President Donald Trump (L) delivers brief remarks before meeting with House of Representatives committee leaders, including Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-WA) (C), Education and Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and others to discuss the American Health Care Act in the Roosevelt Room at the White House March 10, 2017 in Washington, DC.

Forum speaks with a panel of journalists about the latest political news, including Friday’s jobs report, the ongoing debate about the Republican plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, and the fallout from Wikileaks’ release of the CIA’s surveillance techniques.

Political News Roundup 13 March,2017Michael Krasny

Guests:
Josh Gerstein, senior White House reporter, Politico
Stephen Kinzer, world affairs columnist, Boston Globe
Kelsey Snell, reporter, Washington Post

  • EIDALM

    With all of what Donald Trump actions in the few weeks since he took office, from his Islamophobic hate mongering executive orders banning Muslim travelers, to appointing the worst of the worst Wall Street and other nightmare choices of his Cabernet members, to his action in the destruction for whatever left of the middle class, to the soon demise of the whole health care sysrem, to unrepresented firing of so many loyal federal employees in the state department. justice department, and other government agency only to be filled by his own cronies, as well as pulling fights with many international leaders, …All what I can say is God help us all and the country.

    • Paul

      The only true God is the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
      Peace be unto pasta PBUP

    • Another Mike

      Did Trump ban Pakistani Muslims, Indonesian Muslims, Malaysian Muslims, Philippine Muslims, Saudi Arabian Muslims, Jordanian Muslims, Turkish Muslims, Kosovo Muslims, Algerian Muslims, Moroccan Muslims, etc. etc.?

      No.

  • EIDALM

    There is no question that Donald Trump is taking the whole country on the road of Fascism and dictatorship.

    • Skip Conrad

      How do you know this?

      • Ehkzu

        Appeals to “blood and iron” as the basis for patriotism rather than the ideals of the Declaration of independence; attempts to delegitimize any source of information but his tweets–particular his calling the press the “enemies of America.” Total control of information is the keystone of fascism–it’s how Putin got his 90% approval rating with the Russian public. Fundamentally Trump represents the appeal of Rule of a Man over Rule of Law.

        • Another Mike

          Trump does not need to rely on a friendly press to get his message out to the public. Trump’s tweets are just today’s version of FDR’s Fireside Chats.

          • kpwn

            Breakfart goes beyond being a friendly “press”. Breakfart is aggressively amorous toward Trump.

          • Curious

            Like the MSM and Barry?

          • Another Mike

            The NY Times has had at least one Page One article slamming Trump every day for the past eight months. The Washington Post has been dumping on Trump to at least that extent. I do not know what “Breakfart” might mean.

    • Paul

      The sky is falling!

      Did you know the Koran says the moon is a light source unto itself, and not a reflector of the sun’s light? It’s like a child wrote it.

  • Skip Conrad

    The President has the power to restrict visas, and to refuse entry to any foreigner. The fact that he exercises this power is not a problem for me. What does bother me is the fact that our immigration system is under the control of foreign special interest groups. The fact that our border is run by the drug cartels bothers me. The fact that visa-less foreigners have rights in this country bothers me. It doesn’t bother me that we have enforcement of our immigration laws.

    • Robert Thomas

      Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

      §1) “… No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” [emphasis added]

      You’re invited to find a nation state free of such a stricture, and dwell there.

      • Bill_Woods

        … Which obviously does not apply to persons who are not citizens (or permanent residents, or visa-holders) of the US, and not currently within the US.

        • Robert Thomas

          It doesn’t apply to persons not within the jurisdiction of the nation or its states. Persons without documents within the jurisdiction of the nation or its states are so entitled.

      • Skip Conrad

        “any person within its jurisdiction” does not include diplomats and foreign ambassadors. There people are not within the jurisdiction of US law. They are not entitled to equal protection of the laws. Every hear of diplomatic immunity?
        “Any person” does not include foreign diplomats and their families. What other class of humans does the term “any person” exclude?

        FYI, the constitution describes only 3 classes of persons: 1) free persons, 2) other persons, 3) Indians not taxed.

        • Robert Thomas

          You write, “‘any person within its jurisdiction’ does not include diplomats and foreign ambassadors.”

          So? Are diplomats and ambassadors the individuals to whom you referred by “visa-less foreigners”?

          • Skip Conrad

            1. diplomats and foreign ambassadors are not under the jurisdiction of US law.
            2. by “visa-less foreigners”, I refer to those present in the US whose visas have expired, or who crossed the US border without inspection. I am not referring to diplomats, who do possess valid visas.

          • Robert Thomas

            The jurisdictional exclusion (1) actually also extends to the American-born children of ambassadors and foreign ministers in office residing in the U.S.

            (2) Right. “those present in the US whose visas have expired, or who crossed the US border without inspection” are within the jurisdiction of the United States. The Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment apply to such individuals.

          • Curious

            Get educated.

            In 1866, the actual author of the post-Civil War Amendment – Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan – explained
            the real purpose of his amendment.

            Howard wrote “that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United
            States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”

          • Skip Conrad

            1.The American-born children of ambassadors and foreign ministers in office residing in the U.S.,are not entitled to automatic citizenship by birth.
            2. As far as whether undocumented aliens are within the jurisdiction of the United States, there is much disagreement. Legally, they are treated differently than citizens. There is a different legal code that applies to them. All are subject to immediate deportation.
            Such undocumented aliens may be entitled to equal protection, but they should be obliged to pay for it themselves.
            Entitlement to something like equal protection and due process, doesn’t mean you get it for free. There is a cost to it, that should not be be born by the people.

          • Robert Thomas

            Whatever disagreement there may be, the law is well established. People under jurisdiction of the United States and its constituent states are entitled to equal protection under the law.

            Persons confined in prisons don’t have the same rights as persons not confined. People may have rights rescinded or curtailed, under the law. Persons may be deprived of life, under the law. All persons are entitled to equal protection, at all times.

    • Ehkzu

      Suppose the President issued an executive order banning all foreigners who are black from entering the United States, based on that Nigerian terrorist who tried to incinerate an airliner over our country.

      According to you the President has that power. I doubt any lawyer would agree with you.

      As for our border being run by the drug cartels, a good start would be closing off the pipeline from our gun manufacturers to supply those cartels with their arms–which was the goal of Fast & Furious, which the Republicans used as a pretext to keep that pipeline open.

      • Another Mike

        The National Origins Quota acts of the 1920s were explicitly designed to minimize the number of southern Italians and Jews that could enter this country. Even though the word “Jew” appears nowhere in either bill.

        • Skip Conrad

          FDR’s executive order 9066 has no mention of the word “Japanese”.

    • Paul

      If you look at the CIA’s activity pre 9/11, a whistleblower has shown that attempts to block dangerous Saudis from coming to the US was overridden by CIA

    • Skip Conrad

      Kelly didn’t really respond very well to he question. She regarded my use of “ visa-less foreigners” as travelers on the visa-waiver program. But even those travelers get a 3 month automatic tourist visa. They still get visa, which is a contract, which endows certain rights and responsibilities. When that visa expires, there is no contract. No responsibilities, and no rights.
      Just like every luncheonette displays the sign “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”. We have the same sign at the border, whether explicit or implicit.

  • Robert Thomas

    Preet Bharara thought he had a “deal” with the Trump administration, to continue in his position.

    ???

    Countless contractors thought they had a deal with the Trump organization, to be paid money for their labor and materials. Why was Mr Bharara convinced he was in some way special?

  • Kurt thialfad

    The Jeff Sessions incident of talking to the Russian ambassador seems quite innocent. Don’t US government legislators speak with ambassadors all the time? What would not seem innocent would be meeting in secret to with a Russian spy, who is not an official spokesperson and representative of a foreign government.

    • William – SF

      See previous Forum show on this topic. Sessions, when asked if he meet with any Russians, claimed no meetings even though he had at least two.

      • Another Mike

        The context of the question was the Presidential campaign. Unless Sessions discussed campaign strategies with the Ambassador, I do not see how he lied, which requires an intent to mislead.

        • William – SF

          You and I arguing over whether he lied or not goes nowhere. I simply stated what happened because KT’s comment left out that important fact. I’ll assume we both would like to hear the extents of Session’s conversations, and then decide.

          • Another Mike

            Your “important fact” assumes that Franken’s context was irrelevant to Sessions’ answer. But Sessions responded to Franken’s context as well as his exact wording.

          • William – SF

            …leaving out the fact that he met with, on at least two occasions, the Russian ambassador. Slight of hand aside, the context is relevant to Sessions.

      • Kurt thialfad

        He wasn’t asked by Sen. Franken whether he met with any Russians. He was asked “what would you do .. if members of the Trump campaign were meeting with the Russians, etc.” He replied by saying he has been accused of being a surrogate, and that he had no meeting with the Russians (with the implication that these are shady Russian operatives – not the ambassador) … He said he had no further comment.
        It was a bad question, and awkward question, even a leading question meant to trip up Sessions. He squirmed out of it. But I don’t see violation here. Of course, he would have meetings with ambassadors, as all members of the federal government. The ambassador is obvious. I think Sessions didn’t think Franken was talking about meeting with the Russian ambassador, because everybody meets with the Russian ambassador – that’s his job.

        • William – SF

          So Sessions agrees that if the Trump campaign was communicating with the Russians then they were shady Russian operatives?
          Give Sen. Franken the same “implication” you give Sessions and assume Franken’s question applies to Sessions, too.

          • jakeleone

            Sessions said that the conversation was really an argument with the Russian ambassador over Crimea. I personally could care less about Crimea, it is 80% Russian nationals and it is basically Russia’s Pearl Harbor. But this points out that the administration is 100% behind American interests, and 0% any sense at all about Russian interests, even to the point of losing it (in my opinion).

    • Robert Thomas

      Many Americans including myself agree that as U.S. Senator, Sessions undoubtedly had opportunity and perhaps good reason to communicate with Russian nationals and officials during the period in question. During his confirmation hearings, however, Senator Sessions clearly found that the fact that such communications as did actually occur were sufficiently inconvenient or uncomfortable that he not only denied that they had occurred but was positively and condescendingly dismissive of the very suggestion that they had taken place. That is prevarication, and amounts to contempt of the Senate’s responsibility to advise the President and consent to the President’s selection of his officers.

      • Kurt thialfad

        It seemed to me Franken’s dramatic build up in the framing of the question, begged a swift denial of such allegations. I would even suspect Franken was setting a trap. Sessions avoided the trap as best he could.

        Franken could have retorted – “haven’t you even met with the Russian ambassador in official events as part of your job as a US Senator, and member of the armed services committee?”. Franken just dropped the line of questioning, leaving the resolution obscure.

        • Robert Thomas

          Senator Sessions was and is an Officer of the Court. As such, and as such testifying before a tribunal under oath, he did have and continues to have a duty and an enhanced responsibility to be generous, clear and forthright and not in any way evasive about his activities.

          As for context, no one can seriously deny that the context of this particular hearing and the other Trump confirmation hearings was and continues to be fraught with concern over the Trump campaign’s connection to and intercourse with persons who are Russian nationals and/or officers of the Russian state. In that context, it can’t be other than clear that ANY contact or communication with such persons were of concern to the Senators in their examination of the candidate.

          I believe that had Senator Sessions admitted his contacts with these Russian officers during the period, he would have been faced with a stream of other questions, some of which may have caused discomfort and some of which may have required that they be answered in writing. I think it’s likely that these answers may have incited criticism that nevertheless would have quickly diminished. Sessions was foolish to respond evasively.

          • Kurt thialfad

            True, Sessions was foolish to respond evasively. But the response kept Franken at bay.

          • Curious

            There was nothing false about Session’s testimony. Hillary’s myriad lies – that’s another matter, which I am sure you are pursuing.

        • jakeleone

          You know Franken would have jumped all over the conversation (apparently an argument over Crimea) Sessions had with the Russian ambassador. This is a waste of time witch hunt.

          Look it really is time to get onto constructive matters with this administration.

          The Democrats almost won the last election, realize that. It wouldn’t take much to win next time, maybe a more constructive relationship will help. Start looking for a better candidate.

  • Paul

    Obama bugged merkel, he bugged Hollande, and he bugged Trump.
    There should be a criminal investigation of Obama if a crime was committed. Even if it was legal, Obama undermined the reputation of the intelligence community.

    • Ehkzu

      You don’t seem to realize this is KQED Forum, not Breitbart or Drudge. But keep that conspiracy theorizing going–it occupies the mind on slow days, and it’s a great smokescreen for Obama’s great crime: BPWB (Being President While Black).

      • Paul

        You don’t seem to realize I’m not a consevative and that fact based reasoning, just because your simple mind can’t comprehend it, can’t be undermined by calling it a conspiracy theory

    • Curious

      Obama also bugged Dennis Kucinich, Sharyl Attkisson and James Rosen.

  • Another Mike

    What nonsense.
    Donald Trump is the first President in history to have a Jewish daughter, whose Jewish husband is one of Trump’s chief advisor. Not to mention Trump’s Jewish grandchildren. The idea that a Trump presidency would be bad for the Jewish state is a non-starter.

    And I will repeat: While President, George Washington raised wheat for export at Mount Vernon, and ground it into flour. Nobody suggested that he should divest himself of Mount Vernon, and nobody suggested that his export business would cause him to fall foul of the then-brand-new Emoluments Clause. The Emoluments Clause forbids gifts. It does not bar ordinary business transactions.

    • jakeleone

      Could not agree more. Can we please drop the insanity of associating Trump with Anti-Semitism. It is really stupid to the point of being well almost a surreal comedy. SNL should parody that insanity.

      And BTW, the horror of the holocaust did really happen. And Israelis deserve protection from their neighbors, because all people deserve protection from genocide. And we should error on the side of caution in these matters. Just to let you know I love Freedom of Religion and I support countries on the basis of how much Freedom of Religion and then general Freedom they encourage. Israel, while not perfect, if light years ahead of many of its neighbors, although some are (officially) progressive in that regard.

  • Paul

    The major powers are USA, Russia and China. It is really dumb to seek conflict with Russia as the anti-nationalist, globalist 1% wants especially when china is far more adversarial and has hacked every corner of the American business community

    • Ehkzu

      The new-found affection for Russia by the American Right shows that they’ll approve of anything their Dear Leader proposes, because he proposed it, despite the fact that opposition to that despotic imperialist power was always a part of Republican zeitgeist.

      And Russia isn’t a major power. It has an economy the size of Italy, only with a lot of that country’s resources diverted into its military. Russia is a major pain in our collective keester but its ability to do things we don’t approve of doesn’t make it a major power.

      • Paul

        Another cowardly slander … anyone who says anything you dislike is a right winger, a racist etc. You’re proving you have no valid argument.

        • Gene K.

          How is that cowardly slander? Everything he said was true:

          Putin and Russia have been on the enemy list of the Republican establishment for many decades
          Russia’s economy is small
          Russia is not a major power like that of China

          Looks to me it is you who is being a coward and proving you have no argument.

          • Paul

            He rewrote his comment

            And Russia is a major power, they have nukes and people

  • ES Trader

    The difference berween a senator/congressmen meeting w/ foreign ambassador vs Session’s meeting w/ Russian ambasador is light years !

    • Another Mike

      And you say this because…?

      • ES Trader

        1) of the 19 senators responding to NYTIMES? “Did you, on the same committee, meet w Kislyak? 19 No’s

        2) Sessions is a lawyer & ex state AG, he knew full well the ? asked of him by Franken & sidestepped it.

        I dont believe for a sec that Kislyak was not told to schmooze ALL dt sr campaign people to as Hayden said for dt to be a “fool for Putin”

  • Another Mike

    There was no point in drafting a bill to reform Obamacare as long as Obama was in a position to veto it. Now that he’s out of office, the drafting process can begin.

Host

Michael Krasny

Michael Krasny, PhD, has been in broadcast journalism since 1983. He was with ABC in both radio and television and migrated to public broadcasting in 1993. He has been Professor of English at San Francisco State University and also taught at Stanford, the University of San Francisco and the University of California, as well as in the Fulbright International Institutes. A veteran interviewer for the nationally broadcast City Arts and Lectures, he is the author of a number of books, including “Off Mike: A Memoir of Talk Radio and Literary Life” (Stanford University Press) “Spiritual Envy” (New World); “Sound Ideas” (with M.E. Sokolik/ McGraw-Hill); “Let There Be Laughter” (Harper-Collins) as well as the twenty-four lecture series in DVD, audio and book, “Short Story Masterpieces” (The Teaching Company). He has interviewed many of the world’s leading political, cultural, literary, science and technology figures, as well as major figures from the world of entertainment. He is the recipient of many awards and honors including the S.Y. Agnon Medal for Intellectual Achievement; The Eugene Block Award for Human Rights Journalism; the James Madison Freedom of Information Award; the Excellence in Journalism Award from the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association; Career Achievement Award from the Society of Professional Journalists and an award from the Radio and Television News Directors Association. He holds a B.A. (cum laude) and M.A. from Ohio University and a PhD from the University of Wisconsin.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor