word that describes you is ‘Wife.’ And then I think its ‘Mom,’ and then it’s ‘Grandmother.”

    “And when I saw that, I have to confess that I felt just a little bit upset.

    And then I went and I looked at your husband’s Twitter account, and the first word was not ‘husband,” Adichie said.

    She was curious as to why with all of Clinton’s career accomplishments; did her Twitter bio primarily identify her as a “Wife”.

    Bill Clinton’s Twitter bio leads with, ‘Founder, Clinton Foundation and 42nd President of the United States’.

    Adichie wanted to know if it was Clinton’s choice to first identify in relation to her husband, and if so, why?

    “When you put it like that, I’m going to change it,” Clinton said, prompting roars from the crowd.

    However, Clinton had pretty good explanation for why ‘Wife’ kicked- off her bio, which is that women should be able to celebrate both their accomplishments and their relationships.

    Here are some of the reactions:

    Popular blogger Linda Ikeji wrote @lindaikeji: I’m a big advocate for women empowerment, rights and indepencence but when I do marry, I’d proudly describe myself as a wife & proudly add my husband’s name to mine.

    “Proudly! if you don’t believe in that as a woman, that’s fine too #differentstrokesfordifferentfolks,’’

    @Linesandtimes tweeted, “Chimamanda said she was a bit upset by Hillary Clinton’s bio. Her intolerance for anything that does not align with her idea of feminism is really tragic.

    “A woman can be defined as anything she wants to be seen as, what’s important is that it’s her choice.”

    @Txtwistatornado wrote, “Lol I read the article, and I think it was great. I don’t think she disgraced Nigeria at all.

    “She got Hillary Clinton to re-evaluate the message she sends to women. I believe in a happy medium as a woman so I’m good with this interview.IMO”

    @SeunxTemi tweeted, “Not going to read all these. This is someone’s personal life Chimamanda thinks she has the right to criticize in such an unwarranted manner.

    “Hilary Clinton is a Queen and what her bio states shouldn’t diminish her numerous accomplishments.”

    @Realcalmday said, “If Hilary Clinton had a problem with what Chimamanda asked her, I believe she would’ve said so. Why are you people carrying the matter on your heads?”

    @Chinewubeze_mc wrote, “Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie went too far with this her feminism issue during her interview with Hilary Clinton today.”

    @Pengasonconcept tweeted, “So happy about how Hilary Clinton clarified Chimamanda on the true meaning of feminism.

    “Just because a woman is up to the same task as an average man on earth doesn’t stop them from knowing their true responsibilities in life.”

    NAN reports that Adichie’s feminism campaign has been a pivotal crux of her writing as her characters centre around powerful women who are usually dwarfed by the patriarchal system in their environments.

    Her TedX talk ‘We Should All Be Feminists’ was sampled on American singer Beyonce’s hit song ‘Flawless’ and was also part of Beyonce’s performance routine at 2018 Coachella.

    In 2017, Adichie released a small book titled – ‘Dear Ijeawele or A Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions’.

    Recently, her novel ‘Americanah’, was recognised as one of 15 remarkable books by women that are shaping the way fiction was being written and read in the 21st century.”

    NAN

  • Obama, Clinton top list of most admired in US

    Obama, Clinton top list of most admired in US

    Former President Barack Obama and former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton retained their titles among U.S. adults as the most admired man and woman anywhere in the world in 2017 for the tenth consecutive year.

    Àccording to a poll by the Gallup organisation, Obama edged out [President] Donald Trump, by 17 per cent to 14 per cent, while Clinton edged out Michelle Obama, by nine per cent to seven per cent.

    Trump won handily among Republicans, 35 per cent name him as the man they admire most, with only one per cent Obama, the release explained.

    In contrast, Obama led among Democrats, with 39 per cent mentioning him and 3 percent mentioning Trump.

    Read also: How Obama  Michelle spend after presidency

    Meanwhile, Clinton ’s nine per cent marked the lowest score she has received since 2002, when named by seven per cent, the release noted.

    She has held the title a record 22 times in total, with Eleanor Roosevelt in second place with 13 wins.

    Obama has been named the most admired man ten times, trailing only President Dwight Eisenhower, who earned the distinction 12 times, according to the release.

    Barack Obama won all eight years he was president, plus 2008, the year he was first elected, and this year, his first as a former president of the U.S.

    (Sputnik/NAN)

  • Forbes names Merkel as world’s most powerful woman for 7th time

    Forbes names Merkel as world’s most powerful woman for 7th time

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been named the world’s most powerful woman for the seventh time in a row by Forbes magazine, the publication announced on Thursday.

    “Merkel this year won a hard-fought election that saw the far-right Alternative for Germany party creep into the Bundestag.

    “She’ll have to continue to hold tight to the EU rudder as she faces oncoming storms from Brexit and the growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe,” Forbes said in a statement.

    British Prime Minister, Theresa May, took second place in the ranking, while Hillary Clinton, who was ranked the world’s second-most powerful woman in 2016, fell to 63rd place after her election defeat to U.S. President Donald Trump.

    Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, who has been serving as a White House advisor in his administration, ranked 19th on the list, while the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, came in 43rd.

    Melinda Gates of the Gates Foundation, Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook and Mary Barra, the head of General Motors, took third, fourth and fifth place, respectively.

    NAN