WHITE HOUSE President Donald Trump on Monday declared he has an "absolute right" to pardon himself and then also tweeted his assertion that the federal government investigation into ties between his 2016 election campaign and Russia is "totally unconstitutional." While Trump has frequently ignored established norms and challenged the understood limits of presidential powers, his latest comments are viewed by some legal scholars as unprecedented and testing constitutional boundaries. "I was shocked" by Trump's tweets, said Susan Low Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University. "No president has ever tried it," she told VOA News. "It's unlikely the president can pardon himself. I think the court would say no" and if he did give himself a pardon, "most congresses would impeach him." Bloch also notes when most people accept a pardon "it's an admission of guilt," thus it would be a bad idea for Trump to pursue such a course of action. The professor, who has testified before the Senate on whether a president can be indicted and tried while in office, says the special counsel is "absolutely constitutional." Another constitutional scholar, Keith Whittington at Princeton University, said, "I think it is important to note that the president's comments reference serious arguments that are being debated by legal scholars, but these are difficult and unusual constitutional questions that would ultimately be answered in the courts." According to Northwestern University Law Professor Andrew Koppelman, "Trump's position on pardons is consistent with the Constitution's text, but inconsistent with the overall structure. It means that the President could commit capital treason, or any other federal crime, and then immediately pardon himself. "It means that he could commit murder in the White House," Koppelman said. "It makes no sense within the Constitution as a whole." Asked by reporters Monday about Trump's comment on his ability to pardon himself, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders repeatedly replied: "The... The law professor Susan Low Bloch probably thinks that: - Trump's statement is not a surprise. - not enough information - Trump's statement is inexpected. - The courts will allow Trump to pardon himself.
Trump's statement is inexpected.

Nothing I can think of. I've unwittingly embarrassed my daughter by stopping by my daughter's place too often to drop things off, I guess. I guess I embarrassed my daughter when she was living with her boyfriend by stopping by with healthy food and favorites groceries and other things I thought she needed and might like. The boyfriend always told me the groceries were a help. My daughter complained she already had too many clothes and if I tried to surprise her with something new. I think my husband and I embarrass our daughter now practically no matter what we do just because we're parents and maybe because we're older in our 60's and too happy to see her and too eager to please and we inadvertently treat our daughter like she is still a kid although she will be 22. I've never had a deliberate favorite thing to do except maybe by accident when I used to share too many photos of the cats when I used to be on FB? Parents can't help but embarrass their children beyond a certain age maybe? I can picture if we had an in the ground pool and my husband and I were continually doing silly moves and cannon ball jumping in I think or even simply lazing around in ridiculous color and style too teeny bathing suits for our age that too would embarrass my daughter. When push comes to shove parents like myself don't have to be too inventive or think much to come up with things they might do that embarrass their kids. My daughter told me she could not stand to go to the movies with me because I used to cry during movies. She never forgets one time I got emotional during a movie "Spirit" my husband and I took her to when she was little. I tried to hide this but my husband blurted out "You aren't crying, are you" like it was the dumbest thing to do and for the entire movie going audience to hear. Sheesh! What do the parents like to do during the summer? - not enough information - hanging out around the pool - post pictures on FB - embarrass their daughter
hanging out around the pool

Q: SEOUL The annual U.S.South Korea joint military exercises currently underway have historically been a very public demonstration of force intended, in part, to counter North Korea's aggressive nuclear and missile tests. But with looming diplomatic summits aimed at reaching a deal to end the North's nuclear program, media coverage of the drills has so far been limited. This week, the U.S. Second Infantry Division held a public tree planting ceremony at Camp Casey in South Korea, near the inter-Korean border. "It is my belief that this tree, like those that have come before it, shall symbolize the roots that bind us together, and to our past in an enduring way," said General Jon Howerton, the deputy commander of the U.S. 2nd Infantry Division, at the event. The journalists attending the tree ceremony were also permitted to watch a shooting competition to determine the best marksmen in the participating U.S. and South Korean divisions. The Camp Casey event was one of the few joint military training activities that news organizations have, so far, been allowed to cover, and it illustrates how the United States and South Korea are downplaying the offensive component of this year's combined exercises. "This is clearly in order to send a signal to North Korea that South Korea and the United States are not willing to escalate the situation any further," said Go Myong-Hyun, a North Korea analyst with the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul. This year's Foal Eagle and Key Resolve combined military exercises are similar in scale to past drills, with more than 23,000 U.S. troops and 300,000 South Korean forces engaging in joint battlefield maneuvers, and responding to computer-simulated attacks from North Korea. But the start of the drills was delayed this year at South Korea's request to set a peaceful tone for the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics in the South and to facilitate the North's participation in the games. XXXXXXXXXXXXX What is probably true of the US and South Korea? - They are at war - They are allies - not enough information - The are enemies
A: They are allies

(Q).
It was a good feast. Celenda's manservant had purchased two of the biggest and strongest oxen in Fena Kef and they now roasted over the hall's two huge braziers. The smell filled Celenda's nostrils. She closed her eyes and laid back on her silk divan, enjoying the sights and sounds. Her finger fiddled with a torn seam on the divan's armrest and her pleasure faded. She would have flogged her seamstress for allowing such a thing but the woman had fled a year ago. She could barely afford clothing acceptable to a woman of her position, though few could say for certain what that position was, so she simply wore less clothes overall. She raised her arms behind her back and let the warmth of the braziers flow over her body. Though the number shrank, many still enjoyed Celenda's frequent celebrations. Some laughed and shouted on one side, some coupled in the dark shadows and behind silk curtains. Most feasted and drank and everyone partook in the red lotus. Celenda beckoned a thin slave boy, one of her last few, and he came holding a bronze bowl. Dried red leaves covered the bottom of the bowl. 'Why is this bowl not full?' she shouted at the boy. He cringed but she could tell he was not really frightened. She could not afford to injure or kill him and everyone knew it. She slapped him, but not hard. If she hit too hard she would find herself with one less slave along with her diminishing supply of the red leaf. Instantly the thoughts of the crumbling villa, the torn furniture, and the diminishing coffers fled from her mind. Euphoria flowed in. She felt it in her fingers and toes. who thinks she cannot afford to kill a slave boy? - some couples - Celenda - her manservant - not enough information
(A).
Celenda