SUMMARY: Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Amna Nawaz to discuss the week in politics, including how the Trump administration and Congress have handled conflict with Iran, indications House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is preparing to send articles of impeachment to the Senate for a trial of the President and what all the tumult means for 2020 Democrats.
Amna Nawaz (NewsHour): Back on Capitol Hill this week, the House of Representatives voted to check the President's war powers against Iran, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi told her Democratic Caucus to prepare for the next chapter on impeachment in the days ahead.
Here to help make sense of it all, as well as some eye-popping polling numbers from the Democratic primary field, are Shields and Brooks. That's syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
Happy Friday. Welcome to you both.
Let's start overseas, shall we?
David, it was a week ago that the U.S. assassinated the Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in Iraq, three days since Iran retaliated.
President Trump says he wants peace. They just rolled out new sanctions against Iran today. Is this de-escalation?
David Brooks, New York Times: Yes.
A week ago, we didn't know where we were going. And it certainly looks a lot calmer than it did a week ago. And it looks more like a normal Middle East terror episode, in which case you have a terror army, whether it's Hezbollah or Iranian-state sponsored terrorism. They're ramping up ramping up activities.
And then the U.S. says, stop. You — let's — we're going to be in conflict, but let's not get carried away here. You're pushing the boundaries here.
And so we do an action, and when you do this kind of action, like killing Soleimani, it's using violence as a form of communication, saying you have pushed the boundaries, time to stop.
And then the other side, the terrorist side, has a chance to say, no, we're going to keep going, or they have a chance to say, message received, we won't push the boundaries, it's not in our interests either.
And that seems to have been what has happened. We have seen that through the Israeli-Hamas or fights. We have seen it through other terror fights. And it looks like a much more conventional sort of communication between a nation and a terror organization.
Amna Nawaz: At the same time, Mark, we have had 176 civilians killed as a result of those escalated tensions, right? That didn't happen in a vacuum, necessarily.
And now Iraq and Iran are kind of on the same page, wanting U.S. troops out, out of Iraq from the Iraqi Parliament, and out of the region from Iran, which has always been a stated goal.
I guess the question is — and we may not know this yet — but are we safer? That's what the administration is arguing.
Mark Shields, syndicated columnist: My argument, I guess, would be that we're not.
But I go to the words of one exceptionally well-read Marine general, who later became secretary of defense, who said, history teaches — history teaches us that nations with allies thrive, nations without allies wither.
Every year, Pew Research, a very respected polling operation, polls in the world, 32 different countries, on trust and confidence. And the fact is, the United States under Donald Trump has plummeted in the world.
Among five world leaders, including Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Merkel and Mr. Macron, the fact is that Donald is at the bottom. He has 29 percent of the world has confidence in him; 64 percent don't.
This is a total reverse, total reverse from Barack Obama, when 64 percent of the world had confidence in his judgment.
We are isolated as a people. I mean, Secretary Pompeo complained that the Brits and the Germans didn't go along. (A) there is no support in their country for it. (B) they were never consulted.
So, no, I think — I don't argue with David's assessment of the individual discrete events. But I think the overall pattern is that we're paying a terrible price for isolation.
And alliances have been the saving strength of the United States and the Western world since World War II, and they are in total disrepair at this point.
Amna Nawaz: A lot of the questions revolve around what will happen next, for sure, right? There's concern there could be an increase in some of those proxy militias you had mentioned, David.
I want to play a sound bite for you, though, from President Trump at a rally in Ohio last night. He was responding to the House's move to try to restrict some of those Presidential war powers that Presidents have had for several years now post-9/11.
Take a listen to what President Trump had to say last night:
President Donald Trump: They're all trying to say, how dare you take him out that way? You should get permission from Congress. You should come in and tell us what you want to do.
(BOOING)
President Donald Trump: You should come and tell us, so that we can call up the fake news that's back there, and we can leak it.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
Amna Nawaz: David, to some degree, no surprise the House said, we want you to come to us before you take more action against Iran.
But then we also saw a Republican senator, right, Mike Lee from Utah, outraged after a briefing from military intelligence leaders that he felt was completely insufficient.
Is this the time you think Congress starts to claw back some of that power?
David Brooks: No, I don't think so.
I mean, they have had the chance in bin Laden. They have had a lot of chances, and the executive has taken this power.
I do think the laws we have are obsolete. They're — for a time when not a terror war, whether it was like World War II or Vietnam, when there was a moment of peace and then a moment of war, and there was a transitionary moment where Congress would act between those two states.
But in an ongoing terror war, there's no moment of peace and there's no moment of war. It's constant engagement. And so for the President, in a position of constant conflict with Iran, where they're ramping up pressure, we're trying to fight them, a discrete episode seems to me outside the bounds of Congress.
Having said that, the President, executive branch shouldn't be running a long-running terror war without the constant communication with Congress and with the intelligence communities and the Intelligence Committees.
And so while I don't think Congress should be approving every little individual operation, it's certainly up to the executive branch to be in constant communication, so there are no surprises. And that doesn't seem to have happened.
Amna Nawaz: Mark, what do you make of the way the administration has been responding to those calls for greater oversight, maybe explaining and providing justification for this strike on Soleimani in the first place?
Mark Shields: Oh, I don't think there's any question the President has asserted the total autonomy of his office.
I mean, he sees no need to consult. He sees no congressional restraints. And I think, in spite of the fact that the House did act on the war policy, it's not going to go anywhere in the Senate.
But there are there are pockets of resistance. I mean, it was — whether it was Senator Lee or Congressman Gaetz in the House. I mean, whether in fact it takes on a larger dimension remains to be seen.
But make no mistake about it. Donald Trump and his administration make a serious mistake by not consulting. If they're not with you on the takeoff, they're not going to be with you on the crash landing.
And there's no — they have no stake in what happens as far as his policy is concerned. Obviously, they do care about the nation. But as far as his policy and whatever political damage there is done to him, if they in no way are consulted or asked their opinion or their judgment or just told to shut up and join…
David Brooks: And despite this episode with Soleimani, I do think there's a bipartisan move, almost a consensus, a populist consensus.
Trump has used military force less than any President since Jimmy Carter.
Mark Shields: Yes.
David Brooks:He's [Trump] not normally a military guy.
From the populists on the left and populists on the right in different versions, it's like the Middle East is a mess. We are not good at dealing with that region. Let's stay away.
And I do think, whether it's Mike Lee or people further on the left — Mike Lee's a Republican — there's a consensus, we shouldn't be involved in that region, or as little as possible.
SUMMARY:Hundreds of thousands of Iranians took to the streets Monday to mourn Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a U.S. airstrike Friday. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, led funeral prayers and wept over Soleimani's body. But the fallout is more than emotional; as Iran and President Trump trade threats, the U.S. military is bracing for potential retaliation. Nick Schifrin reports.
SUMMARY: The Friday killing of Iran’s best-known military commander in a U.S. airstrike prompted an outpouring of grief in Tehran -- along with vows of vengeance. In the aftermath of Qassem Soleimani’s death, the country’s leaders and President Trump exchanged threats about what might come next. To share Iran’s perspective, Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Majid Takht-Ravanchi joins Judy Woodruff.
SUMMARY: For two views on the latest developments in Iran and Iraq, Nick Schifrin speaks with Narges Bajoghli of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, author of “Iran Reframed: Anxieties of Power in the Islamic Republic,” and U.S. diplomat Ryan Crocker, who served as ambassador to Iraq, Syria, Kuwait and Lebanon and is now diplomat in residence at Princeton University.
SUMMARY:After trading threats with the U.S., Iran said Tuesday night it launched ballistic missiles on Iraqi facilities housing U.S. troops in retaliation for the American killing of Gen. Qassem Soleimani. The attacks come after President Trump and top U.S. officials defended the Soleimani strike, which has been blamed for pushing the U.S. and Iran closer to war. Judy Woodruff and Nick Schifrin report.
SUMMARY:The U.S. killing of one of Iran’s top military leaders has prompted questions about whether the Trump administration has an effective strategy for Iran, Iraq and the larger Middle East. As Iran announces it has fired missiles at Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops, Nick Schifrin talks to Mara Karlin of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and the Hudson Institute’s Michael Doran.
SUMMARY: President Trump says Iran is “standing down” after firing missiles at Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops -- but causing no casualties. But Iran says its goal is to see U.S. forces leave the Middle East. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Karim Sadjadpour joins Nick Schifrin, Yamiche Alcindor and Judy Woodruff to discuss the latest developments.
NOTE:The effect is exactly opposite, the Iranian people and government are more united.
Excerpt
SUMMARY:For a congressional Republican’s perspective on the conflict between the U.S. and Iran, we turn to Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a former Marine who deployed twice to Iraq as a commander of intelligence teams. He joins Judy Woodruff to discuss why he supported the decision to kill Gen. Qassem Soleimani and what he expects next from Iran.
SUMMARY:For a congressional Democrat’s take on the conflict between the U.S. and Iran, we turn to Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) a member of the House Armed Services Committee. Crow is a lawyer and former Army Ranger who deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan during his military career. He joins Judy Woodruff to discuss why he is not satisfied with the Trump administration’s handling of the Soleimani strike.
SUMMARY: The fallout from the Trump administration’s killing of Qasem Soleimani continues to unfold -- and it could affect the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq. On Friday, Sec. of State Mike Pompeo rejected Iraqi calls for the U.S. to plan troop withdrawal. Retired Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmit, who served in the George W. Bush administration, and York University’s Thabit Abdullah join Nick Schifrin to discuss.
SUMMARY:The state of Israel has a history of great violence, visited on it by its enemies and in return by Israel's own intelligence services and military. In "Rise and Kill First," journalist and author Ronen Bergman writes about the nearly century-long campaign of targeted killing. He joins Nick Schifrin to discuss the secret history of these strikes.
SUMMARY: Thousands took to the streets of Beirut Friday to mourn the killing of Mustafa Badreddine, the commander of Hezbollah's military forces in Syria and a key supporter of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in that nation's civil war. An enemy of the U.S., Israel and ISIS, it is not yet clear who is responsible for Badreddine's death. Special correspondent Jane Ferguson reports.
JANE FERGUSON (NewsHour): People in this suburb of Beirut have been to many funerals since the beginning of the war in Syria, but none as big as this.
Mustafa Badreddine was believed to be the main military commander of Hezbollah forces fighting in Syria. In life, he was a villain to America and its allies. In death, he is a hero to these people.
In Hezbollah neighborhoods of Beirut, the funerals of war dead feel like celebrations. Women throw rice and rose petals on the coffin as it passes.
“I know there are martyrs in Syria,” this woman says, “but we like that and we are happy because we give martyrdom. If we didn't go to Syria, ISIS would come to here.”
MAN: When the name of this dead man is in our minds, we will always remember that we have to fight. We have to get revenge from those who killed him.
JANE FERGUSON:Badreddine was believed to have been involved in the devastating attack on the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, which killed 241 Americans. He was also indicted for the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a huge truck bomb in 2005.
He was killed in Syria leading Hezbollah's military campaign, propping up the group's ally President Bashar al-Assad. Young men from here often go to fight in Syria for Hezbollah, many returning in coffins. It's a heavy price the group is paying for its involvement in the war.
The death of this commander, however, is the biggest loss to the group since his predecessor was killed in 2008. Mustafa Badreddine, according to Hezbollah, had said just a few months ago that he would only return to Lebanon from Syria either victorious or as a martyr.
Professor Daniel Byman of Georgetown University says he was a founding member of Hezbollah.
DANIEL BYMAN, Georgetown University:Badreddine's death is a big blow to Hezbollah. He's someone who was there at the founding of the movement. He's been with it in leadership positions, really the tip of the sphere almost everywhere they have been active, whether it's been in Kuwait, in Lebanon, now in Syria.
And this is a tremendous blow. It has repeatedly lost senior leaders in its history, and it has repeatedly emerged strong and committed. So, it's not likely to change things, in the country.
SUMMARY: One year ago, Burundi's president announced he was running for a third term, which triggered a failed coup, protests and a violent crackdown. Hundreds died and at least 220,000 have left the country. Special correspondent Nick Schifrin reports from Nairobi, where some Burundian refugees from the opposition have fled for safety, but instead are being hunted down by men sent by the government.
JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):It has been one year since Burundi's president, Pierre Nkurunziza, announced he was running for a third term, a move widely considered unconstitutional. His announcement triggered a failed coup, a questioned election, mass protests, and a violent crackdown on the opposition.
Since then, at least 400 people have been killed and 3,500 arrested. More than 220,000 people fled the country. Divisions between Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups have characterized past violence in Burundi, but, on Sunday, Marguerite Barankitse was honored for her work helping Burundian orphans and refugees, regardless of ethnicity. She received a million dollars from an Armenian group. The money will be donated to the organization of her choice.
Still, ethnic identity can be a matter of life or death for Burundians, even those outside the country.
Special correspondent Nick Schifrin, partnering with the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, found Burundian refugees 900 miles from home, in Nairobi, Kenya, where they thought they'd be safe. But their enemies have tracked them down.
NICK SCHIFRIN (NewsHour): It's just past midnight. We're in Nairobi, Kenya, and this isn't only a cornfield. This is a kind of protection because, right behind me, there's a house full of men, and all night, every night, two of them are in the field standing guard, using old weapons like a crowbar and a rusty knife.
They are too scared to sleep, and too scared to show their faces. They are Burundian refugees who say they're being hunted.
The men who are guarding the house, can they really defend you from the people who are hunting you?
MAN (through interpreter): The weapons you see here can only be used against the dogs you hear barking. If there were an enemy coming here with a grenade or a machine gun, we wouldn't be able to resist.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Twenty-year-old Arnold is a Burundian refugee. He lives in this tin shack with seven other refugees. It's a 150-square-foot church library.
MAN (through interpreter): We have no mattresses, no food. As refugees, we can't find jobs, and we are scared of being arrested and sent back from where we were.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Where they were was Burundi's capital, Bujumbura. A systematic campaign targeted the government's political opponents, leaving some of their bodies in the street.
The U.N. warns that President Nkurunziza is helping lead the country to a second civil war by transforming politics into ethnic conflict between Hutus and Tutsis. That's the same ethnic divide in Rwanda that sparked the 1994 genocide.
In the last year, 225,000 Burundians have fled the violence to cities they hoped were safe. But, even here, they hide their faces.
Today, here in Nairobi, which of you is afraid?
All of these men escaped from Burundi. Kenyan activist Tom Oketch brought them together to discuss their rights and try to calm their fears.
SUMMARY: The findings of a British inquiry into the demise of former Russian spy and high-profile defector Alexander Litvinenko were released Thursday, concluding that Litvinenko's 2006 death by polonium poisoning was the result of a Russian government operation, likely personally approved by President Vladimir Putin. Chris Ship of Independent Television News begins our coverage.
HARI SREENIVASAN (NewsHour): The death by poisoning of a former Russian spy in London was thrust back into the headlines today, as a British inquiry into his killing released its report.
Alexander Litvinenko fled Russia nearly 20 years ago and accused the former chief of Russia’s spy agency, now-President Vladimir Putin, of corruption. In 2006, he met two Russian spies at a London hotel, and three weeks later, he was dead.
Chris Ship of Independent Television News begins our coverage.
CHRIS SHIP, Independent Television: We were reminded today that the radioactive poison inside Alexander Litvinenko's body was so strong, he had to be buried in a lead-lined coffin. Today, the Russian security service the FSB was blamed for his killing. And the orders, concluded the man who led the inquiry, most likely came from the top, the very top, he said.
SIR ROBERT OWEN, Litvinenko Inquiry Chairman: The operation to kill Mr. Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr. Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and also by President Putin.
SUMMARY: A British investigation is pointing the finger at the Russian state and President Vladimir Putin for the 2006 assassination of a former spy and defector. Hari Sreenivasan talks to Steven Lee Myers of The New York Times and Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia.
SUMMARY: In Tahrir Square, tens of thousands of Egyptians rallied to support the military's ouster of former President Morsi, who may face new charges. Islamists also held demonstrations where some fighting led to deaths. In Tunisia, thousands protested the assassination of leftist politician Mohamed Brahmi. Margaret Warner reports.
SUMMARY: Margaret Warner joins Judy Woodruff to discuss the latest unrest for Egypt and Tunisia and how both countries have faced major challenges in establishing inclusive, pluralistic democracies.
Significant excerpt
MARGARET WARNER (Newshour): Well, my theory is that, when you have had people live under oppression for decades and decades, where no rival political parties are, if allowed to exist, not flourish, or in the case of the Brotherhood and the Islamists, they're in jail, in hiding, or in exile, and then suddenly the boot is taken off their neck, they have no experience in politics. They have no experience in governing.
And it's not in their sort of social, cultural, political DNA to understand that democratic government actually involves give-and-take and trusting, that if your rival happens to be on top, he's not going to use it, he's not going to use the power to impose absolute power, because, after all, that's what they have all experienced.
I talked to Marwan Muasher today, a former foreign minister of Jordan, a big thinker about moderation in the Arab world, and he said, what connects these two is that the commitment to pluralistic democracy is really skin-deep. Neither the seculars nor the Islamists really believe in inclusion.
MARGARET WARNER (Newshour): President and Mrs. Obama were thousands of miles away in San Diego last Friday night when shots rang out on historic Constitution Avenue just south of the White House.
But it wasn't until Tuesday that the Secret Service discovered two bullets had actually hit the White House. The exact location wasn't confirmed, but yesterday workers were on the second-story Truman Balcony examining a window of the president's living quarters. The bullet was stopped by ballistic glass.
Investigators now say they believe the shots were fired from about 750 yards away by a gunman in a car on Constitution Avenue between the White House and the Washington Monument. Shortly after the shooting, police found a car abandoned a few blocks away. An AK-47-style assault rifle and empty shell casings were inside.
By Sunday, they had linked the car to Oscar Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez, a 21-year-old man from Idaho. U.S. Park Police issued a warrant for his arrest on a charge of carrying a deadly weapon.
SGT. DAVID SCHLOSSER, U.S. Park police: This is a man who discharged a rifle in downtown D.C. I think that speaks volumes.
MARGARET WARNER: Just hours before the shooting, acting on a report of suspicious behavior, police in nearby Arlington, Va., had detained Ortega-Hernandez near this abandoned house. They held him briefly, photographed him, then let him go.
After a nationwide manhunt, employees at this hotel near Indiana, Pa., yesterday thought they recognized the man in the photos.
I am Retired U.S. Navy (22yrs) and a Vietnam Veteran. After my Navy retirement I was in the computer related industry, now retired. In 2000 I was a registered Republican and voted for George W. Bush. Six months of having Bush in the Whitehouse forced me to re-evaluate my political stance. I had always thought of myself as a Moderate Republican, but was a Republican by "default" NOT because of close examination of the GOP. Due to what has happened in America since 2000, I now consider myself a progressive, and registered as a Non-Affiliated voter.
*Anti-First Amendment policies that attempt to turn America into a theocracy by enshrining ANY religious belief as law.
* Any attempt to suppress human or Constitutional rights.
* Any law or policy that supports discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race/color, gender, sexual orientation, or any law that does NOT support Equal Treatment under the law.
*Any law or policy that attempts to suppress Freedom of the Press or Free Speech.
LINK DISCLAIMER:
There is no guarantee that any link provided in this blog will always work, especially for older links. The validity of any link is governed by the source-site policies. Some sites will archive articles and require subscription to access. Very small sites, such as a local town newspaper, may not archive at all.
