An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
Police fire water cannon and pepper spray at protesters
March called off after clashes
Dozens of police injured as riots continue into night
Donald Trump is in Hamburg ahead of G20 meeting
Police were fighting running battles with anticapitalists in the streets of Hamburg on Thursday night as protests against the G20 summit turned violent
Masked protesters hurled smoke bombs and glass bottles at police who responded with water cannon.
Police said they were “horrified by the violence”.
Protesters march as world leaders gather for the G20 summit, in pictures
There were scenes of confusion in the nightlife district of Saint Pauli as the black clad masked protesters choked the narrow alley while nervous drinkers looked on from pubs.
Hundreds of armoured riot police ran through the streets.
Police said the violence had broken out after they asked a hardcore of protesters to remove their masks.
The protesters planned to march to the city centre where the summit begins tomorrow.
Police said they could not continue unless they removed the masks.
There was a tense standoff for around half an hour while negotiations continued before the first smoke bombs were thrown.
German riot police use water cannons against protesters during the demonstrations during the G20 summit in Hamburg Credit: Reuters
The ‘Welcome To Hell’ protest was officially cancelled on Thursday night amid the violence, but a hardcore continued in defiance of the order.
World leaders including President Donald Trump are in Hamburg for the start of the summit tomorrow.
Several injuries reports as renewed demonstration underway
Seven police officers were injured in the clashes with protesters, according to official accounts.
There were also many injured among the protesters, including several with severe injuries from police batons, according to Andreas Blechschmidt, one of the organisers of the march.
German riot police detain a protester during the demonstrations during the G20 summit in Hamburg Credit: Reuters
There are unconfirmed reports one of the protesters suffered life-threatening injuries.
A renewed demonstration was underway as Theresa May arrived in Hamburg ahead of the summit around 10pm (9pm BST).
Prime Minister Theresa May and husband Philip arrive in Hamburg for the G20 leaders’ summit Credit: PA
Timo Zill, a police officer, told journalists how he and a colleague had been attacked on the street by protesters and had to take refuge in an ambulance.
Drivers were reportedly trapped inside their cars for up to six hours by road blocks while police battled demonstrators.
Police helicopters were circling overhead the tense scene on a street running alongside the Elbe river harbour with its container cranes, and near mural-covered former squats that saw heavy clashes with police in the 1980s, AFP reports.
Protesters were seen scrambling to leave the scene, some changing out of their all-black gear, as police announced that the organisers have called off the march following the clashes.
Riot police move in through the smoke during the “Welcome to Hell” rally against the G20 summit in Hamburg Credit: AFP
Police say they repeatedly asked a group of hardcore anti-capitalist demonstrators to remove their masks Thursday evening, to no avail. They then decided to separate the group from the rest of the several thousand-strong demonstration.
Black-hooded protesters attacked a police vehicle with bottles and bricks, breaking its window.
The violence broke out near the start of the demonstration at a riverside plaza used for Hamburg’s weekly fish market.
German riot policeman catches a protester during the demonstrations Credit: Reuters
Primer: Moscow hired thousands of North Koreans to build the infrastructure for the Sochi Olympics. Russia still uses North Korean slaves for mining and forestry. The North Koreans are hired slaves that have to send their pay checks back the the Kim regime. Not to be outdone, Qatar is doing the same with slaves from the DPRK, as they are hired to build the stadium for the FIFA World Cup Soccer games in 2020.
North Koreans are hired out to foreign corrupt governments to work 20 hours a day with a pay rate of $100 per month (US$) and 70% of that goes back to Pyongyang as a loyalty payment.
By the way, China, Kuwait, Libya, Africa, Oman and several other countries hire the slaves and their living conditions don’t even qualify as slums, they are much worse.
So, while there is much worry about the missile and nuclear program at the hands of North Korea, China is a major culprit in full assistance and cooperation in that regard. Further, China has aided North Korea and other terror regimes in skirting not only United States sanctions, but those from applied by other nations.
Over the last eight years, the Obama administration has hardly taken any aggressive stance with regard to North Korea and consequences except to shut off humanitarian exports to the country. President Trump meanwhile is trusting Russia and China to deal with North Korea? Worse mistake yet.
Deeper dive…
The Global Web That Keeps North Korea Running
Pyongyang’s ties with 164 countries help it amass money and know-how to develop nuclear weapons
By: Jonathan Cheng in Seoul, Jeremy Page in Beijing and Alastair Gale in Tokyo
WSJ: North Korea may be one of the world’s most isolated countries, but the tightening sanctions regime it has lived under for the past two decades is anything but impermeable.
An examination of North Korea’s global connections reveals that even as it becomes increasingly dependent on China, Pyongyang maintains economic and diplomatic ties with many nations. Those links—from commercial and banking relationships to scientific training, arms sales, monument-building and restaurants—have helped it amass the money and technical know-how to develop nuclear weapons and missiles.
The nature and extent of North Korea’s global ties comes from current and formal officials, researchers, North Korean defectors, U.N. decisions, NGO’s and an analysis of economic statistics.
North Korea: What Comes After the ICBM Test?
In some cases, North Korea leans on old allies, particularly those like Cuba from the former Communist bloc, or those like Syria that are similarly hostile to the U.S. In others, notably in Africa, it has more transactional relationships to supply items such as cheap weaponry or military training. In the Middle East, it supplies laborers for construction work and pockets almost all their earnings.
Sanctions against North Korea haven’t been as broad as those applied to Iran over its nuclear program, nor as rigidly enforced.
David S. Cohen, undersecretary of the Treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence during the Obama administration, wrote in an op-ed in April that “North Korea has gotten off relatively easy, especially as compared with Iran.”
Trying to crack down on North Korean business activities is like a game of Whac-A-Mole. North Korean defectors have detailed how the regime uses front companies to conceal its commercial activities in foreign countries, or adopts business names that obscure their identity by avoiding using North Korea’s full name, thereby benefiting from confusion over whether the entity is North or South Korean.
Pyongyang maintains diplomatic ties with 164 countries and has embassies in 47, according to the National Committee on North Korea, a Washington-based nongovernmental organization, and the Honolulu-based East-West Center.
Although it lags far behind China, India has been North Korea’s second biggest trade partner in the past couple of years, buying commodities including silver and selling it chemicals among other goods. Russia has exported petroleum products to North Korea and imported items such as garments and frozen fish. Last year, North Korea attempted to export military communications equipment to Eritrea via front companies in Malaysia, according to a recent U.N. report.
Most North Koreans abroad are involved in providing funds for the state, defectors say. One of the primary roles of North Korean diplomats is to help develop and maintain cash flows for the regime, according to former embassy officials. North Korea missions typically have to be self-financed to maximize revenue for the state, these people say.
In recent months, under pressure from the Trump administration, there are signs more countries have begun to clamp down on North Korea. In February, Bulgaria had Pyongyang send home two diplomats in its embassy in Sofia, in line with U.N. Security Council resolutions passed in September calling on countries to reduce the number of North Korean diplomats abroad.
Italy this year moved four North Koreans studying at the International Center for Theoretical Physics in Trieste to switch to less-sensitive majors in line with a Security Council resolution calling for member nations not to provide education that could aid Pyongyang’s weapons program.
In March, Senegal said it suspended issuing visas for artisans from North Korea’s Mansudae Art Studio, a state-run organization that has erected monumental sculptures across Africa.
This image, from North Korea’s KRT, shows what it said was the launch of a Hwasong-14 intercontinental ballistic missile. Photo: /Associated Press
More than 50,000 North Korean workers are employed abroad, according to the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, a Seoul-based think tank, many in construction or factory jobs. For these workers, wages are paid directly to North Korean officials, raising hundreds of millions of dollars a year for the state, human-rights groups say.
These ties are under scrutiny as Pyongyang’s success at launching a missile that could reach Alaska is escalating the crisis over its weapons program. This week’s missile test took place on the back of a Chinese truck imported to North Korea for logging purposes, according to analysts.
U.N. sanctions are primarily intended to block North Korea’s illegitimate trade and revenue streams that have a suspected link to its weapons programs. The U.N. doesn’t target all of Pyongyang’s business activities abroad, such as the chain of restaurants it operates in Asia and the Middle East, or its dispatch of laborers.
U.S. sanctions go further in trying to disrupt North Korea’s trade and revenue, including a recent move to block access to the U.S. financial system for a bank in China on which Pyongyang relied. The U.S. has sanctioned North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, a move that would freeze any of his assets in America.
Video from a North Korean state news bulletin Tuesday was said to show leader Kim Jong Un applauding after the launch. Photo: Yonhap News/Zuma Press
This week, Sen. Cory Gardner (R., Colo.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s subpanel on East Asia, said he was drafting legislation that he says would create a “global embargo” on North Korea.
“We need to shut off North Korea’s access to oil, to trade, to currency, to financial institutions,” he said in an interview Thursday, calling for “Iran-style” sanctions. “They are far from being ‘sanctioned out.’ They are certainly isolated, but they have to recognize they ain’t seen nothing yet.”
China has had close ties to North Korea since the 1950s when it sent troops to fight U.S.-led forces backing the South in the Korean War.
In 2001, China accounted for around 18% of North Korea’s exports and 20% of its imports, ranking behind Japan on both measures, according to customs figures compiled by Harvard University’s Atlas of Economic Complexity.
Since U.N. sanctions on North Korea were tightened in 2009, Japan and other countries have curtailed commercial ties with Pyongyang, leaving China as by far its biggest trade partner.
For the past five years, China has accounted for more than 80% of North Korea’s imports and exports, providing an economic lifeline even as political relations between Beijing and Pyongyang have deteriorated.
During that period, China has imported mostly industrial raw materials from North Korea, especially coal, but also seafood and clothing such as men’s suits and overcoats.
In recent days, President Donald Trump has expressed frustration with China for expanding trade with North Korea despite U.S. appeals to exert more pressure.
China says it enforces U.N. sanctions and since February it has banned imports of North Korean coal—one of Pyongyang’s main sources of hard currency.
However, U.N. sanctions still allow trade that isn’t deemed to benefit North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, and China’s customs figures show that its exports to North Korea have increased this year. Crucially, China continues to be North Korea’s biggest source of crude oil, according to diplomats and experts on the region.
Much of North Korea’s trade takes place over the 880-mile land border with China, which is porous and sparsely guarded. Small Chinese and North Korean companies quietly ferry coal, iron ore and other resources over the border, far from checkpoints.
U.N. sanctions introduced in March 2016 banned exports of North Korean iron ore unless they were exclusively for “livelihood purposes”—a loophole China continues to exploit.
While North Korea gained notoriety in the early 2000s for state-backed exports of illegal drugs and counterfeit U.S. dollars, Pyongyang has mostly shifted its strategy to allow private North Korean enterprises to take the lead, with the regime collecting bribes from these enterprises in a primitive system of taxation, says Justin Hastings, a lecturer at the University of Sydney who has researched North Korea’s overseas smuggling networks.
The shift in strategy means that North Korea can outsource some of the risk involved in the trade while continuing to fill its coffers.
“North Korea is not infinitely adaptable, but it’s far more adaptable than people have thought and its ability to adapt to sanctions has not been reached yet,” Mr. Hastings said.
One informal Chinese trader that Mr. Hastings interviewed for a soon-to-be-published academic paper was importing truckloads and boatloads of North Korean iron ore and other minerals across the river into China for resale as recently as a year ago, when the interview took place.
Pay up Iran, the victim’s families deserve compensation. Obama and Kerry gave you billions.
ToI: Newly analyzed DNA evidence from the 1994 AMIA Jewish center bombing in Buenos Aires could provide a definitive link to suicide bomber Ibrahim Berro, the Hezbollah terrorist who carried out the attack and whose body was never found or identified until now.
NBC
The discovery was announced on Monday by the AMIA Special Investigation Unit of the Argentinian General Prosecution, two weeks before the 23rd anniversary of the bombing that killed 85 and injured hundreds.
The final report after two years of investigation by a forensics team, reveals for the first time the existence of a genetic profile among the preserved remains in the laboratory of the Federal Police that “doesn’t belong to any known victims.”
With this information prosecutors have taken steps “in the field of international cooperation to try to match the profile obtained with that of samples of relatives of the suspected individual.”
A man walks over the rubble after a bomb exploded at the Argentinian Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) in Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 18, 1994. (AFP/Ali Burafi)
In 2005 special prosecutor Alberto Nisman identified Berro as the suicide bomber who carried out the attack. Berro’s brothers denied he was involved, claiming he was killed in fighting in Lebanon. Some Argentinian journalists also cast doubt on the assertion.
In May 2016, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI director James Comey met in Washington, DC, with Argentine Justice Minister Germán Garavano and offered to extend technical help to the Argentinean Justice Department regarding the AMIA attack and the death of Nisman.
Prosecutors Sabrina Namer, Roberto Salum and Leonardo Filippini have led the AMIA Special Investigatory Unit since their predecessor Nisman was discovered shot dead in his apartment in January 2015, hours before he was scheduled to appear in Congress. Nisman had been about to present allegations that then-President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner orchestrated a secret deal to cover up Iranian officials’ alleged role in the AMIA bombing. Fernandez denied the allegations and judges threw out the case. It was reopened one year ago, though no conclusions have yet been announced.
Late Argentinean public prosecutor Alberto Nisman gives a news conference in Buenos Aires, May 20, 2009. (Juan Mabromata/AFP/Getty Images)
The two years work on the DNA analysis was conducted by the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team, the Forensic Medical Body and the University of Buenos Aires. The same team one year ago identified victim number 85 of the AMIA attack.
Berro grew up in Lebanon. According to his brothers, around 1989 he changed radically, leaving school and becoming interested in Hezbollah, where his brother Ali was an active member. His mother feared Berro would end up badly, and applied for a visa for him to go to Detroit — to where some of the family had emigrated — but the application was turned down because Berro was underage. He then traveled to Iran, where he presumably received training.
Berro is suspected of having entered Argentina near Ciudad del Este — a region known for smuggling, drugs, and other illegal activities — where Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina share a border, accompanied by a man named Ahmed Saad.
The bombing, in which a van full of explosives opposite the AMIA building was detonated, was similar to the March 1992 Israeli Embassy attack in Buenos Aires, possibly also committed by Hezbollah. The attacks, it appears, occurred with the support of Iran,[3] though the Iranian government repeatedly denied these charges.[4]
Two months after the attack, Berro was reported by radio stations in Lebanon to have been killed by the Israeli army, apparently an attempt to cover up his role in the attack in Argentina. After the bombing, Berro’s wife received $300 a month from Hezbollah.[5]
In late 2005, Berro was identified as the bombing perpetrator after years of investigation and speculation into who committed the bombing. According to official Argentine government prosecutor, Alberto Nisman, Hussein’s two US-based brothers had testified that he had joined the radical Shia militant group Hezbollah. “The brothers’ testimony was substantial, rich in detail and showed that he was the one who was killed,” Nisman added.[6] A U.S. House resolution in July 2004 declared Berro was the suicide bomber,[7] but the identification was not declared positively until November 2005 after Berro’s relatives in Detroit identified his photograph. Berro was also recognized with “80 percent certain[ty]” [8] by eyewitness Nicolasa Romero, who saw the driver in the van near the AMIA building. Some Argentine journalists, however, have expressed reservations about these alleged findings; in an op-ed for La Nación, Jorge Urien Berri objected to those who “insist in taken hypotheses as proven when they not”, and contested Berro’s involvement in the incidents”.[9] Berro’s two brothers also had denied this version in April 2005 before a US prosecutor, stating that Berro had died on September 9, 1994 during combat in Lebanon. No proper autopsies or DNA tests were done. The police dumped in a bin the head thought to be that of the bomber.[6]
Berro’s brother, after apparently identifying Berro in a photograph, now denies that Berro had any role in the attack. “They changed the truth,” he said. “I gave them the photo [of Berro] at 17 years old, but when I saw photo in the news, I said, ‘How are they publishing the photo that I gave them a few months back? They said in the news that I identified the photo, and it’s not true. I gave them the photo of him at 17, but I don’t know who is in the others.”[8]
In a May 2007 interview, James Cheek, Clinton’s Ambassador to Argentina at the time of the bombing, told La Nación,[10] “To my knowledge, there was never any real evidence [of Iranian responsibility]. They never came up with anything.” The hottest lead in the case, he recalled, was an Iranian defector named Manoucher Moatamer, who “supposedly had all this information.” But Moatamer turned out to be only a dissatisfied low-ranking official without the knowledge of government decision-making that he had claimed. “We finally decided that he wasn’t credible,” Cheek recalled. Ron Goddard, then deputy chief of the US Mission in Buenos Aires, confirmed Cheek’s account. He recalled that investigators found nothing linking Iran to the bombing. “The whole Iran thing seemed kind of flimsy,” Goddard said.
Discrimination is happening at college campuses across the country. Not only is it happening by plots of students, campus selective organizations but it includes university administrators and professors.
Here comes a lawsuit that just may set legal standing and fire a shot across the bow of other universities. Lawsuits require discovery and once documents as well as electronic communications are submitted, we may see a larger coordination and collusion. Frankly, it could lead to RICO.
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, JUNE 19, 2017 — A group of San Francisco State University students and members of the local Jewish community today filed a lawsuit alleging that SFSU has a long and extensive history of cultivating anti-Semitism and overt discrimination against Jewish students. According to the suit, “SFSU and its administrators have knowingly fostered this discrimination and hostile environment, which has been marked by violent threats to the safety of Jewish students on campus.” The plaintiffs are represented by a team of attorneys from The Lawfare Project and the global law firm Winston & Strawn LLP.
The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and also names as defendants the Board of Trustees of the California State University System, SFSU President Leslie Wong and several other University officials and employees, alleges that “Jewish students at SFSU have been so intimidated and ostracized that they are afraid to wear Stars of David or yarmulkes on campus.”
The lawsuit was triggered following the alleged complicity of senior university administrators and police officers in the disruption of an April, 2016, speech by the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat. At that event organized by SF Hillel, Jewish students and audience members were subjected to genocidal and offensive chants and expletives by a raging mob that used bullhorns to intimidate and drown out the Mayor’s speech and physically threaten and intimidate members of the mostly-Jewish audience. At the same time, campus police – including the chief – stood by, on order from senior university administrators who instructed the police to “stand down” despite direct and implicit threats and violations of university codes governing campus conduct.
The lawsuit states that “SFSU has not merely fostered and embraced anti-Jewish hostility -it has systematically supported … student groups as they have doggedly organized their efforts to target, threaten, and intimidate Jewish students on campus and deprive them of their civil rights and their ability to feel safe and secure as they pursue their education at SFSU.” SFSU continues to affirm its preference for those targeting the Jewish community, according to the lawsuit, by claiming to handle such incidents successfully by removing the Jewish students from their lawful assembly without allowing them the opportunity to exercise their free speech rights.”
Making matters worse, no actions were ever taken by SFSU against the disruptive students, no disciplinary charges were ever filed, and no sanctions were ever imposed against the groups or students responsible for committing these acknowledged violations.
“Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the underpinning of the modern American ethos of equal protection and anti-discrimination. This case isn’t about Jews, it’s about equal protection under the law,” says Brooke Goldstein, Lawfare Project Director. “If the courts fail to apply Title VI in this context, we are creating a massive loophole that will ultimately be exploited to target other marginalized minority communities. If we refuse to enforce anti-discrimination law for Jews, if we say Jews don’t deserve equal protection, it will erode constitutional protections for everyone. Jews must be protected the same as any other minority group, or the bedrock of civil rights law will crumble.”
In addition to the disruption of the speech by Nir Barkat, the lawsuit describes a long list of discrimination, intimidation and mistreatment of Jewish students at SFSU. Following are just a few examples:
In 1994, a ten-foot mural was erected on SFSU’s student union building that portrayed yellow Stars of David intertwined with dollar signs, skulls and crossbones, and the words “African Blood.”
In 1997, a banner depicting an Israeli flag with a swastika next to an American flag with a dollar sign was hung over the same wall where the 1994 mural had been painted.
In April of 2002, posters appeared around campus advertising an event called “Genocide in the 21st Century,” featuring a dead baby on the label of a soup can, surrounded on either side by Israeli flags.
In May of 2002, following a Peace rally, a small group of Jewish students were targeted by a large group of students who shouted bigoted and offensive remarks, including “Hitler didn’t finish the job,” “Get out or we’ll kill you,” and “Go back to Russia.”
In 2009, SFSU hosted on-campus events that advocated for the elimination of the Jewish state of Israel.
In 2016, President Wong complained that in all his years, he had never seen a university donor withhold a pledge because of a “political issue.” A Jewish Studies faculty member told him, “the physical safety of Jewish students is never a political issue.” President Wong replied, “on this, we will have to agree to disagree.”
In 2017, when specifically asked whether Zionists are welcome at SFSU, President Wong refused to provide the only proper answer: “Yes.” Instead, President Wong demurred, stating “That’s one of those categorical statements I can’t get close to. . . . Am I comfortable opening up the gates to everyone? Gosh, of course not.”
While SFSU actively supports virulently anti-Jewish and groups and events at the university, according to the lawsuit, its administrators have done just the opposite for Jewish students. “SFSU has repeatedly denied Plaintiffs’ student groups, including Hillel and the Jewish fraternity Alpha Epsilon Pi equal access to campus events that welcome other non-Jewish student organizations at the University… The anti-Jewish animus pervading SFSU’s campus is as ubiquitous as it is hostile. Jews are at best ignored, but more often ostracized in every corner of the university community. While other groups are able to host events, obtain permits and participate in “tabling” at student fairs, Jewish groups are customarily forced to fight for these basic rights as tuition-paying students, no matter how hard they work to follow processes correctly and avoid controversy.”
The lawsuit comes at a crucial time for Jewish students across the United States. According to the lawsuit, “Anti-Semitic incidents at colleges and universities have been rising at exponential rates, doubling from 2014 to 2015 and increasing from 90 to 108-another 20 percent-from 2015 to 2016…According to the FBI hate crimes statistics from 2015 (the most recent year calculated), anti-Jewish incidents accounted for 57 percent of all religiously motivated hate crimes.”
Furthermore, the suit was filed just four days after an announcement by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), which is tasked with federal enforcement of Title VI on university campuses, stating that the office would be “scaling back” investigations into discrimination against “whole classes of victims.” It is abundantly clear that, unless courageous Jewish students like these plaintiffs bring lawsuits to enforce their own civil rights, they will have no other recourse than to suffer the discrimination in perpetuity.
“Anti-Semitism, like any other form of racism, is totally repugnant and cannot be countenanced. This lawsuit intends to address the rampant anti-Jewish animus pervasive at SFSU. Jews are entitled to the same civil rights as all Americans,” says Lawrence Hill, a senior partner at Winston & Strawn LLP and member of The Lawfare Project’s Board of Directors. “When our universities, which are supposed to be institutions of tolerance that encourage freedom of expression, instead foment prejudice and suppress free speech, we cannot stand idly by. College students are America’s future. Their minds shouldn’t be poisoned with hate and their voices shouldn’t be silenced by a mob.”
Amanda Berman, The Lawfare Project’s Director of Legal Affairs, who has been investigating SFSU for more than 14 months, added “Every couple of weeks, another anti-Semitic incident occurred; another Jewish student faced harassment or intimidation on campus; another member of Hillel or AEPi was targeted; another openly degrading comment surfaced from a member of the administration; or another student faced recalcitrance when trying to benefit, the same as all other students, from the opportunities and privileges of enrollment at SFSU. These defendants seem to believe that they are above the law, that discrimination against Jews is entirely acceptable, and that their response to criticism must go only so far as to placate Jewish donors. It is time for profound institutional change at SFSU, and since the faculty and administration is entirely unwilling to pursue such a goal, Jewish victims of this pervasively hostile environment have been left with no choice but to ask a federal court to compel it.”
Primer: Try performing an internet search of any of the names below as an introduction to their own individual scandals. Two congressional committees are assigned to this bill, they are the House Rules Committee and the House Judiciary Sub-Committee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
The Washington Post is ‘all-in’ on advancing this legislation and is likely aiding the committees with alleged facts, all yet to be proven true or accurate. This is tiresome and impedes the people’s business of that of representatives of the House…continuity of government and the transfer of power means nothing to these people. America suffers. Additionally, these democrats are using taxpayer dollars and legislative time to do this.
Further, there is already a lot of chatter inside the Beltway about the 25th Amendment. So, here it is for your use and reference.
The 25th Amendment, proposed by Congress and ratified by the states in the aftermath of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, provides the procedures for replacing the president or vice president in the event of death, removal, resignation, or incapacitation. The Watergate scandal of the 1970s saw the application of these procedures, first when Gerald Ford replaced Spiro Agnew as vice president, then when he replaced Richard Nixon as president, and then when Nelson Rockefeller filled the resulting vacancy to become the vice president. Read more from the Congressional Research Service here….
Amendment XXV
Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
Mr. Raskin (for himself, Mr. Conyers, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Lee, Ms. Jayapal, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Soto, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Gutiérrez, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Brown of Maryland, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Takano, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Evans, and Mr. Nadler) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned…
A BILL
To establish the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1.Short title.
This Act may be cited as the “Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity Act”.
SEC. 2.Establishment.
There is established a commission in the legislative branch to be known as the “Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity” (in this Act referred to as the “Commission”). The Commission shall serve as the body provided by law by Congress to carry out section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
SEC. 3. Duty of Commission.
(a) In general.—If directed by Congress pursuant to section 5, the Commission shall carry out a medical examination of the President to determine whether the President is mentally or physically unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office, as described under subsection (b).
(b) Determination.—The determination under subsection (a) shall be made if the Commission finds that the President is temporarily or permanently impaired by physical illness or disability, mental illness, mental deficiency, or alcohol or drug use to the extent that the person lacks sufficient understanding or capacity to execute the powers and duties of the office of President.
SEC. 4. Membership.
(a) Number and appointment.—The Commission shall be composed of 11 members, appointed as follows:
(1) Two members appointed by the majority leader of the Senate.
(2) Two members appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.
(3) Two members appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(4) Two members appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives.
(5) Two members—
(A) one of whom is appointed jointly by the two appointing individuals under paragraphs (1) through (4) who are members of, or caucus with, the Democratic party;
(B) one of whom is appointed jointly by the two appointing individuals under paragraphs (1) through (4) who are members of, or caucus with, the Republican party; and
(C) each of whom has served as President, Vice President, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, or Surgeon General.
(6) One member, to serve as Chair of the Commission, appointed by simple majority vote of the 10 members appointed under paragraphs (1) through (5).
(b) Criteria for appointment.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Each member appointed to the Commission under paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (a) shall be a physician. Of the two members appointed by each individual under such paragraphs, one shall be a physician with a specialty in psychiatry. The Chair shall be either a physician or an individual appointed under paragraph (5) of subsection (a), or both.
(2) LIMITATIONS.—A member appointed under subsection (a) may not, at the time the member is appointed or serving as a member on the Commission, be—
(A) an elected official to any Federal, State, or local office;
(B) an employee (as that term is defined in section 2105 of title 5, United States Code, including any employee of the United States Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission); or
(C) a member of the Armed Forces, including reserve components thereof.
(3) PHYSICIAN DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “physician” means a doctor of medicine licensed to practice medicine, surgery, or osteopathy in a State.
(c) Travel expenses.—Each member shall receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with applicable provisions under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
(d) Terms.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Each member shall be appointed for a term of 4 years. A member may serve after the expiration of that member’s term until a successor has taken office.
(2) APPOINTMENT.—Each member shall be appointed during the period beginning on the date that a Presidential election is held and ending on the date that is 30 days after such election date.
(3) VACANCIES.—A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the manner in which the original appointment was made, not later than 30 days after the vacancy occurs. Any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the expiration of the term for which the member’s predecessor was appointed shall be appointed only for the remainder of that term.
SEC. 5. Examination of the President.
(a) In general.—A concurrent resolution described in this subsection is a concurrent resolution directing the Commission to conduct an examination of the President to determine whether the President is incapacitated, either mentally or physically, the title of which is “Directing the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity to conduct an examination of the President”, and the text of which consists solely of a directive to the Commission to conduct the examination.
(b) Procedures.—The provisions of section 2908 (other than subsection (a)) of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 shall apply to the consideration of a concurrent resolution described in subsection (a) in the same manner as such provisions apply to a joint resolution described in section 2908(a) of such Act.
(c) Special rules.—For purposes of applying subsection (b) with respect to such provisions, the following rules shall apply:
(1) Any reference to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives shall be deemed a reference to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and any reference to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate shall be deemed a reference to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate.
(2) Any reference in subsection (c) to a “20-day period” shall be deemed a reference to a “48-hour period”.
(3) Any reference in subsection (d) to “the third day” shall be deemed a reference to “the first day”.
(4) Any reference to the date on which the President transmits a report shall be deemed a reference to the date on which a Member of Congress introduced a concurrent resolution described in subsection (a).
(d) Examination.—Not later than 72 hours after the adoption by Congress of the concurrent resolution described in subsection (a), the Commission shall conduct the examination described under such subsection.
SEC. 6. Report.
(a) In general.—Not later than 72 hours after completing the examination under section 4(d), and notwithstanding the HIPAA privacy regulations (as defined in section 1180(b)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d–9(b)(3))), the Commission shall submit a report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate describing the findings and conclusions of the examination.
(b) Consideration.—Any refusal by the President to undergo such examination shall be taken into consideration by the Commission in reaching a conclusion in the report under subsection (a).
NBC
BusinessInsider