The ranks of the conspiracy theorists now include the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which just ruled Covid vax mandates unconstitutional because the vaccine does not stop transmission.
I dunno, maybe it’s the brain worm, but I seem to remember the experts and authorities…
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) June 9, 2024
When President Biden met with congressional leaders in the West Wing in January to negotiate a Ukraine funding deal, he spoke so softly at times that some participants struggled to hear him, according to five people familiar with the meeting. He read from notes to make obvious points, paused for extended periods and sometimes closed his eyes for so long that some in the room wondered whether he had tuned out.
Between 9 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. (Sanaa time) June 1, U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) forces destroyed one Iranian-backed Houthi uncrewed aerial system (UAS) in the southern Red Sea. USCENTCOM forces also observed two other UAS crash into the Red Sea. No injuries or damage was reported by U.S., coalition, or commercial ships.
Additionally, between 7 and 11:30 p.m., USCENTCOM forces successfully engaged two Houthi anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM) in the southern Red Sea. The ASBM were fired in the direction of USS Gravely and were destroyed in self-defense, with no damage or injuries reported by U.S., coalition, or commercial ships.
It was determined these UAS and ASBM presented an imminent threat to U.S., coalition forces, and merchant vessels in the region. USCENTCOM’s actions are taken to protect freedom of navigation and make international waters safer and more secure for U.S., coalition, and merchant vessels.
To close out May, a month-long focus on Jewish contributions to the fabric of American life, Congress commemorated Jewish American Heritage Month with their annual celebratory tribute honoring two pillars of the American Jewish community: Malcolm Hoenlein and Eric Gertler. The annual event was coordinated by Project Legacy (https://theprojectlegacy.org/).
“We are saluting two remarkable individuals whose dedication to service and advocacy has left an indelible mark not only on our nation but also on the Jewish community in the United States and beyond” was the refrain heard throughout the two-hour-plus program featuring a bipartisan array of who’s who in national affairs.
Members of Congress from both parties attended the event, expressing their support for the Jewish community and achievements, and delivered remarks. Members included: Senators Sherrod Brown, Ben Cardin, Cory Booker, Richard Blumenthal, John Hickenlooper, Tim Kaine, James Lankford, James Risch, Pete Ricketts, Jacky Rosen, Jeanne Shaheen, Brian Schatz, Ron Wyden, Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Brad Schneider.
Malcolm Hoenlein has spent decades in Jewish leadership on the front lines of countless issues that impact world Jewry. Mr. Hoenlein has traveled the world, meeting with world leaders and Jewish communities. His extensive speaking engagements across the United States and abroad on international relations, Israel and Middle East Affairs, and the American Jewish community, have established him as a true luminary in Jewish leadership. Hoenlein’s outstanding work for decades as the Executive Vice Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and as the founding Executive Director of the Greater New York Conference on Soviet Jewry has made Hoenlein’s name synonymous with Jewish leadership.
Equally deserving of admiration is Eric Gertler, whose dedication to public service and contributions to the Jewish community has been nothing short of exemplary. Gertler serves as the Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. News & World Report, and his leadership has been instrumental in shaping the discourse on global affairs. His active involvement in various boards, including the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School, Tel Aviv University, and Hebrew University, underscores his commitment to advancing education and fostering international cooperation.
“We are here to celebrate both extraordinary men not only for their accomplishments but also to acknowledge their impact as leaders in their respective communities,” said Greg Rosenbaum, program tribute in his closing remarks.
For more information, you may browse https://jewishheritagecelebration.org/2024.html
After the May 30, 2024, conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in New York, what comes next?
Trump’s legal team will likely appeal the verdict. “We will fight for our Constitution,” Trump said following the jury’s announcement. “This is long from over.” A sentencing hearing for Trump is set for July 11.
The Conversation U.S.‘ politics and society editor Amy Lieberman spoke with Gabriel J. Chin, a scholar of criminal law and procedure, to better understand the verdict.
A courtroom sketch depicts Judge Juan Merchan, Donald Trump, prospective jurors and other court and legal personnel.Christine Cornell via AP Pool
1. Why were there so many different felony counts in this case?
The essence of the offenses Trump was convicted of is falsifying documents or records. Accordingly, each check, invoice or other document that the jury found had been falsified was a separate offense, which can be the basis of a separate count and punished separately. The prosecution wanted to make sure that the jury saw the full scope of the scheme it alleged had occurred – which is that Trump covered up the fact that he paid hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels by disguising the payment as a legal fee to his lawyer, Michael Cohen. Cohen then allegedly used Trump’s money to pay Daniels to stop her from talking about her alleged affair with Trump.
2. What is most important for people to understand about this conviction?
It is historic and groundbreaking for a former or future president to be convicted of felonies in the United States. There will be debate, and people will have to judge whether this prosecution is an example of the principle that no person is above the law, or whether this is an example of political persecution.
As a technical legal matter, this conviction has a significant effect on all of Trump’s other criminal and civil cases. At a minimum, it means that if Trump takes the stand to testify in any case, opposing lawyers will be able to attack his credibility with this conviction. Lawyers can argue that any witness with a felony conviction might well be lying.
Practically speaking, this verdict also means that Trump – who is registered to vote in Florida – cannot vote there until completion of his sentence, although there are many variables that could affect his ability to vote and legal experts appear somewhat divided on the question. Under federal law, he cannot possess a firearm. But he can still run for president and serve in office, because nothing in the Constitution disqualifies people with convictions – or who are in prison – from running for, or serving as, president.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg speaks during a news conference about former President Donald Trump’s arraignment on April 4, 2023.Kena Betancur/Getty Images
3. What can we know, if anything, about what his sentence might look like?
New York judge Juan Merchan will decide the sentence alone, without a jury.
It is not surprising that sentencing has been set for July, rather than sooner. As in other cases, the probation office will prepare a report that lays out Trump’s background and history, and the facts and circumstances of this case. Trump has no criminal record, which is generally a favorable sentencing factor. On the other hand, he does have negative results from lawsuits, including a civil finding in 2023 that determined he committed sexual assault. One issue to look out for is whether the prosecution or the probation department argues that Trump’s other criminal charges and civil cases should be considered in sentencing.
One sentencing factor which sometimes comes into play is lack of remorse; it is often a reason judges impose a more severe sentence. It certainly does not seem that Trump has in any way acknowledged that he did something regrettable, or committed a crime. Trump’s violation of the gag orders in this case, which the judge has already punished him for, could also be a factor used to argue for or impose a higher sentence.
4. Given this verdict, is it likely that Trump will serve time in prison?
The offense of falsifying business records is deemed a “Class E” felony in New York state – and each felony has a potential sentence of up to four years. Probation is available instead of incarceration, or probation plus a short term of incarceration. Sentences may be imposed concurrently or consecutively, so theoretically Trump could get a sentence of 136 years if maximum sentences on all counts are imposed consecutively. But, while the sentence is up to the judge, based on past practice it is reasonable to speculate that Trump will not be sentenced to a long prison term, and may well receive no incarceration time at all.
A not-guilty verdict would have been final because of the Constitution’s prohibition against double jeopardy – meaning a person cannot be convicted, acquitted or punished more than once for the same offense.
This conviction will undoubtedly be challenged for years, and the appeals process could have at least two chances to get to the U.S. Supreme Court. Whether this case was appropriately tried in state court will also be an issue – federal authority over federal elections and election crimes is likely to be examined on appeal.
In other words, this case is not over by a long shot. It is likely that even were Trump sentenced to incarceration, he would be allowed to remain free, pending appeal. This practice is not uncommon in complex and high-profile cases, at least where there are reasonable legal claims of error.
5. What made the evidence so strong in this case that it persuaded jurors?
It is in part the breadth of the New York law which, unlike the law in many states, criminalizes falsifying internal business records even when they are private and not used to cheat the tax system or defraud anyone. But even in New York, generally falsifying private business records is a misdemeanor. It becomes a felony only if, as the jury found here, the actions are used to cover up or conceal a crime.
In this case, the jury may well have been persuaded by the prosecution’s argument that the crime covered up was essentially a scheme to defraud the American people by concealing information about the character and conduct of a presidential candidate.
Because Trump was alleged to have deceived voters, perhaps the jury was unwilling to simply shrug this off as business as usual. Another factor is the remarkable investigation that went into preparing this case. The prosecution had so many witnesses and documents that it could tell the story in highly specific detail.
This story was updated on May 31, 2024, to include more details about Trump’s ability to vote.
Louisiana’s Legislature approved a bill on May 23, 2024, that would reclassify two abortion pills, mifepristone and misoprostol, as “controlled, dangerous substances.” Both pills have a long history of safe and effective use in medication abortions as well as for treatment of miscarriages and other conditions. The bill, which is expected to be signed into law by the state’s governor, makes it illegal to possess either of the pills without a prescription. Surgical and medication abortions are already banned in Louisiana, with few exceptions.
The Conversation U.S. asked twin sisters Jamie Rowen, a legal scholar, and Tami Rowen, an obstetrician and gynecologist, to explain the new law’s implications – both for patients and providers.
What does Louisiana’s law mean for these abortion pills?
Mifepristone and misoprostol have long been classified as noncontrolled substances. Though a prescription is required in order to obtain them, there have been no criminal consequences for possessing these medications.
Louisiana’s new bill, once signed, would reclassify the pills as Schedule 4 drugs, which includes medications such as diazepam, more commonly known as valium, and tramadol, a commonly used opioid.
In the U.S., prescription medications are divided into two categories: not controlled and controlled. These are based on the drug’s likelihood for mental and physical addiction. Louisiana just moved the two medications from not controlled to controlled.
Access to medication abortion already requires a prescription everywhere in the U.S. So people seeking abortions will still need to get a prescription to obtain the pills under Louisiana’s new law, just as before.
What this law primarily does is make it a crime for people who are not seeking abortions to possess the pills. In Louisiana, it is against the law to provide a medical or surgical abortion absent the threat of a woman’s death or “substantial and irreversible bodily impairment.” Louisiana residents seeking medication abortion must get the pills from out of state. Under this new law, if someone without a valid prescription transports or stores mifepristone or misoprostol in Louisiana, they may face a penalty of between one and five years in prison and up to US$5,000 in fines.
Controlled substances are further categorized by schedules. Under federal law, schedule designations are determined by a drug’s potential for abuse, its risk to public health and a few other factors.
Under Louisiana state law, there are five schedules that follow similar categorizations as federal law. A Schedule 4 classification means that the drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse, has a currently accepted medical use, and that abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence.
By classifying mifepristone and misoprostol as a controlled Schedule 4 drug, the legislature is asserting without evidence that there are dependence and abuse risks associated with taking the medication.
Hundreds of doctors in Louisiana say that the new bill could make it much harder for them to obtain the pills for maternal care in a state that already has some of the highest maternal mortality rates in the U.S.
What science, if any, did the Legislature rely on?
This is the first time that a state has classified abortion medication as a controlled substance, but it is not an unprecedented classification of abortion medication as a Schedule 4 drug.
The classification has no science behind it, however, as no studies suggest that the drug poses any risk of dependence or abuse. Mifepristone can be used for elective abortion, miscarriage management and even for labor induction, being more effective than traditional treatments with misoprostol alone.
In terms of safety, it is useful to compare the risks of mifepristone with another commonly used drug, Viagra. Though requiring a prescription, Viagra is not classified as a controlled substance. For mifepristone, there are rare reported cases of nonspecific fatal sepsis that could be related to women undergoing medical abortion in the U.S.
In contrast, Viagra was linked to 1,473 major adverse outcomes and 522 reported deaths in the U.S. during a 13-month period. The legislative history in Louisiana does not explain the science behind its classification scheme.
It should be noted that there is no risk of dependence from either misoprostol or mifepristone. Misoprostol was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for its ability to lessen the symptoms of gastric ulcers but is widely used throughout obstetrics and gynecology for inducing labor and stopping postpartum hemorrhage. Side effects for those using misoprostol for ulcers or gynecological care are rare, particularly compared with other Schedule 4 drugs.
Abortion rights activists have been protesting efforts at the state and federal level to restrict access to abortion pills like mifepristone.AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana
How could the new law affect access for nonabortion procedures?
According to the new law, the criminal penalties of up to five years in prison can be imposed regardless of whether the pills are designated for a person electing abortion or trying to complete a miscarriage. In addition, the law does not distinguish between the possession of misoprostol for the treatment of gastric ulcers or gynecological care.
By punishing people who are transporting or storing the medications for others, the law may create new barriers to access for a variety of people, even if it doesn’t criminalize pregnant people who consume the pills.
What are the implications of the laws for other states?
The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution as allowing both the federal government and the states to regulate controlled substances. This means there can be variations in access to medications state to state.
The immediate impacts will be on clinical studies on the two drugs in other states that have patients in Louisiana. Clinical trials with medications that are not controlled substances may be conducted in any state with little or no added state regulation. Clinical trials of controlled substances have additional regulatory requirements that can add costs and delay development.
The most likely long-term outcome is that other states may make similar legislative attempts to curb access to medication abortion, particularly in states that have unsuccessfully tried to stop access to medical abortion in other ways.
