Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Michele Bachmann’s handlers get rough with reporter - The Plum Line

Michele Bachmann’s handlers get rough with reporter

By Greg Sargent

This morning, the Daily Caller published a story I was inclined to leave to others: Michele Bachmann suffers from severe migraines.

But now the Bachmann camp has suddenly invited a whole lot more scrutiny to the story. At an event today, ABC News reporter Brian Ross tried to ask her about her condition, and according to another reporter on the scene, Time’s Michael Crowley, Bachmann’s handlers got pretty rough and aggressive with Ross:

Ross dashed after Bachmann, repeatedly asking whether she had ever missed a House vote due to a migraine. She ignored him. Ross pursued her into a parking area behind the stage. Her aides grew alarmed. When Ross made a beeline for the white SUV waiting to carry Bachmann away, two Bachmann men pounced on him, grabbing and pushing him multiple times with what looked to me like unusual force. In fact, I have never seen a reporter treated so roughly at a campaign event, especially not a presidential one. Ross was finally able to break away and lob his question at Bachmann one more time, but she ignored him again.

Afterward, I asked Ross — a hard-nosed pro who nevertheless seemed slightly shaken — whether he’d ever been treated so roughly. “A few times,” he told me. “Mostly by mafia people.”

Jeffrey Schneider, a senior vice president for ABC news, reiterated the charge in an interview with me just now.

“He was certainly shoved around and pushed,” Schneider says. “It’s unfortunate when physicality is involved. He was just doing his job.”

Schneider confirmed that there’s even video of the episode. “We were videotaping Brian asking questions,” he said. “I’m sure it will find its way onto our web site at some point.”

Asked if Bachmann’s aides would have had any credible reason to think she was in danger, Schneider said it was clear that they already knew his identity. “They absolutely knew that it was Brian Ross — of that there is no doubt,” Schneider said. “Every effort was made not to be engaged by Brian.”

The migraines themselves aren’t too interesting, but as David Weigel notes, Bachmann’s statement on them today failed to explain her health condition adequately, and after all, she is running for president of the United States.

Beyond this, her team’s handling of the issue raises a host of questions. Bachmann may say nutty things, but she is not a fringe figure. She’s widely considered the frontrunner in the Iowa caucuses, and some commentators even think she’s got a shot at becoming the GOP presidential nominee. Is it really possible that Bachmann and/or her team didn’t think to prepare her for questions about this? Running for president is hard. You wake up in the morning confronted by a story that — even if you think it’s terribly unfair — you can bet will come up at your next press availability. If you spy Brian Ross approaching your candidate with an inquisitive look on his face, the correct response is not to grab him and heave him around like a sack of old potatoes.

Really, if this turns out to be as bad as it sounds, it should raise questions about the Bachmann team’s fitness for a presidential campaign. Shouldn’t this invite more media scrutiny? Shouldn’t her team be pressed to justify this behavior?

Whatever headache was created for Bachmann by the migraine story may have just gotten a whole lot worse.

On cybersecurity, Congress can’t agree on turf

Congress already has more than 40 committees and well over 100 subcommittees. Does it really need one more? How about another task force? Or a working group?

Yes, says Sen. John McCain: A new panel is needed to cope with a relatively recent and unquestionably grave threat — hacking.

Comments

Weigh In
Corrections?

In Session

Archive

@benpershing
E-mail

Last week, the Arizona Republican wrote to Senate leaders proposing the creation of a temporary Select Committee on Cybersecurity and Electronic Intelligence Leaks, which would produce “comprehensive” legislation on the subject.

No one on Capitol Hill needs persuading that the United States is vulnerable to attack on this front. Last week, the Pentagon revealed that thousands of files containing Defense Department data had been stolen from a defense industry computer network in March. Congress itself has been a hacking target multiple times.

But why get a new committee involved in the fight? Because too many committees are already involved in the fight.

McCain wrote that cybersecurity legislation “has been drafted by at least three committees and at least seven committees claim some jurisdiction over the issue.” He also noted that the White House and the Energy, Commerce and Defense departments have all put forward separate initiatives on the subject.

“With so many agencies and the White House moving forward with cyber security proposals, we must provide congressional leadership on this pressing issue of national security,” McCain wrote, adding that the best solution would be to have top Republicans and Democrats “step away from preserving their own committees’ jurisdiction.”

Put more simply, lawmakers hate giving up turf.

When the Homeland Security Department was created in 2002, for example, House and Senate committees bickered over which would oversee it, just as other Cabinet departments fought against ceding any agencies or authority to the new entity.

So it’s not surprising that the two leaders of the panel with perhaps the most to lose — the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee — are not big fans of McCain’s proposal.

Chairman Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and ranking member Susan Collins (R-Maine) wrote back to McCain last week that their panel has already made significant progress on the cybersecurity front, so “[i]t would be a real mistake and a waste of time to restart the process when so much work has already been done.”

McCain isn’t the first senator to have this idea. In his own letter responding to McCain, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) pointed out that he had proposed a similar select committee on cybersecurity in 2009.

“Unfortunately, there was not support for this effort and, in fact, significant opposition,” Reid wrote. “In light of this response, I did not want to spend months or years in a perhaps fruitless effort to establish a Select Committee, rather than working on critical legislation and oversight.”

Instead, Reid this year suggested the formation of “bipartisan working groups” that would collaborate across committee lines. So far, he has not gotten feedback from the Republican leadership on the idea.

Rupert Murdoch, son apologize to lawmakers but deflect phone-hacking blame -

LONDON — Rupert Murdoch and his son James confronted an angry parliamentary committee on Tuesday, insisting they did not know the scope of phone hacking and other illegal newsgathering at their News of the World tabloid and apologizing for being the source of one of the worst crises in the history of British media.

The hearing was dramatically interrupted at one point when a man in a plaid shirt walked up to the witness table, yelled “You are a greedy billionaire,” and tried to shove a shaving-cream pie in the face of the 80-year-old Rupert Murdoch. The media baron’s 42-year old wife, Wendi Deng, leapt from her chair and belted the attacker, who was later identified as Jonnie Marbles, a comedian and activist.

1253

Comments

Weigh In
Corrections?

Video

An incident during the hearings of James and Rupert Murdoch temporarily stopped the proceedings.

Graphic

Key relationships in the scandal

Timeline

News of the World scandal

View timeline

Murdoch repeatedly pounded his hand on a table as he gave testimony, but nevertheless appeared removed from day-to-day details of the scandal and unprepared for detailed questioning.

Appearing for the first time in such a forum, the Australian-born baron of the conservative press strained at times to hear questions and often turned to his son, who oversees the company’s British operations, to field them for him. When pressed to answer himself, he offered candid, unedited responses.

“There were people in the company which were apparently guilty, and we have to find them and we have to deal with them appropriately,” Murdoch conceded at one point. At the same time, he said he did not consider himself ultimately responsible. And both he and James Murdoch, 38, said they did not think top executives at News of the World were aware of the hacking when it was taking place.

The elder Murdoch answered with a dismissive “no” when one lawmaker asked whether he would consider resigning.

“I feel that people I trusted — I’m not saying who, but I know at what level — let me down,” he said. “And I think they behaved disgracefully. They betrayed the company, and me, and they should pay.

“Frankly, I’m the best person to clean this up.”

Yet both father and son mounted a rigorous defense of the company’s response to the phone hacking of thousands of British citizens, including members of the royal family, by the now-shuttered News of the World.

Rupert Murdoch, in particular, backed two top News Corp. executives who have resigned in light of the scandal, Les Hinton and Rebekah Brooks. Brooks — the former editor of News of the World and chief executive of News Corp.’s British operations until last Friday — was arrested Sunday and released on bail. She appeared before the committee on culture, media and sport after the Murdochs, who testified for three hours although they had been scheduled for only one.

In her testimony, Brooks denied ever paying a bribe to a police officer or authorizing such a payment. “In my experience of dealing with the police, the information they give newspapers comes free of charge,” she said.

In response to questions, she said, “Things went badly at the News of the World, and we’re tryng to set it right.”

In addition to bringing down power players in Britain’s media elite, the revelations of rampant hacking have plunged Prime Minister David Cameron into a political crisis over his ties to tainted News Corp. figures.

Mandel, Corker, Gillibrand all winners - The Fix -

By Aaron Blake

In The Fix’s Monday column, we reviewed some of the big winners and losers from the second-quarter fundraising period.

Today, we go a little deeper, looking at the 2012 battle for the House and Senate, race by race, and picking the the highs and lows.

WINNERS

Ohio Senate candidate Josh Mandel (R): The state treasurer had arguably the most unexpected report of the quarter, pulling in $2.3 million and outraising Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) by $800,000. Mandel, a 33-year-old Iraq veteran, is now a contender.

Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.): Both are up for reelection in 2012, but neither is considered a top target. That didn’t stop them from raising huge sums, though — $2.6 million for Corker and $3.1 million for Gillibrand. Keep an eye on these upwardly- mobile senators.

Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.): The frontrunner for retiring Sen. Jon Kyl’s (R-Ariz.) seat didn’t have a hugely-surprising quarter, raising $800,000. The more important thing is that, for the second straight quarter, he had no major opponent raising any money. He’s used that to build a $2 million head start.

New Mexico Senate candidate Hector Balderas (D): The state auditor got outraised in his primary with Rep. Martin Heinrich (D), $485,000 to $400,000, but the fact that he was competitive suggests he will give Heinrich a real run for his money – especially in a heavily Hispanic state.

Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa): His opponent, Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa), may have gotten the headlines for fending off an intruder at his family’s home last weekend, but Latham had the big quarter, raising nearly $590,000 and outraising Boswell by $400,000 for their just-declared incumbent-on-incumbent matchup on the state’s new congressional map.

Iowa House candidate Christie Vilsack (D): Speaking of the matchups in the Hawkeye State, Latham wasn’t the only one building an advantage in the second quarter. Vilsack, the former first lady of Iowa, outraised Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) more than two-to-one and already has more cash-on-hand than the incumbent.

Rep. Gary Peters (D-Mich.): The man without a home isn’t going quietly. After having his district chopped up in the state GOP’s redistricting plan, Peters did what he does best: fight back. He raised nearly $300,000 for the quarter. That’s not a spectacular number, but it is solid and well more than both of his potential opponents, Reps. Sandy Levin (D) and Thaddeus McCotter (R). He also has more cash-on-hand than both Levin and McCotter.

California House candidate Ricky Gill (R): The 24-year-old law student — yes, law student — raised nearly $450,000 in the second quarter, which was the third-most of any non-incumbent Republican. He’s currently in Rep. Jerry McNerney’s (D-Calif.) district — he raised twice as much as the incumbent — but he may be in a different seat after redistricting.

LOSERS

The Sanchezes: Running in neighboring states, both New Mexico Lt. Gov. John Sanchez (R) and former Gen. Ricardo Sanchez (D) – running in Texas – had lackluster starts to their Senate campaigns. John Sanchez raised just $110,000 in his first month-plus as a candidate, self-funding another $200,000 but leaving him off the pace set by former congresswoman Heather Wilson in the GOP primary.

Ricardo Sanchez meanwhile, raised just $160,000 and had $150,000 on hand for an uphill battle in the open Texas Senate race. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has suggested the race is winnable, but Texas requires a whole lot more money than that. The Democrat’s campaign says it will ramp up fundraising in the third quarter, but he entered the race in mid-May, so he had plenty of time to get things going in the second quarter. Not a good start.

Connecticut Senate candidate Susan Bysiewicz (D): Two years ago, the former secretary of state was the odds-on favorite for the state’s governorship. In the second quarter, she finished third in fundraising in an open Democratic Senate primary, finishing behind Rep. Chris Murphy and even state Rep. William Tong with just $427,000.

Cleveland Democrats: With Republicans pretty set on targeting Cleveland-area Democrats in redistricting – one of their districts is likely to be cut with the state losing two seats – none of them stepped up their game in the second quarter. Northeast Ohio Reps. Marcia Fudge, Dennis Kucinich, Betty Sutton and Tim Ryan all raised less than $200,000, and none has more than $325,000 in the bank.

Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.): The embattled lawmaker has a real primary on his hands, as state Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian raised nearly $200,000. Wu still outraised him by about $35,000, but raising money as a primary challenger is generally more difficult than that. If Avakian can keep it up, he’s in good shape.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.): The freshman got a bit of a wake-up call in the second quarter. The congresswoman he beat in 2010, Ann Kirkpatrick (D), returned to outraise him $240,000 to $170,000. And Gosar, who was not among the GOP’s best fundraisers as a candidate, is already trailing in cash-on-hand, which is never a good sign for an incumbent. Other GOP incumbents who got outraised include Reps. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), Charlie Bass (R-N.H.) and David Dreier (R-Calif.).

Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.): Not only is her currently safe “ribbon of shame” district likely to be redrawn to be significantly more competitive, but her GOP opponent, former lieutenant governor Abel Maldonado, outraised her more than two-to-one, bringing in more money than any other challenger in the country, at nearly $540,000.

Tea party moves to put its stamp on priorities on campaign trail, in Washington

The tea party movement, which established its power last year by defeating Republicans who didn’t meet their idea of what a conservative ought to be, is shifting to a more policy-driven focus as its leaders try to expand its growth and effectiveness.

The strategy appears to be working, both on the presidential campaign trail, where most candidates are eagerly embracing tea party priorities, and in Washington, where loyalists are setting the terms of the debate over taxes and spending.

Comments

Weigh In
Corrections?

Video

The Washington Post's Anqoinette Crosby talks with Post reporter Amy Gardner about the Tea Party's policy-driven focus.

On Capitol Hill, congressmen elected on the tea party wave of 2010 have helped grind to a halt negotiations over raising the debt ceiling with their objections to any deal that includes more taxes. The more vocal among them question the establishment wisdom that a default on federal debt would precipitate an economic catastrophe. And they have pushed many of the presidential contenders to adopt similar points of view.

At a campaign appearance in Iowa on Monday morning, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty said Republicans in Congress should use the debate to achieve deep budget cuts and long-term spending reforms. Failing that, he has said lawmakers should allow the country to default.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, appearing in Columbia, S.C., signed her own version of U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint’s “Cut, Cap and Balance” pledge, which the House will take up Tuesday. In addition to the three-part promise to cut spending enough to reduce the deficit next year, enact “enforceable” spending caps and approve a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, Bachmann added her own line to repeal and defund President Obama’s health-care legislation.

Most of the other candidates, including Romney, have signed DeMint’s version of the pledge.

While potentially broadening its appeal, going after policies instead of people protects the tea party movement against picking a losing fight that could sink its popularity. And it illustrates the view that defeating President Obama is more important than disqualifying a Republican candidate who might be best positioned to do it.

A year ago, for instance, Mitt Romney would have been the perfect tea party target: a Republican who has called for emissions reductions to combat global warming and who, as governor of Massachusetts, signed a health-care overhaul that was a model for the landmark federal legislation.

So far, though, most tea party leaders are not directly taking on Romney — some are even backing him.

“I don’t agree with Mitt Romney on everything,” said U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a darling of the tea party movement who surprised some conservatives by endorsing Romney last month. “But I want to beat Barack Obama, and I think he’s the best person to do that.”

DeMint, who endorsed Romney in his 2008 bid for president but has stayed neutral this year, said he’s “going to talk good about all the candidates, because I don’t know who is going to wind up being the nominee. None of them are going to be perfect. We’re not

Why Republicans don’t fear a debt default - The Fix -

The United States is now two weeks away from defaulting on its debt, a scenario cast as something close to financial armageddon by everyone from President Obama to Warren Buffett.

But, a majority of Republicans in a new Pew Research Center poll don’t seem concerned. At all.

Fifty-three percent of self-identified Republicans (and 65 percent of those who say they support the tea party) said the country can go past the deadline without any serious economic consequences.

“This is a case where the messenger has become the message,” explained Republican pollster Chris Wilson. “The two groups — Wall Street and the federal government — pushing the narrative that not raising the debt ceiling would be a catastrophe are two groups that an overwhelming majority of Americans don’t trust these days.”

To back up his point, Wilson noted that Gallup’s most recent “confidence” index showed that just 12 percent of people trust Congress and less than one in five (19 percent) trust big business.

And, in a new Washington Post/Pew poll, not a single one of the major political figures involved in the debt-ceiling negotiations had the trust of a majority of Americans to do the right thing.

Cutting through all the numbers, the reality for many Republicans is that they simply don’t believe that we are on the verge of crisis, and it’s virtually impossible — given their distrust of the country’s major institutions — for anyone or anything to convince them otherwise.

It’s not hard to understand then the rapid rise in the 2012 Republican presidential field of Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, who not only has pledged in a television ad currently running in Iowa that she won’t vote to increase the debt ceiling under any circumstances, but has also said publicly that “we need to tell Wall Street, we need to tell Main Street, we need to not scare the American people.”

Christian Ferry, a Republican strategist who served as deputy campaign manager for Arizona Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid in 2008, said that GOPers are fed up with what they believe to be empty warning from politicians about impending doom in the country.

“Republican voters held their nose and swallowed [the Troubled Asset Relief Program] at the end of the Bush administration and then watched powerlessly as Obama and Democrat[ic] majorities sunk us further into debt with what they see as failed and flawed policies,” said Ferry. “They are ‘mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.’”

That attitude, of course, gives Republican politicians little political incentive to find compromise before the Aug. 2 deadline. (A new CBS/New York Times poll showed just 33 percent of Republicans supportive of a debt ceiling increase, although that number has increased from16 percent in June.)

And, if the party’s leaders — men like House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — do cut some kind (or, really, any kind) of deal to avoid the alleged consequences of default, they stand to be pilloried by many within their party who think the debt deadline amounts to Linus’ search for the “Great Pumpkin”.

Optimism seems to have ticked up for a compromise in the last 48 hours. But, a look at polling data alone should temper that good feeling — at least somewhat.

Bachmann has severe headaches: The Daily Caller is out with a real talker this morning. The crux of the report: Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) suffers from severe headaches, she has been hospitalized as a result on a few occasions, and she requires lots of medication to deal with it.

Former staffers, speaking to the Daily Caller anonymously, said they are scared about what kind of impact the condition would have on Bachmann if she were to become president — hinting that she could be incapacitated during crucial moments.

It should be noted here that Bachmann has left behind some disgruntled former staff. It’s not clear whether those speaking anonymously have some sort of ax to grind.

Either way, though, it’s likely to be something she has to address in more detail.

Sessions says GOP will gain seats: With his Democratic counterpart predicting Democrats may retake the majority in 2012, National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions is not to be outdone.

Sessions tells Fix friends Salena Zito and Mike Wereschagin of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that he thinks his party will win 16 more seats in 2012, expanding on its current 48-seat majority.

“We’re on offense,” Sessions said.

Winning 16 more seats would be a pretty big win for Sessions, given how few genuinely competitive districts are currently in Democratic hands.

First Wisconsin recall race today: The first off nine recall elections will be held in Wisconsin today, with state Sen. Dave Hansen (D) defending his seat against Republican David VanderLeest.

VanderLeest is not considered a serious candidate — he was the default nominee after a state House member failed to turn in enough valid signatures — so a loss by Hansen would send serious shockwaves through the state legislature.

Two other Democrats and six Republicans face their own recalls next month.

The recalls were triggered after a contentious battle over the collective bargaining rights of unions.

Fixbits:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) making more calls in Iowa.

Perry clarifies that he wasn’t suggesting that God was calling him to run for president.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) releases his plan to cut $9 trillion over the next decade.

Bachmann calls the Ames straw poll “ground zero.”

With state Senate President Mike Haridopolos (R) out of the race, FreedomWorks backs former state representative Adam Hasner (R) to face Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.).

Former Iowa first lady Christie Vilsack (D) launches her campaign against Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

Richard Land
chides
Herman Cain over Cain’s contention that local communities could ban the construction of mosques.

Cain says Mitt Romney
can’t win in the South because of his Mormon religion.

Romney assures Iowans that they will see him.

Embattled Rep. David Rivera (R-Fla.) is apparently the only member of the Florida GOP delegation who won’t be at an upcoming NRCC fundraiser in Miami.

A GOP businessman considers a campaign against newly vulnerable Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.).

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Now Cabinet ministers want UK to quit the EU

NOW CABINET MINISTERS WANT UK TO QUIT THE EU

Oliver Letwin is also said to have swung behind growing Tory support for withdrawal

Thursday June 30,2011

By Macer Hall Political Editor

Comment Speech Bubble
Have your say(31)

SENIOR members of the Prime Minister’s inner circle are convinced that Britain should quit the European Union, it emerged last night.

Two Cabinet ministers are reported to have been persuaded that the UK would be better off by cutting its links with Brussels.

And Cabinet Office Minister Oliver Letwin, the PM’s policy guru, is also said to have swung behind growing Tory support for withdrawal.

The surge in anti-Brussels feeling within the Government follows the Daily Express’s hugely popular crusade for Britain to quit the EU. Last week it was reported that Mr Cameron’s strategy chief Steve Hilton also wants the UK to pull out. The latest reports of Government unease are revealed in today’s edition of the Spectator magazine.

An article by political editor James Forsyth said: “An increasing number of people in government are being driven to distraction by these EU obstacles. Even the Liberal Democrats in the coalition have taken to moaning about how much extra work Brussels imposes on them.

Even the Liberal Democrats in the coalition have taken to moaning about how much extra work Brussels imposes on them

Article by political editor James Forsyth

“But it is the Tory radicals who are most infuriated. Both Oliver Letwin, the Prime Minister’s policy point man, and Steve Hilton, Cameron’s longest-standing political ally, have been known to end meetings by saying ‘Well, the only solution is to leave the EU.’ At least two Cabinet ministers share their view.”

The article added: “It’s not just the Tories on the Treasury bench who are becoming more Eurosceptic. One senior backbencher tells me that he expects a sizeable number of his fellow Tory MPs to vote for Ukip (the UK Independence Party) at the European elections in 2012.

“Among the new intake of Tory MPs, who make up nearly half the parliamentary party, it is accepted that anyone who wants to be elected Tory leader will have to promise to renegotiate Britain’s membership of the European Union and put the result to a referendum.”

Yesterday Downing Street officials attempted to play down the report, insisting that all ministers remained committed to the official Government policy of working for reform within the EU. The PM’s spokesman insisted quitting the EU was “not the Government’s policy”.

But Eurosceptics believe the case for Britain’s exit is gaining ground among figures close to Cameron.The shift is said to reflect widespread anger at Brussels regulation and red tape.

Tory MP Douglas Carswell said: “The Daily Express has been saying what many people around this country have been thinking.”