LONDON — Britain 's Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt warned Iran of `` serious consequences '' if it does not release a British-flagged oil tanker it seized in the strategic Strait of Hormuz waterway on Friday , although he ruled out `` military options . ''\nHunt announced later in a tweet that he had spoken with Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and `` expressed extreme disappointment '' that Iran had `` behaved in the opposite way '' of trying to deescalate the situation .\nThe seizing of the `` Stena Impero '' potentially marks the most significant escalation in tensions between Iran and the West since they began rising in May , about a year after the United States pulled out of an international accord aimed at Iran 's nuclear program .\nThe Pentagon announced it authorized the movement of troops to Saudi Arabia as an `` additional deterrent , '' adding to the 1,000 troops deployed to the Middle East in June .\nThe showdown has caused concerns around the globe , with each maneuver bringing fear that any misunderstanding or misstep by either side could lead to war .\n`` It is essential that freedom of navigation is maintained and that all ships can move safely and freely in the region , '' Hunt said late Friday , ahead of an emergency government meeting . He subsequently told British media that `` we ’ re looking at a diplomatic way to resolve the situation , but we are very clear that it must be resolved . ''\nAbout a fifth of the world 's crude oil exports passes through the Strait of Hormuz .\nIran ’ s Revolutionary Guard Corps ( IRGC ) said Friday that the `` Stena Impero '' was taken to an Iranian port because it was not complying with `` international maritime laws and regulations . '' On Saturday , Iran 's state-run IRNA news agency reported that the `` Stena Impero '' collided with an Iranian fishing boat , causing it damage , and then failed to respond to calls from the smaller craft . The fishing boat informed Iran ’ s Ports and Maritime Organization , which notified the IRGC . The IRGC launched an investigation .\nFARS , Iran 's semi-official news agency , later released video showing the IRGC seizing the ship .\nIran 's Revolutionary Guard also released a new , high-quality video of the incident , showing commandos in black ski masks rappelling from a helicopter onto the vessel .\nA statement from Stena Bulk , which owns the seized tanker , said the ship had 23 crew members aboard when it was seized . They are from India , Russia , Latvia and the Philippines . There were no reports suggesting of any of them were injured .\nAnother British ship was briefly detained Friday before allowed to go . The owner of the Liberian-flagged , but British-owned , tanker said it was boarded by armed guards . The `` Mesdar '' vessel has left Iran ’ s territorial waters , Iran state media said .\n`` This only goes to show what I ’ m saying about Iran : trouble , '' President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House . `` Nothing but trouble . ''\nTrump declined to say whether the moves by Iran crossed a `` red line '' or how the U.S. might respond . He noted the U.S. has a maritime security agreement with Britain .\nThe latest incident follows a threat by Iran to seize a British oil tanker in the Persian Gulf after British Royal Marines earlier this month helped capture an Iranian tanker off Gibraltar , in the Mediterranean Sea , suspected of carrying oil to Syria in breach of European Union sanctions . Iran denied the ship was on its way to Syria .\nSuggesting the tanker seizure could have been a retaliatory act , FARS reported a spokesperson for Iran 's Guardian Council , Abbas Ali Kadkhodayee , as saying , `` The rule of reciprocal action is well-known in international law which is used against the foul measures of a government , '' adding that the seizure of the ship was a `` correct measure ... based on international rights . ''\nU.S. patrol aircraft are in the vicinity monitoring the situation in the Strait of Hormuz , and Naval Forces Central Command has been in contact with American ships in the area to ensure their safety , a Department of Defense official said . Britain has sent additional warships to the area and been escorting oil tankers in the region .\nU.S. Central Command said it in the process of developing a `` multinational maritime effort , '' called `` Operation Sentinel , '' to increase security of key Middle East waterways .\nLast month , Trump abruptly canceled a planned retaliatory attack on Iran after the country downed an unmanned U.S. drone , but his administration has kept up a policy of trying to squeeze Iran 's leaders with stiff economic sanctions . Days after he pulled back the strikes on Iran , Trump threatened to use `` overwhelming force '' against Iran if it attacked any U.S. assets or personnel . Trump announced that the U.S. `` destroyed '' an Iranian drone on Thursday . Iran said there is no evidence for that .\n`` If ( Stena Impero ) has been taken to Bandar Abbas then that ’ s an important Iranian military port and I think any military options will therefore be extremely unwise , '' Tom Tugendhat , chairman of Britain 's parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee , told the BBC .\nContributing : Doug Stanglin , Nicholas Wu , David Jackson , Donovan Slack and John Fritze , from Washington , D.C. ; Associated Press


The sheer size and frequency of the recent credit card data breaches at Target , Neiman Marcus and other companies are prompting lawmakers to consider legislative options to keep sophisticated cyberthefts from happening .\n`` If anything , we 've learned from this major , major breach that we can no longer do nothing , '' said Sen. Amy Klobuchar , D-Minn. `` We have to take action . ''\nThe bad guys who stole data from as many as 110 million Target customers are so good at what they do that even the most modern security programs could n't detect them . If security software ca n't keep up , hopes for regulation to stop fraud are slim .\n`` This is kind of an ongoing war , and the types of threats are changing all the time , '' said Fran Rosch , a vice president at the security software company Symantec . He appeared Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary panel , which explored legislative options in data security .\n`` Information 's everywhere , '' Rosch said . `` It 's in our data centers , it 's in the cloud . It 's in software that sits in the cloud and on our mobile devices . So the threats are exploding , but so are the attack surfaces . ''\nLawmakers are considering a few policy changes to better protect consumers , such as pushing for more secure credit and debit cards . American credit cards have already failed to keep up with European and Asian card technology , which feature encrypted chips . The chips prevent cyberthieves from reusing any data after they steal it .\n`` What 's stopping our country when they 're doing this in Europe ? '' Klobuchar asked .\nPart of the problem is the complexity of the American financial system , which has so many competing card issuers , banks , retailers and business owners . Adopting systemic change to the way purchases are made would cost retailers and banks hundreds of millions of dollars .\nBut the recent breaches were so costly that both banks and retailers are backing a changeover to chip technology together .\n`` All of us have to move together simultaneously ; it 's a shared responsibility , '' said Target Chief Financial Officer John Mulligan . `` The financial industry , obviously they 're , in general , the issuers of the cards . So again , in partnership with them , we need to move together collectively so the whole system is employing chip and PIN technology . ''\nVisa and Mastercard are aiming to have chips in the majority of U.S. cards by October 2015 , but it could be even longer before retail outlets change their card readers . Lawmakers are asking what they could do to speed up the change .\nAnother plan would be to tighten data theft disclosure and security standards , an option pushed by Sen. Al Franken , D-Minn .\n`` Right now there 's no federal law setting out clear security standards that merchants and data brokers need to meet , and there 's no federal law requiring companies to tell their customers when their data has been stolen , '' Franken said .\nFranken and Sen. Patrick Leahy , D-Vt. , are co-sponsoring the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act , which includes those disclosure and security standards . Both retailers and security companies who appeared before senators Tuesday signaled support .\nBut the fast-changing tech terrain makes some lawmakers wary of any attempt at national standards .\n`` I 'm always a little bit concerned about creating a new federal regulatory authority , '' said Sen. Mike Lee , R-Utah , `` in part because sometimes when you establish something like that it can quickly become ineffective , especially if it 's in an area like this one . ''\nOutside a Washington , D.C. , Target store Tuesday , Joshua Sands said he 's still a loyal Target shopper — but he 's taking personal responsibility for his security .\n`` It 's like being on the Internet , when they tell you you should always have an anti-virus on your computer , '' he said . `` You always assume somebody 's trying to get in . You have to be vigilant for yourself . You ca n't leave it up to someone else to handle your security . ''\nUntil more systemic changes are put in place , security experts say the attacks on our payment systems are expected to continue .


Chrissy Houlahan has done a lot with her industrial engineering degree over the last 30 years including serving in the Air Force , working in the aircraft manufacturing industry , being the COO of a sports apparel company and even teaching high school chemistry .\nHoulahan says her science , technology , engineering and mathematics – or STEM – background has allowed her to be fluid in her career by helping her tackle everyday problems through a unique lens .\n`` Somebody with a technical background might think in a little bit different than the way , for instance , that a lawyer would think , '' Houlahan says . This was one of her biggest motivators for running for office in Pennsylvania 's 6th Congressional District , she says .\n`` I think a person with a technical background could be really useful in Washington , '' says Houlahan , noting that Congress is called to pass laws on issues the Founding Fathers would have never thought imaginable .\n`` Anything from cybersecurity , biosecurity , information technology and privacy issues are all things the government now has the responsibility to be worried about , '' she says . `` Those are all things that scientific and technical backgrounds can be used for . ''\nHoulahan won her congressional House race this month , defeating a Republican opponent who is a tax lawyer and businessman . She is one of the nine STEM-related professionals – one senator and eight members of the House of Representatives — voted into office during the 2018 midterms . All are Democrats except for one Republican and the cohort includes an ocean scientist , an aerospace engineer , a software engineer and a biochemist .\nAccording to the latest congressional profile , released before Election Day , only about seven percent of the 115th Congress reported they have some kind of STEM background . Occupations that are typically associated with people running for office — lawyers , career politicians , business men and women — were the most frequently listed .\nThere 's a reason there are not a lot of STEM professionals in Congress , says Shaughnessy Naughton , founder of 314 Action , an advocacy group that helps candidates with such a background move beyond advocacy and into action .\nNaughton started the group — named after the most widely known mathematical ratio — in 2016 in response to concern about the Trump administration 's attacks on science , especially the president 's stance on climate change . And 314 Action helped eight of the new STEM professionals get elected to Congress in the recent elections .\nNaughton says while there are procedural hurdles for anyone trying to break into politics , scientists also face cultural barriers .\n`` Scientists and physicians and STEM professionals often think of science as above politics , or their profession is above politics and therefore they should n't be involved in politics , '' says Naughton , who staged an unsuccessful campaign for Congress herself in 2014 and then again in 2016 . `` And I think we see the results of that attitude by just a real dearth of people with scientific backgrounds and the often misplaced priorities that are put forward [ by Congress ] . ''\n314 Action spent more than $ 2 million endorsing 13 candidates in the midterm elections . Eight of them won their races , while the five candidates who did not still made tremendous gains in promoting STEM backgrounds as a way to talk about local issues , says Naughton .\n`` I think it 's important because we would have a policy more based in facts and evidence , '' Naughton tells NPR . `` But I also think we would have a more collaborative approach to governing if more scientists were at the table . ''\nThrough trainings and financial support , 314 Action helps STEM professionals-turned-candidates promote their experience and skill set in their run for office .\nCongresswoman-elect Dr. Kim Schrier says the group helped her use her experience both as a pediatrician and a Type 1 Diabetes patient to connect with voters . Last week she become the first Democrat to ever represent the 8th Congressional District of Washington state .\n`` It gave me the ability to speak to the issues that other candidates just do n't have and an expertise that I can really bring to Congress to help fix our broken medical system , '' say Schrier , who decided to run because Republicans in Congress kept trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act .\n`` And that directly affected patients like me with pre-existing conditions , '' she says .\nSchrier hopes to bring a unique voice when topics such as health care , the pharmaceutical industry and prescription drugs arise in the next Congress .\nCongresswoman-elect Elaine Luria says her being a nuclear engineer connected with voters on issues that deeply affect in the 2nd Congressional District of Virginia such as global warming , tourism , aquaculture and offshore drilling . Her district includes Virginia Beach , the Norfolk Naval Station and other parts of that city – which is starting to grapple with increased flooding as sea levels rise .\n`` When we talk about those issues they are environmental issues and they have a scientific basis but because of the nature of our region they 're also people 's livelihood-type issues , '' she says . `` All of these things impact the economy here . ''


Three GOP congressmen introduced a resolution Friday calling for special counsel Robert Mueller to resign from the Russia collusion probe , citing his ties to the FBI and its role in controversies involving Russia .\nRep. Matt Gaetz , R-Fla. , a member of the House Judiciary Committee , along with co-sponsors , Rep. Andy Biggs , R-Ariz. , and Louie Gohmert , R-Texas , introduced the resolution on Friday .\n“ Evidence has emerged that the FBI withheld information from Congress and from the American people about Russian corruption of American uranium companies , ” Gaetz said in a statement Friday . “ A confidential U.S. witness , working in the Russian nuclear industry , revealed that Russia had deeply compromised an American uranium trucking firm through bribery and financial kickbacks . ”\nGaetz was referring to Mueller ’ s supervision of a bribery probe involving a subsidiary of Russia ’ s Rosatom , which eventually got approval from the U.S. to buy a Canadian mining company , Uranium One , that controlled a swath of American uranium reserves . At the time of the probe , Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein , who appointed Mueller as special counsel , was a U.S. attorney and Mueller was FBI director . Republicans want to know how that deal was approved despite the evidence gathered in the bribery probe .\nMUELLER FACING NEW REPUBLICAN PRESSURE TO RESIGN IN RUSSIA PROBE\nGaetz also pointed to the FBI informant , whose gag order was lifted by the Justice Department last week , and is now able to provide information to Congress , free of the FBI ’ s nondisclosure agreement he signed when Mueller served as director .\n“ Although federal agents possessed this information in 2010 , the Department of Justice continued investigating this “ matter ” for over four years . The FBI , led at the time by Robert Mueller , required the confidential witness to sign a non-disclosure agreement . When the witness attempted to contact Congress and federal courts about the bribery and corruption he saw , he was threatened with legal action , ” Gaetz said in a statement . “ By silencing him , Obama ’ s Justice Department and Mueller ’ s FBI knowingly kept Congress in the dark about Russia ’ s significant and illegal involvement with American uranium companies . ”\nGaetz said that due to these “ deeply troubling ” events , Mueller ’ s “ impartiality is hopelessly compromised . ”\nRep. Trent Franks , R-Ariz. , has also called for Mueller ’ s resignation .\nSenate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley , R-Iowa , has called for an independent special counsel to investigate the Obama-era Uranium One deal .\nThere are currently two pieces of legislation in the Senate , with bipartisan sponsorship , that would ensure a judicial check on the executive branch ’ s ability to remove a special counsel . Republican Sens . Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , and Thom Tillis , R-N.C. , are behind the bills , along with Democratic senators .\nThe proposed resolution comes just days after Mueller ’ s team announced the first charges in their investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign officials in the 2016 presidential election .\nFormer Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates were indicted on 12 counts by a federal grand jury as part of the probe . Both pleaded not guilty . And Former Trump foreign policy campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos entered a guilty plea on Monday after admittedly making false statements to the FBI .


They have spent their lives in research facilities , been injected with miserable diseases , and used by National Institutes of Health scientists to research new medicines , but now , after being designated by the NIH as `` permanently ineligible for biomedical research , '' 60 chimpanzees , slated for retirement , are unable to be moved to a special sanctuary because of congressional inaction .\nAt issue is an obscure piece of legislation , The Chimp Act , which puts a cap on the amount of money the NIH can spend , from its appropriated budget , on the care of NIH owned or supported chimpanzees housed in sanctuaries .\nCurrently , there are 60 chimpanzees slated to move from the New Iberia Research Center , in Lafayette , La. , to Chimp Haven in Keithville , La. , this spring . In addition , this law also means trouble for the 100 chimpanzees currently housed in Chimp Haven , designated as retired .\n`` We have hit this wall , and we need this fixed , or else come mid- to end-November , we will not be able to pay Chimp Haven to take care of these animals , '' said Dr. Kathy Hudson , NIH Deputy Director for Science , Outreach and Policy . `` Scientifically , ethically and economically that is a bad idea . ''\nThat wall Hudson is talking about is a $ 30 million spending limit , enacted under a law in 2000 that legally obligates the NIH to only spend that much of its appropriated funds on the sanctuary care for these chimpanzees .\nThese 60 chimps that have been designated to head into retirement are not alone . There are many more waiting behind them , since the Institute of Medicine advised the NIH to retire all of its biomedical research chimps , in favor of better , less expensive models for medical research . However , 50 chimpanzees will be placed on retainer in case they are needed for crucial medical studies that could be performed no other way .\nThere is wide bipartisan support for amending the law , but somehow , the permission slip got lost during the mess that was the government shutdown .\nWednesday , Senator Tom Harkin , D , Iowa , Chairman of the Senate HELP Committee and Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor , Health and Human Services , Education , and Related Agencies , will get the ball rolling in his committee , by introducing The CHIMP Act Amendments of 2013 ( S. 1561 ) , a bipartisan bill that the Committee will consider at an executive session .\n`` The National Institutes of Health has made a worthy and important decision to scale back the use of chimpanzees in medical research . Current law limits NIH 's ability to use its existing funds to provide care to its chimpanzees already housed in sanctuaries , in addition to carrying out the important goal of moving the chimps current living in research labs . We have an obligation to provide care for animals that have directly contributed to our medical knowledge , and it is absolutely urgent that Congress act to remove this funding limitation now and for the future , '' the senator said in a statement to ███ .\nHudson has faith that this issue will be resolved quickly by Congress .\n`` This is really an issue where there is no divide , it would be impossible to find someone who did n't support the NIH in taking care of these animals that have contributed greatly to biomedical research , '' Hudson said . `` We are very grateful to the members and staff that have contributed to this bill and think it will move quickly through house and senate . ''\nHarkin also expressed his hope for a quick bipartisan movement to ensure the chimps enjoy the sunset of their lives . `` Moving these chimps to sanctuary care is not only the right thing to do , but doing so would also be more cost-efficient for NIH and for taxpayers . I hope that Democrats and Republicans can work together to ensure that NIH can use resources it already has on hand to ensure these chimps ' well-being now and in the future , '' he said in a statement to ███ .\nHudson agreed and explained that it is more cost effective to care for the chimps that are not being used in research in the sanctuary . `` We 're not breeding these animals , and they are an aging population . It will be more economical to have these animals there ; overtime these costs will go down . ''


( CNN ) In the struggle between Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Democratic-controlled House , the immovable object may finally have met an irresistible force .\nMcConnell has been the immovable object : He 's frustrated House Democrats by systematically blocking Senate votes so far on the lengthening list of bills they have passed , from gun control to additional protections for patients with preexisting health problems .\nBut McConnell 's blockade faces a new challenge as the House turns to a series of bills meant to fight foreign interference in the 2020 election . Those measures , aimed at defending fundamental American institutions from foreign subversion , may be tougher for the Kentucky Republican to portray as partisan overreach than the bills the House has passed so far . And that could make them an irresistible force that strains his overall strategy of preventing action on any House legislation .\n`` It could be the thing that has the public home in on where the problem is , where the obstruction is , '' says Democratic Rep. John Sarbanes of Maryland , a leading author of the House election security agenda . `` The public , and I understand that , they paint everything with a broad brush and they say Washington is dysfunctional . Here 's a case study that they are going to be very interested in , that shows ... the problem is not with Washington , the problem is not broadly with Congress , the problem is with Mitch McConnell , who will not bring any of these things to the Senate floor . ''\nMcConnell 's decision to methodically bar consideration of any of the House priorities already looms as a defining gamble in the GOP 's effort to maintain its Senate majority in next year 's election . He has leaned into his role as obstacle , portraying a Republican-controlled Senate as the last line of defense against a Democratic `` socialist agenda '' and calling himself the `` Grim Reaper '' for their legislative plans .\n`` I am indeed the 'Grim Reaper ' when it comes to the socialist agenda that they have been ginning up over the House with overwhelming Democratic support , and sending it over to America , '' he declared in an interview on Fox News Channel last week . `` Things that would turn us into a country we have never been . '' McConnell 's campaign is even providing contributors with T-shirts featuring a tombstone for `` socialism '' on the front and a similar quote underscoring his determination to block the House agenda on the back .\nThe electoral impact of McConnell 's strategy will likely be determined by which side successfully defines the agenda he is obstructing .\n`` He talks about that almost every opportunity he can , '' says Josh Holmes , McConnell 's former chief of staff . `` Being in opposition to health care plans that end private health insurance or environmental deals that basically shut down your electricity provider is something that he 's pretty comfortable with . ''\nBut neither single-payer health care nor the Green New Deal , which Republicans are confident they can paint as unprecedented government intrusion into the economy , is likely to reach a vote on the House floor , much less pass the chamber , before 2020 .\nInstead , the legislation the House has passed this year -- and that McConnell is blocking -- has focused more on expressions of social values and bread-and-butter economic concerns , like buttressing the Affordable Care Act and confronting high prescription drug costs . Many of these measures enjoy preponderant support from the public in polls .\nnearly three-fourths of Americans said they supported legal status for those young people . The House , for instance , in early June passed legislation that provides legal status for potentially millions of `` Dreamers , '' young people brought to the country illegally as children . In a Fox News poll released Sunday , nearly three-fourths of Americans said they supported legal status for those young people .\ndilute the Affordable Care Act 's protections for patients with preexisting medical problems . In April Also in May , the House passed legislation to block regulatory actions by the Trump administration that woulddilute the Affordable Care Act 's protections for patients with preexisting medical problems . In April polling by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation , about two-thirds of Americans said it was important that health insurers be required to sell coverage to consumers with preexisting health conditions and be prevented from charging them more .\nOther House-passed measures this year include the Violence Against Women Act , legislation promoting greater gender equity in pay and comprehensive legislation to expand voting rights and impose new ethics guidelines on Washington . Senior Democratic House aides are confident that by the 2020 election , they will also pass legislation creating a nationwide $ 15 minimum wage , expanding the subsidies for families to purchase health insurance through the ACA 's exchanges , updating the Voting Rights Act and combating the rising costs of prescription drugs .\nThe strong public support for most of these ideas has Democrats cautiously optimistic that their challengers next year can portray incumbent Republican senators as part of a `` do-nothing Senate '' blocking action on important concerns .\n`` When your occupation is to vote every day down the line against things that matter to voters ... sure , we are going to make those a significant issue , '' says J.B. Poersch , president of Senate Majority PAC , a leading Democratic super PAC .\nDemocrats have been frustrated so far by their inability to create more pressure on McConnell to take up any of the House-passed bills ; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a news conference last week where she brandished a chart showing `` McConnell 's graveyard '' of bills that he had blocked , complete with miniature tombstones .\nHolmes , now president of a Washington communications firm , says House Democrats today face the same unforgiving equation Republicans did in 2013-14 . During that congressional session , the GOP-controlled House passed a series of conservative priorities , only to see them systematically blocked by the Democratic majority led by then-Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada . Despite loud complaints , House Republicans could never generate enough pressure on Reid to force him to allow votes on the GOP plans .\nMcConnell feels politically secure bottling up the House priorities , Holmes says , `` for the same reason Harry Reid did n't feel particularly moved by the fact that ( then-Speaker ) John Boehner had moved every conservative bill dealing with the economy or social issues possible . The priorities of Nancy Pelosi are not the priorities of Mitch McConnell , period . And he 's very comfortable with that . ''\nElection security , though , could be an issue that causes at least some GOP senators to question McConnell 's blockade . Sarbanes , who chaired the House Democrats ' Democracy Reform Task Force , says the party plans to pass by August `` a suite '' of bills to safeguard the 2020 election against foreign interference .\nThose bills will include some measures already included in the House 's omnibus political overhaul legislation , HR 1 , that would provide states with more money to harden voting systems against possible foreign intrusion and mandate that the Department of Homeland Security develop a strategy for resisting such attacks .\nThe House also plans to pass new measures requiring campaigns to notify federal law enforcement officials if they are approached by foreign operatives with damaging information on their opponents , as well as provisions barring campaigns from sharing internal information with foreign officials , mandating more disclosure of foreign ad purchases on digital platforms and clarifying that it is illegal to work with foreigners to influence an American election .\n`` We may not get every single piece of this package onto the floor and passed and directed to the Senate before August but we want to get a good critical mass of these important measures in place , '' Sarbanes says .\nPolls have shown broad public support for further action to resist interference by Russia or other foreign actors in the 2020 election . A Monmouth University poll last month found that 60 % of Americans believe the government is not doing enough to guard against such interference ; a survey by Democratic pollster Geoff Garin for the bipartisan advocacy group Law Works Action found that more than 4 in 5 Americans support a requirement that political campaigns notify law enforcement officials of foreign offers of assistance .\nMcConnell , as noted above , has felt comfortable blocking debate on other House-passed legislation with comparably lopsided levels of public support . But House Democrats are hopeful that more Senate Republicans will demand that he allow action on these issues because the public is likely to see them as less partisan .\n`` I think it 's going to be a very difficult place for him to be , opposing these things that are supposed to protect the fundamental principles of our democracy , '' Sarbanes says . `` This is about ... protecting ourselves from foreign interference , having confidence that our elections are being carried out in a free and fair and uninfluenced way . It 's baseline stuff ; it 's Founding Fathers kind of principles here . If you stand in the way of measures that are designed to safeguard these principles , I think you are standing in the way of American democracy or at least not respecting it . ''\nMcConnell has n't yet definitively closed the door on election security legislation . He 's committed to a full Senate briefing later this month from intelligence officials on the possible risks .\n`` I would suspect that has a huge amount of influence about what ultimately the Senate does in this space , '' says Holmes .\nBut all signals from McConnell suggest he 's unlikely to accept almost any new federal initiatives on election security . Last week , Senate Republicans blocked an effort by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia to force a vote on a `` duty to report '' bill , which many Republicans consider an effort to embarrass President Donald Trump . McConnell shrugged off Trump 's comments , which drew widespread condemnation in both parties , that `` you might want to listen '' to a foreign government offering dirt on a 2020 opponent . And Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri , a member of the GOP leadership , has publicly declared that McConnell is unlikely to allow any election security bill to reach the floor , whatever the House does next .\nThat opposition reflects both McConnell 's long-standing resistance to federal influence over any aspect of election activity ( he 's long been the leading opponent of campaign finance regulation ) and his reluctance to take actions that provoke Trump . But it risks allowing Democrats to make election security a powerful symbol for the wider wall McConnell has constructed against the legislation passing the House .\nIn a sign of what may be ahead , the Texas Democratic Party on Monday , for instance , chastised Republican Sen. John Cornyn , who 's up for reelection next year , for joining the Republican opposition to Warner 's legislation on disclosing foreign contacts . `` If Cornyn is unwilling to legislate , what exactly is he in Washington for ? '' Abhi Rahman , the party 's communications director , said in a statement .\nThe ordinarily taciturn McConnell has enthusiastically accepted the persona of the `` Grim Reaper '' for House priorities . The question is whether the Senate leader is embracing that identity to a point that helps Democrats entomb the GOP Senate majority in 2020 .


The chairman of a House committee that recommended a contempt citation against Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in its Fast and Furious investigation said on Tuesday President Obama ’ s assertion of executive privilege in the matter means the White House is covering up its involvement in the botched operation or is obstructing a congressional probe .\n“ To date , the White House has steadfastly maintained that it has not had any role in advising the [ Justice ] Department with respect to the congressional investigation , ” Rep. Darrell Issa , California Republican , said in a tersely-worded seven page letter to Mr. Obama .\n“ The surprising assertion of executive privilege raised the question of whether that is still the case , ” he said .\nMr. Issa , chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , also challenged the validity of the privilege claim , saying courts have “ consistently held ” that executive privilege applies only to documents and communications that involve the president ’ s decision-making process .\nAccordingly , he said , the assertion could only mean that Mr. Obama “ or your most senior advisers ” were involved in managing the Fast and Furious operation “ and the fallout from it , ” or the president was asserting a privilege he knew to be “ unjustified solely for the purpose of further obstruction a congressional investigation . ”\nThe committee voted 23-17 last week along strict party lines to recommend to the full House that Mr. Holder be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over hundreds of pages of Fast and Furious documents sought by the panel under a subpoena . The executive privilege assertion came only shortly before the committee was scheduled to vote on the recommendation .\nThe House is expected to vote on the recommendation later this week .\nMr. Obama previously has denied any knowledge of the Fast and Furious operation , and has stood solidly behind Mr. Holder despite an increasing chorus of calls by Republicans for his resignation .\nFast and Furious was a gunrunning operation by the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives ( ATF ) aimed at identifying drug smuggling bosses in Mexico who were buying weapons out of Phoenix area gun shops . More than 2,000 weapons , including AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifles and .50-caliber Barrett sniper rifles , were sold and “ walked ” into Mexico , but the ATF lost track of them .\nThe operation , which began in September 2009 , was shut down only after U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry was shot and killed during a December 2010 gunfight with Mexican bandits at an isolated location near the Mexican border , south of Tucson . Two weapons found at the site of the Terry killing later were traced to the Fast and Furious operation .\n“ The Terry family appeared before the committee on June 15 , 2011 , to ask for answers about the program that put guns in the hands of the men who killed their son and brother , ” Mr. Issa said . “ Having been stonewalled for months by the attorney general and his senior staff , the committee issued a subpoena for the documents that would provide the Terry family with the answers they seek . ”\nThat subpoena was issued on Oct. 12 , 2011 , and while the Justice Department has said it has handed over 7,600 records involving Fast and Furious , Mr. Issa said the department has identified “ 140,000 pages of documents and communications responsive to the committee ’ s subpoena . ”\nWhite House Spokesman Eric Schultz dismissed the letter , saying Mr. Issa ’ s analysis of executive privilege has “ as much merit as his absurd contention that Operation Fast and Furious was created in order to promote gun control. ” He said Mr. Obama ’ s privilege claim was consistent with executive branch legal precedent set over the past three decades .


Nearly a half century ago , young Donald Trump—a Wharton graduate , and an avid player of squash , football , and tennis—scored a 1-Y medical deferment . Hundreds of thousands of young men were being deployed to Vietnam . Trump had some bone spurs . He then limped happily into his father ’ s real-estate business without delay .\nWhen Trump was interviewed by the Times about his deferment during the 2016 campaign , he admitted that the foot condition was “ temporary ” and “ minor ” —usually orthotics or stretching eased the pain—and yet , “ I had a doctor that gave me a letter—a very strong letter on the heels. ” He promised the paper that he would look for the letter . Amazingly , it never turned up . Later , however , his unforgettable physician , Dr. Harold N. Bornstein , assured the nation that Trump , if elected , “ will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency . ”\nOn Wednesday morning , the Commander-in-Chief declared by tweet-fiat that , “ after consultation with my Generals and military experts , ” he had decided to reverse an Obama Administration decision and bar transgender individuals from serving in the military “ in any capacity. ” Trump tweeted further , “ Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming . . . victory and can not be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail . ”\nLet ’ s begin with the retrograde cruelty . There are thousands of transgender people already serving among the 1.3 million active-duty members of the military . These are people who have volunteered their service and have potentially put their lives on the line , and yet their President , who managed to come up with a flimsy doctor ’ s note back in the day , denies them their dignity , their equality . He will not “ accept or allow ” them in the military . Imagine the scale of this insult .\nHowever , today ’ s outrage—they seem to come at least once daily—is not merely one that reflects on Trump ’ s low character . It also reveals yet another layer of his political cynicism , and his willingness to use any tactical means available to try to emerge whole from his current predicament .\nThe President is in the midst of a colossal scandal , and the country , to an increasing measure , knows it . It ’ s not merely a matter of poor popularity polls . A sizable portion of the country wants to be rid of him and suspects he is unworthy of his office . Six months into his Presidency , according to a USA Today/Media Ethics poll , the country is split on whether or not he should be impeached , with forty-two per cent on either side of the question . The scandal is broad-based , but it surely includes ( but is not limited to ) contacts with Russian officials during the campaign and potential collusion to undermine the Clinton campaign ; the constant lying about same ; the firing of James Comey ; the threats to fire Jeff Sessions and Robert Mueller ; the appalling vulgarity of his public performances ( cf . the “ Playboy After Dark ” speech before the Boy Scouts of America ) ; the accumulating evidence of a history of sleazy business practices and partners ; and the level of sheer incompetence in the West Wing .\nIt is implausible that Trump paid much attention to his highest-ranking generals , or to experts , generally ; Secretary of Defense James Mattis has supported transgender individuals joining the military . And the hardly radical Rand Corporation has published an in-depth study refuting the idea that transgender soldiers are somehow expensive , or that they undermine the morale and cohesion of the military over all . Trump ’ s decision to bar transgender people from the military is pure politics , cheap and cruel politics , a naked attempt to divert attention from his woes , to hold on to support from his base—a base that he believes will cheer his latest attempt to do battle with the secular-humanist coastal élites who are so obsessed with identity politics . ( One Administration official told Axios ’ s Jonathan Swan that the move was intended to force Democrats from Rust Belt states to take “ complete ownership of this issue. ” ) In other words , it is a decision straight out of the Steve Bannon playbook . Cue the organs of the alt-right press .\nTrump likes to declare what a “ disaster ” the military is , how deeply it has fallen into disrepair , and how he will be its salvation . When you begin to consider the meanness of what Trump has done , it is worth remembering him saying that he was “ smarter ” than the generals on military matters , and that he mocked John McCain ’ s service in Vietnam because “ I like people who weren ’ t captured. ” When you begin to think about the scale of this offense , it is worth remembering Khizr Khan , the Gold Star father who lost a son in Iraq , addressing Trump directly from the lectern of the Democratic National Convention : “ You have sacrificed nothing and no one . ”


A Pentagon official signaled Wednesday that the U.S. is pressing the Turkish government to intervene in support of Kurdish forces desperately battling to keep the Syrian border town of Kobani from falling into Islamic State hands .\nPentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby told Fox News that U.S. officials are talking with the Turks about `` what they can or will or may do here . ''\nHe added : `` This is a decision the Turkish government has to make . We ca n't make it for them . ''\nAt a press briefing later in the day , Kirby clarified that the United States is not `` making demands of the Turks , '' but hopes they will `` contribute what they can . ''\nThe situation in the town of Kobani has intensified , and with it concerns over whether partners on the ground are doing enough .\nThe New York Times reported earlier that the White House is growing frustrated with Turkish inaction as the situation next door in Kobani gets worse .\nKirby also stressed the `` limits of airpower '' and said the U.S. needs more help on the ground .\n`` There 's just so much you can do from the air , '' he told Fox News . `` You 've got to have willing partners on the ground . You 've got to have ground forces . ''\nThe New York Times quoted a senior administration official who slammed the Ankara government for `` dragging its feet to act to prevent a massacre less than a mile from its border . ''\n`` After all the fulminating about Syria 's humanitarian catastrophe , they 're inventing reasons not to act to avoid another catastrophe , '' the official continued . `` This is n't how a NATO ally acts while hell is unfolding a stone 's throw from their border . ''\nThe Times reported that Secretary of State John Kerry had spoken with his Turkish counterpart Mevlut Cavusoglu and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu multiple times over the prior 72 hours in an effort to resolve tensions between the two sides .\nTurkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the U.S.-led coalition 's air campaign launched last month would not be enough to halt the Islamic State group 's advance . Turkish troops have been massed near the border since the assault on Kobani began , but have so far not taken an offensive posture .\n`` Kobani is about to fall , '' Erdogan told Syrian refugees in the Turkish border town of Gaziantep , according to The Associated Press . The Turkish president called for greater cooperation with the Syrian opposition , which is fighting both the extremists and forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad .\n`` We asked for three things : one , for a no-fly zone to be created ; two , for a secure zone parallel to the region to be declared ; and for the moderate opposition in Syria and Iraq to be trained and equipped . ''\nThe Times reported that President Obama prefers that Erdogan not tether the fight against Islamic State , commonly known as ISIS , to the effort to overthrow Assad . U.S. officials also tell the paper that Erdogan 's demand for a no-fly zone against the Syrian Air Force is meaningless on the grounds that the airstrikes have created a no-fly zone in all but name .\nThe call for a buffer zone inside Syria was , meanwhile , prompting confusion . Top diplomats from the U.S. and Britain said Wednesday they would consider supporting one to help protect Turkey 's borders , but a Pentagon spokesman said that is not an option that is currently on the table . Asked about a buffer zone after an hour-long meeting in Washington , Kerry and visiting British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond both stopped short of embracing one .\nOn Wednesday , Fox News reported that machine gun and small arms fire could be heard and seen near Kobani , indicating street fighting at close quarters . Artillery fire could also be heard at the center of town . The minaret of the town 's mosque was destroyed by ISIS fire .\nU.S. Central Command said Tuesday that five airstrikes on ISIS positions had been carried out near Kobani . A Fox News crew witnessed at least two airstrikes . One strike hit an ISIS tank on a hillside overlooking the town , while another two tanks appeared to be hit to the town 's southwest .\nWhile it is thought that supply lines for ISIS might have been disrupted by the stepped up attacks , enough ISIS fighters have entered the town with heavy arms back-up to wage a serious fight .\nOn Tuesday , the United Nations envoy for Syria issued a call for `` concrete action '' to prevent `` humanitarian tragedies . ''\n`` The world has seen with its own eyes the images of what happens when a city in Syria or in Iraq is overtaken by the terrorist group called ISIS or Da'esh : massacres , humanitarian tragedies , rapes , horrific violence , '' Staffan De Mistura said . `` The international community can not sustain another city falling under ISIS .\n`` The world , all of us , will regret deeply if ISIS is able to take over a city which has defended itself with courage but is close to not being able to do so , '' De Mistura added . `` We need to act now . ''


As America ’ s only prisoner of war in Afghanistan was transferred back to U.S. custody , Republicans challenged the Obama administration ’ s insistence it did not negotiate with terrorists in securing the soldier ’ s release and say the move was illegal and could embolden terrorists around the globe .\nAs his parents and residents of his Idaho hometown celebrated the negotiated release of Sgt . Bowe Berdahl over the weekend , the circumstances surrounding the release — and the sudden freeing of five Taliban figures held at the Guantanamo detainee prison — were producing a full-scale controversy in Washington .\nSecretary of Defense Chuck Hagel insisted the U.S. did not negotiate with terrorists in the process of exchanging the transfer of the five terrorism suspects for the release of Sgt . Bergdahl , now 28 , who had been in Taliban hands since June 2009 .\n“ We didn ’ t negotiate with terrorists , ” Mr. Hagel said on NBC ’ s “ Meet the Press. ” “ And I said and explained before , Sgt . Bergdahl is a prisoner of war . That ’ s a normal process in getting your prisoners back . ”\nSgt . Bergdahl arrived at a U.S. military hospital in Germany Sunday after he was handed over to U.S. special operations forces by the Taliban Saturday , with the government of Qatar serving as a go-between .\nIn an emotional press conference Sunday afternoon in Boise , Idaho , Sgt . Bergdahl ’ s father , Bob , likened his son ’ s return to a deep-sea diver resurfacing and urged a gradual re-assimilation process .\nSEE ALSO : GOP lawmakers warn of Taliban incentives in freeing American POW\n“ If he comes up too fast , it could kill him , ” said Mr. Bergdahl , thanking supporters and government officials for their help in the process . “ The recovery and rehabilitation of Bowe Bergdahl is a work in progress . ”\nJani Bergdahl told her son to give himself all the time he needs to recover .\n“ I love you , Bowe — I ’ m so very proud of you , ” she said . “ We praise God for your freedom . ”\nAdministration officials too said the focus right now should be on the fact that the only U.S. POW from the Afghan conflict is coming back home , even as President Obama is winding down the 13-year war there .\nNational Security Adviser Susan E. Rice told CNN that what officials did was ensure that the United States doesn ’ t leave a man or woman on the battlefield .\n“ And in order to do this — it ’ s very important for folks to understand , if we got into a situation where we said , you know , because of who has captured an American soldier on the battlefield , we will leave that person behind , we would be in a whole new era for the safety of our personnel and for the nature of our commitment to our men and women in uniform , ” Ms. Rice said . “ So [ just ] because the Taliban had him did not mean that we had any less of an obligation to bring him back . ”\nBut complicating the administration ’ s narrative was a rare public statement Sunday from Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar , who said the prisoner swap marked a “ great victory ” for the Islamist movement that led the military resistance against the U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan for more than a decade .\n“ The sacrifice of our mujahedeen have resulted in the release of our senior leaders from the hand of the enemy , ” Mullah Mohammed Omar said .\nMs. Rice and other administration officials insisted that , at the diplomatic level , the U.S. was negotiating with the government of Qatar , not the Taliban or its Afghan allies . But the handover followed secret and indirect negotiations between the U.S. and the Taliban , and Qatar is taking custody of five of the Afghan detainees that had been held at Guantanamo Bay , Cuba .\nThe detainees are believed to be the most senior Afghans still held at the prison : Abdul Haq Wasiq , Mullah Norullah Nori , Khairullah Khairkhwa , Mohammed Nabi and Mohammad Fazl . Mr. Obama ’ s efforts to close the detainee site have been frustrated by opposition from both parties in Congress .\nRepublican critics Sunday criticized both the abrupt manner in which the Taliban prisoners were traded — with almost no advance warning to lawmakers — and the potential precedent the deal could set in dealing with other terrorist enemies .\nHouse Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. “ Buck ” McKeon said that the released detainees are “ five very dangerous guys that should not leave Guantanamo [ and ] should not have the opportunity to get back into this fight . ”\n“ And now we have set a precedent — the president has set a precedent , ” the California Republican said Sunday on CNN . “ You know , he has violated the law and flouted the Constitution so many times . We have real concerns about this . They ’ re not following the law . They know they ’ re not following the law . ”\nAdded Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas Republican , speaking on ABC News , “ What does this tell terrorists — that if you capture a U.S. soldier you can trade that soldier for five terrorists ? ”\nSen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia , the ranking Republican on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence , said the administration assured him just six months ago they would not consider the release of the leaders without consulting Congress .\n“ The security assurances the United States has been given regarding these terrorists is feeble at best , and I fear it is only a matter of time before they resume their terrorist activities , ” he said . “ These men are not soldiers ; they are dangerous terrorists , and President Obama should be treating them as such . ”\nBut Idaho ’ s all-Republican congressional delegation hailed the move . Rep. Raul R. Labrador told the Boise Weekly he was “ thrilled ” by the news , while Sen. Mike Crapo said that “ our prayers have been answered . ”\nMr. Hagel acknowledged that the law now mandates that the defense secretary give at least 30 days ’ notice for such prison transfers but that officials moved under the timeline they did in order to save Sgt . Bergdahl ’ s life .\n“ We had information that his health could be deteriorating rapidly , ” he said . “ There was a question about his safety . We found an opportunity . We took that opportunity . I ’ ll stand by that decision . I signed off on the decision . The president made the ultimate decision . We did spend time looking at this . ”\nMs. Rice said the sergeant ’ s situation was “ acute ” and said the administration would have been criticized if it had failed to act when a deal materialized .\n“ We did not have 30 days to wait , ” she said . “ And had we waited and lost him , I don ’ t think anybody would have forgiven the United States government . ”\nMr. Hagel added that he will not agree to the release of any more detainees from Guantanamo unless the country can be assured “ that we can sufficiently mitigate any risk to America ’ s security . ”\nSgt . Bergdahl was captured under murky circumstances in eastern Afghanistan on June 30 , 2009 , about two months after arriving in the country , but neither Mr. Hagel nor Ms. Rice specifically addressed how that happened .\n“ We ’ ll have the opportunity eventually to learn what has transpired in the past years , but what ’ s most important now is his health and well-being , that he have the opportunity to recover in peace and security and be reunited with his family , which is why this is such a joyous day , ” Ms. Rice said on ABC ’ s “ This Week . ”\nAn annual event called “ Bring Bowe Back ” in his hometown of Hailey , Idaho , scheduled for June 28 was quickly renamed “ Bowe Is Back . ”\n“ It is going to be Bowe ’ s official welcome-home party even if he ’ s not quite home yet , ” organizer Stefanie O ’ Neill said .\n• This article is based in part on wire service reports .


US President Donald Trump says transgender people can not serve in `` any capacity '' in the military .\nHe tweeted that he had consulted with military experts and cited `` tremendous medical costs and disruption '' .\nThe Obama administration decided last year to allow transgender people to serve openly in the military .\nBut in June , Defence Secretary James Mattis agreed to a six-month delay in the recruitment of transgender people .\nAs is often the case , the announcement came in a series of tweets .\nMr Trump said : `` After consultation with my Generals and military experts , please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military .\n`` Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and can not be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail . ''\nBut the measure will not go into effect immediately , as spokesperson Sarah Sanders told reporters at a White House press briefing .\nThe implementation policy has to be worked out , she said when asked if troops on battlefields would be immediately sent back to the United States .\nThis was `` a military decision '' said Mrs Sanders , adding that it is `` not meant to be anything more than that '' .\nThe timing of this transgender ban is almost as interesting as the move itself .\nWhy now ? With the Trump administration being buffeted by the Jeff Sessions political death watch , the ongoing multi-prong investigation into the Trump campaign , the healthcare drama in the Senate and the impending Russian sanctions bill , perhaps the administration decided this was a good time to change the subject and rally conservative forces to his side .\nRepublicans have long used cultural issues as a wedge to divide Democrats and energise evangelicals . As one White House insider acknowledged , this is straight out of that playbook . While Mr Trump campaigned as sympathetic to LGBT rights , he needs the traditional religious conservatives to stay loyal to him now , more than ever .\nOr perhaps , as Politico is reporting , the White House sought to resolve an intraparty dispute that threatened passage of a key military spending bill in the House of Representatives . That the president chose to do so suddenly , with little advanced notice , would not be out of the ordinary for this administration .\nThe president 's action will create a furore among liberals and the media commentators whose disdain for the current administration is not a new development . This is a fight the White House will welcome .\nThe independent Rand Corporation estimated in 2016 that about 4,000 US active-duty and reserve service members are transgender , although some campaigners put the figure higher than 10,000 .\nRand also predicted that the inclusion of transgender people in the military would cause a 0.13 % increase in healthcare spending ( approximately $ 8.4m ) .\nA Military Times analysis found that the Department of Defense spends five times that figure just on erectile dysfunction drug Viagara alone .\nThe Obama administration 's move to allow transgender people in the military to serve openly was announced in June 2016 by then Defence Secretary Ash Carter .\nThe policy included a provision for the military to provide medical help for service members wanting to change gender .\nTransgender people would be permitted to join the services , so long as they could demonstrate they had been stable in their new gender for at least 18 months .\nThis was meant to come into effect on 1 July 2017 but the Trump administration delayed it by a further six months . The Pentagon said the five branches of the military needed more time to `` review their accession plans and provide input on the impact to the readiness and lethality of our forces '' .\nWhile Mr Trump 's decision concerns transgender military personnel , the US military 's ban on openly gay and lesbian servicemen and women - known as `` Do n't ask do n't tell '' - was lifted in 2011 .\nLGBTQ campaign group , GLAAD , called Mr Trump 's move `` a direct attack on transgender Americans '' .\nAaron Belkin , director of the Palm Centre , a leading think-tank which studies gender and sexuality in the military , told the BBC that Mr Trump 's decision would force transgender troops to in effect live as gays and lesbians did under `` Do n't ask , do n't tell '' .\nKristin Beck , a retired elite Navy SEAL , issued a challenge to President Trump in an interview with Business Insider : `` Let 's meet face to face and you tell me I 'm not worthy . ''\nShe said that during her decorated military career , she had been `` defending individual liberty '' .\n`` Being transgender does n't affect anyone else , '' she said . `` We are liberty 's light . If you ca n't defend that for everyone that 's an American citizen , that 's not right . ''\nFormer Defence Secretary Carter released a critical statement : `` To choose service members on other grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our military . There are already transgender individuals who are serving capably and honourably . ''\nChairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee , Republican John McCain , said major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter and continued :\n`` The statement was unclear . The Department of Defense has already decided to allow currently-serving transgender individuals to stay in the military , and many are serving honorably today .\nAny American who meets current medical and readiness standards should be allowed to continue serving . ''\nSeveral British military generals have condemned Mr Trump 's decision , including the commander of the UK Maritime Forces , Rear Admiral Alex Burton .\n`` As an @ RoyalNavy_LGBT champion and senior warfighter I am so glad we are not going this way '' , he wrote on Twitter , later adding : `` We have a justifiably rigorous selection process but it does n't include discrimination and we 're a better fighting force for it . ''\nRepublican opponents of transgender people serving in the military include Vicky Hartzler , a congresswoman from Missouri , who wants transgender service members honourably discharged .\nSome oppose the military having to bear medical costs associated with transgender recruits , such as gender reassignment .\nTony Perkins of the socially conservative Family Research council said : `` Our troops should n't be forced to endure hours of transgender 'sensitivity ' classes and politically correct distractions . ''\nTrump supporter and political commentator Scott Presler is among those who disagree with the military carrying the cost of such interventions .\nWhile disagreeing with the ban , he added that `` generals know more about war than I do .\n`` I am cognisant that they understand what it takes to go to war ... I do n't think this is an attack on the LGBT community .\n`` I 'm mixed , but I have confidence in the guidance that President Trump is receiving , '' he said . `` I do n't think for a second he 's prejudiced . ''


WASHINGTON — The U.S. military launched airstrikes to protect a dam in western Iraq , the Pentagon announced Sunday , in another expansion of the air campaign against the Islamic State , the militant group that has seized territory throughout Iraq and Syria .\nU.S. aircraft launched airstrikes against Islamic State targets around the Haditha Dam , a hydroelectric facility on the Euphrates River , Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby , the Pentagon press secretary , said in a statement . The military said the new strikes are in keeping with the Pentagon 's mission to support humanitarian operations and protect U.S. personnel .\n`` We conducted these strikes to prevent terrorists from further threatening the security of the dam , which remains under control of Iraqi security forces , with support from Sunni tribes , '' Kirby said .\nNational Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said the dam is the second-largest hydroelectric contributor to the country 's powers system .\n`` Destruction of the dam or release of water would create a level of flooding that would potentially pose a catastrophic threat to thousands of Iraqis , '' she said in a statement .\nDefense Secretary Chuck Hagel , speaking in Georgia where he 's meeting with government and defense officials , however , rejected the suggestion that the strikes open a new front in the war against the Islamic State or that they represent an escalation of U.S. military operations , according to the Associated Press .\nThe announcement comes after President Obama said Friday the United States was prepared to `` take the fight '' to the militant group , which threatens to destabilize the region and could present a threat to the West .\nA mix of fighters and bombers conducted four airstrikes Saturday to help defend the dam , U.S. Central Command said . The strikes destroyed five Humvees , one armed vehicle , a checkpoint and damaged a bunker , according to the command .\nThe new strikes represent the first shift toward targets in western Iraq , a largely Sunni region that is currently a patchwork of conflicting loyalties .\nSome Sunnis have supported the Islamic State as a bulwark against the Shiite-dominated government . But tribes have taken different stands in the face of the militant offensive . Some tribes are fighting against the militants and others are supporting the Islamic State or are remaining neutral .\nTribes in the Haditha dam region have been fighting against the militants for months . The U.S. military said the dam remains in the hands of tribes working in support of the Iraqi government and Iraqi security forces .\nThe U.S. air campaign began Aug. 8 and has slowly expanded as it has taken on more missions . U.S. planes have pounded targets around the Mosul Dam , allowing a combination of Iraqi counterterrorist forces and Kurdish peshmerga fighters to take the facility back from Islamic State militants .\nU.S. aircraft also targeted militants around Mount Sinjar , where a religious minority had taken refuge after militants had overrun their community . More recently , U.S. aircraft also helped break the siege of Amerli , a Shiite Turkmen town .\nThe U.S. military has conducted 138 airstrikes in Iraq since the air campaign began .


Story highlights Ex-Navy SEAL Robert O'Neill says he fired shots that killed Osama bin Laden\nO'Neill says he 's concerned he 'll face prosecution for publicly telling his story\nHe says value of sharing details with families of 9/11 attack victims makes risk worthwhile\nThe Navy SEAL who says he shot and killed Osama bin Laden says he is worried the Pentagon might prosecute him for publicly telling his story of the May 2011 raid on the al Qaeda leader 's compound in Pakistan .\nBut Robert O'Neill said the value of sharing the details of the mission for the families of the September 11 , 2001 , victims and military veterans killed in the ensuing wars makes that risk worthwhile .\n`` I think I did this in a way that does n't violate any tactics or any rules , '' he said in an interview on CNN 's `` The Lead '' with Jake Tapper .\nBeing prosecuted , he said , `` does concern me , and if it comes up , I 'll address it . ''\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL : Treated bin Laden 'as a threat ' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL : Treated bin Laden 'as a threat ' 04:00\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL describes killing bin Laden Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL describes killing bin Laden 03:13\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL on life after bin Laden raid Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL on life after bin Laden raid 03:54\nIn his most extensive live television interview to date , O'Neill said he realized the power of his story while speaking with a group that included about 20 families of victims of the September 11 attacks . He said it was the first time he 'd really spoken about the mission , and that men and women cried and told him `` it was closure for them . ''\nAt that moment , he said , he realized the importance of sharing what he could -- and that he needed to find a way to do so `` with respect for the tactics , for the safety of our troops and for the Department of Defense . ''\nResponding to criticisms from former administration officials and current servicemembers that he should n't be talking publicly , O'Neill said , `` I think it 's important historically for this to get out there . ''\n`` We were the end of a long , long time of grieving , '' he said . `` We were everybody on that mission . You know , we were the Port Authority , the police department , the NYPD , the FDNY , we were the American people , the 9/11 families , and we were able to go there -- and just that I was able to be a part of that is just the greatest honor that 's ever been asked of me . ''\nO'Neill described many of the details of the mission -- and his preparation beforehand .\nHe said he believed there was `` about a 90 percent chance that we were n't going to come back . '' Among the possible threats : Pakistan 's military , unaware of the mission , could shoot the two helicopters down . Bin Laden 's house could be wired with explosives . Others in the house could be wearing suicide vests .\n`` The house getting blown up , possibly getting shot down , suicide bombers , and then possibly running out of gas was a concern , '' he said . `` The chances of us not coming back were a lot greater than the chances we were coming back . ''\nHe said he called his family members beforehand -- not offering details on what he was doing , but knowing that they 'd soon find out no matter how the mission ended . He also wrote letters to his young children , only to be delivered if he did n't survive at a later date when , for instance , he was n't there for their weddings .\nAfter the mission started , O'Neill described landing outside bin Laden 's compound on the second of two helicopters , after the first one had crash-landed . He said he was the eighth SEAL in line as they moved from the compound 's first floor to its second .\nOn that floor , six ahead of him split off to take out bin Laden 's son , clear other rooms and identify potential threats . He was now second in line headed to the third floor , where they expected to find bin Laden .\nAs the group reached the third floor , he said , the SEAL in front of him dove on top of an `` unknown '' person -- it turned out to be a woman -- to absorb what they feared could be a blast from a suicide vest . He said he thought `` let 's get this over with '' as he entered the room expecting to be blown up by bin Laden .\n`` I shot him twice in the head , he fell on the floor , '' he said . `` I shot him one more time , and I killed him . ''\nJUST WATCHED Navy SEAL : I shot , killed Bin Laden Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Navy SEAL : I shot , killed Bin Laden 07:16\nJUST WATCHED Breaking down the Robert O'Neill interview Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Breaking down the Robert O'Neill interview 07:04\nJUST WATCHED Is Bin Laden shooter now a target ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Is Bin Laden shooter now a target ? 03:48\nThe magnitude of what he 'd done did n't register immediately . O'Neill first worried about eliminating other potential threats -- moving a woman and child out of the way , and then clearing the room .\n`` It was n't until the room was cleared and there were more SEALs in the room that it kind of hit me . I had a moment of pause , '' he said .\n`` I said , 'Hey , what do we do now ? ' '' O'Neill said . `` He said , 'Now we go find the computers . ' I said , 'OK , I 'm back . ' ''\nThe 90-minute flight back to the U.S. air base in Afghanistan was stressful , too , as the SEALs counted down the time until they exited Pakistan 's airspace .\nThen , they could exhale . One SEAL laid next to bin Laden 's body to measure his height -- part of confirming his identity . The group had n't brought a tape measure .\nLater , O'Neill sat feet from bin Laden 's body , eating a breakfast sandwich and watching a flat-screen television , while watching President Barack Obama announce to the world that the United States had killed bin Laden .\n`` I think , '' he told CNN , `` I was part of a team full of heroes . ''


CHARLOTTESVILLE , Va./WASHINGTON ( ███ ) - U.S. President Donald Trump denounced neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan as criminals and thugs on Monday , bowing to mounting political pressure to condemn such groups explicitly after a white-nationalist rally turned deadly in Virginia .\nTrump had been assailed from across the political spectrum for failing to respond more forcefully to Saturday ’ s violence in Charlottesville . The head Merck & Co Inc ( MRK.N ) , one of the world ’ s biggest pharmaceutical companies , quit a presidential business panel as a result , saying he was taking a stand against intolerance and extremism .\nThe chief executives of two other prominent companies - sportswear manufacturer Under Armour ( UAA.N ) and semiconductor chip maker Intel Corp ( INTC.O ) - followed suit hours later .\nCritics denounced Trump for waiting too long to address the bloodshed , and for initially faulting hatred and violence “ on many sides , ” rather than singling out the white supremacists widely seen as instigating the melee .\nDemocrats said Trump ’ s reaction belied a reluctance to alienate white nationalists and “ alt-right ” political activists who occupy a loyal segment of Trump ’ s political base . Several senators from his own Republican Party had harsh words for him .\nSome 48 hours into the biggest domestic challenge of his young presidency , Trump tried to correct course .\n“ Racism is evil , and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs , including the KKK , neo-Nazis , white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans , ” the president said in a statement to reporters at the White House on Monday .\n“ We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred , bigotry and violence , ” he said .\nA 20-year-old man said to have harbored Nazi sympathies was arrested on charges of plowing his car into protesters opposing the white nationalists , killing 32-year-old paralegal Heather Heyer and injuring 19 people . The accused , James Fields , was denied bail at a court hearing on Monday .\nSeveral others were arrested in connection with street brawls during the day that left another 15 people injured . And two airborne state troopers involved in crowd control were killed when their helicopter crashed .\nRelated Coverage Scaramucci says Trump must own his initial failure to condemn neo-Nazis\nSaturday ’ s disturbances erupted after white nationalists converged in Charlottesville , home of the University of Virginia ’ s flagship campus , to protest plans for removing a statue of General Robert E. Lee , commander of the pro-slavery Confederate army of the U.S. Civil War .\nTrump ’ s belated denunciation of white supremacists by name was welcomed by Heyer ’ s mother , Susan Bro , who thanked the president for what she called “ those words of comfort and for denouncing those who promote violence and hatred . ”\n“ I wish that he would have said those same words on Saturday , ” responded Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia on MSNBC . “ I ’ m disappointed it took him a couple of days . ”\nA group of community leaders meeting in Charlottesville likewise said they were unimpressed by Trump ’ s latest message .\n“ Why did it take criticism from his Republican buddies to move him ... to adjust the moral compass that he does not possess ? ” said Don Gathers , who serves as chairman for the city ’ s commission on monuments and memorials .\nTrump lashed out at his critics late on Monday on Twitter : “ Made additional remarks on Charlottesville and realize once again that the # Fake News Media will never be satisfied ... truly bad people ! ”\nTrump ’ s revised statement on Charlottesville , following a day of silence despite a rising chorus of outrage over the violence , came after the chief executive of Merck & Co Inc ( MRK.N ) delivered one of the more noteworthy rebukes of the president .\nMerck CEO Kenneth Frazier , who is black , resigned from Trump ’ s American Manufacturing Council , saying expressions of hatred and bigotry must be rejected .\nU.S. President Donald Trump delivers a statement on the deadly protests in Charlottesville , at the White House in Washington , U.S. August 14 , 2017 . ███/Jonathan Ernst\nTrump quickly hit back on Twitter , but made no reference to Frazier ’ s reasons for quitting the panel , instead revisiting a longstanding gripe about expensive medicines . Frazier would have more time to focus on lowering “ ripoff ” drug prices , Trump tweeted .\nFrazier ’ s resignation was followed hours later by two other members of the business panel quitting in protest , Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank and Intel chief Brian Krzanich .\n“ I resigned to call attention to the serious harm our divided political climate is causing to critical issues , including the serious need to address the decline of American manufacturing , ” Krzanich wrote in a blog post .\nThe AFL-CIO organized labor federation that represents 12.5 million workers said it , too , was considering pulling its representative from the committee .\nThe jarring images of violence from Charlottesville and the heated public debate over racism resonated around the world , particularly in Europe where leaders are contending with a wave of xenophobia .\nGerman Chancellor Angela Merkel told broadcaster Phoenix on Monday that clear and forceful action must be taken to counter right-wing extremism , and that “ we have quite a lot to do at home ourselves . ”\nAbout 130 people demonstrated outside the U.S. Embassy in London , some with placards reading “ Fascism is not to be debated , it is to be smashed , ” and “ I am an ashamed American . ”\nThe United Nations said there must be no place in today ’ s societies for the violent racism , anti-Semitism , xenophobia and discrimination on display in Charlottesville .\nAbout 500 protesters assembled in front of the White House for a “ Reject White Supremacy ” rally , then marched to Trump ’ s hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue nearby . In Manhattan , thousands of demonstrators stood outside Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue shouting “ No Trump , no KKK , no fascist USA . ”\nIn Durham , North Carolina , a crowd of demonstrators stormed the site of a Confederate monument outside a court and toppled the bronze statue from its base . Television news footage showed protesters taking turns stomping and kicking the fallen statue as dozens cheered .\nHundreds of miles to the north , a Holocaust memorial in Boston was vandalized , but police said they quickly arrested a 17-year-old boy who was grabbed by onlookers who saw him shatter one of the monument ’ s glass panels with a rock .\nAsked on Monday whether one side was more responsible for the violence than another in Charlottesville , Police Chief Al Thomas said : “ This was an alt-right rally ” - using the term that has become a banner for various far-right ideologies that includes neo-Nazis , white supremacists and anti-Semites .\nFields appeared in a Charlottesville court on Monday by video link from the jail where he was being held on a second-degree murder charge , three counts of malicious wounding and a single count of leaving the scene of a fatal accident . His next court date was set for Aug. 25 .\nSeveral students who attended high school with Fields in Kentucky described him as an angry young man who passionately espoused white supremacist ideology .\nThe U.S. Justice Department was pressing its own federal investigation of the incident as a hate crime .


As protests against racism and police violence swept across the country , drawing massive crowds into the streets amid a pandemic , public health officials worried about what the overall impact would be .\nCOVID-19 IN COLORADO The latest from the coronavirus outbreak in Colorado : MAP : Known cases in Colorado .\nKnown cases in Colorado . TESTING : Here ’ s where to find a community testing site . The state is now encouraging anyone with symptoms to get tested .\nHere ’ s where to find a community testing site . The state is now encouraging anyone with symptoms to get tested . WRITE ON , COLORADO : Tell us your coronavirus stories .\nTell us your coronavirus stories . STORY : How genetic sequencing is helping solve the mystery of coronavirus ’ spread through Colorado nursing homes > > FULL COVERAGE\nWould these protests — which many health leaders said they support — also turn out to be virus super-spreading events ?\nBut a new study by a nationwide research team that includes a University of Colorado Denver professor has found something surprising : The protests may have slowed the overall spread of the coronavirus in cities with large demonstrations , including Denver .\n“ We think that what ’ s going on is it ’ s the people who are not going to protest are staying away , ” said Andrew Friedson , the CU-Denver professor who is one of the paper ’ s co-authors . “ The overall effect for the entire city is more social distancing because people are avoiding the protests . ”\nFriedson ’ s specialty is economics — specifically the economics of health care . The field of COVID-19 research now contains a multitude of subspecialties , and it has often been economists leading the way in understanding how people are changing their behaviors in response to the pandemic .\nMORE : Coloradans are moving around at nearly pre-pandemic levels . Will a second coronavirus wave follow ?\nAs the protests built , Friedson said he and his colleagues took note of the rising concerns about virus ’ spread . He said they also realized they had the ability to answer that question — using official coronavirus case counts and the anonymous , aggregated cell phone data that has become the gold standard for tracking societal shifts in movement .\nThe team worked quickly and published their findings earlier this month as a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper — meaning it has not yet been peer-reviewed .\n“ I ’ m someone who likes to get the answers out , ” Friedson said . “ There are a lot of people who say , ‘ Well I think it should happen or I think this should happen , ’ and it ’ s nice to have some numbers to inform these decision-making processes . ”\nThe paper comes as officials in Colorado and other states are concerned about rising infections , especially among young people .\nNew infections among young people have contributed significantly to Colorado ’ s uptick in cases in recent days — a rise that reversed a weeks-long trend of falling case numbers and has put Colorado back onto the list of potential coronavirus problem spots . Meanwhile , the number of new infections among older Coloradans has dropped .\nAlready registered ? Log in here to hide these messages . Stay on top of it all . Let us bring Colorado ’ s best journalism to you . Get our free newsletters .\nWith the July 4 holiday approaching , Gov . Jared Polis and county health officials have pleaded with people to be responsible and avoid large gatherings .\n“ We don ’ t have the direct causation of this uptick , ” Polis told reporters last week , noting that there is evidence that some young people who are part of an outbreak in Boulder had attended protests while other outbreaks are tied to social gatherings . “ And we hope this is a trend that is reversed in our state . ”\nOn Monday , a spokesman for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment said that , while the state has now seen rising numbers of new cases for two consecutive weeks , “ we have not seen any clear association between the protests and an increase in cases . ”\nThe spokesman , Ian Dickson , said the uptick in infections “ may be partly due to some Coloradans changing their behavior — especially socializing in larger groups , sometimes without proper distancing or mask wearing . ”\nFriedson said his paper doesn ’ t try to figure out whether the protests spread the virus among the people at the protest . Instead , he said the research took the bigger-picture view : What did the protests mean for overall transmission of the virus within the entire community ?\nThe study looked at 315 American cities with populations of more than 100,000 and found that 281 of those cities saw protests . The remaining 34 cities that did not see protests — which , at the time , included Aurora — were used as a control group against which to measure the impact of the protests .\nThe researchers found that protests correlated with a net increase in overall stay-at-home behavior in cities where they occurred — and the increase was larger in cities that saw more sustained protests or reports of violence .\nProtesters in Denver ’ s Capitol Hill neighborhood on Saturday , June 6 , 2020 . ( Jesse Paul . ███ )\nFriedson said he and his colleagues were a bit surprised at first . The protests in many cities , including Denver , were massive , drawing tens of thousands of people out to march . But they occurred in cities with hundreds of thousands to millions of residents .\n“ We started thinking about it a little more and we thought , ‘ Oh my gosh we ’ re capturing everybody else , ’ ” he said .\nThe paper also found that , with greater social distancing , COVID case growth slowed in cities with protests from what would be expected — but not by a statistically significant amount . There may be other explanations for the trends , the study ’ s authors note . Overall , though , they say the data show that any resurgence in coronavirus cases can ’ t be pinned entirely on the protests .\n“ Public speech and public health did not trade off against each other in this case , ” the authors wrote in the paper .\nBut Friedson said there is one last important thing to keep in mind about this study : It ’ s not a green light for governments to fully reopen bars , concert venues and other places where people gather in large numbers . The key to the researcher ’ s conclusions is that the protests , while receiving lots of support , were ultimately things most people decided to avoid . That ’ s not true of many other large gatherings .\n‘ An outdoor wedding doesn ’ t generate avoidance behavior ; we ’ re measuring avoidance behavior , ” Friedson said . “ People don ’ t say , ‘ Oh man , there ’ s an outdoor wedding next door , we should stay home . ’ ”\nOur articles are free to read , but not free to report Support local journalism around the state .\nBecome a member of ███ today ! $ 5/month $ 20/month $ 100/month One-time Contribution


Here ’ s something everyone knows : Social media is driving American politics into a ditch of partisanship . Political junkies log on and cocoon themselves in a bubble of friendly punditry , appealing fake news , and outrageous acts from the other side . Every retweet and every like is another moment of identity confirmation , another high five to our friends , another reminder that we ’ re right and they ’ re wrong .\nThe result is , well , this ugly mess — President Donald Trump , red and blue Americas , polls showing we fear and hate the other party more than ever before , conspiracy theories growing like weeds , a polity where agreement is impossible and everyone is angry . Damn you , Facebook ! Curse you , Twitter ! ( Instagram , you ’ re cool . )\nBut what if this obvious analysis is wrong ? What if social media isn ’ t driving rising polarization in American politics ?\nThat ’ s the conclusion of a new paper by Levi Boxell , Matthew Gentzkow , and Jesse Shapiro . Their study , released recently through the National Bureau of Economic Research , tests the conventional wisdom about polarization on social media nine ways from Sunday and finds that it ’ s wrong , or at least badly incomplete .\nTheir approach is simple . Using data from the American National Election Survey , they compare the most web-savvy voters ( the young , where 80 percent used social media in 2012 ) and the least web-savvy voters ( the old , where fewer than 20 percent used social media in 2012 ) on nine different tests of political polarization . The measures cover everything from feelings about political parties to ideological consistency to straight-ticket voting , and the data shows how polarization changed among these groups between 1996 and 2012 .\nThe results ? On fully eight of the nine measures , “ polarization increases more for the old than the young. ” If Facebook is the problem , then how come the problem is worst among those who don ’ t use Facebook ?\nTo be thorough , Boxell , Gentzkow , and Shapiro also construct panels based on internet access and find much the same thing — polarization is accelerating fastest among those using the internet the least :\nDoes this mean the internet isn ’ t making us more polarized ? Not necessarily . The young are becoming more polarized , and it ’ s possible social media is part of the reason . But given that older Americans who don ’ t use social media are polarizing faster than younger Americans who do , it ’ s clear that this is about more than whom you follow on Twitter .\n“ Something has to explain the rising polarization of older Americans , ” says Gentzkow , an economist at Stanford . “ We don ’ t argue against the view that social media is important . It ’ s just not the whole picture . ”\nI asked Gentzkow what he thinks might be part of the fuller picture . “ I have two main hypotheses , ” he replied . “ One is stuff that has nothing to do with media at all but is structural , like increasing income inequality . The second is non-digital media , and cable TV and talk radio in particular . ”\nThe latter piece makes particular sense if you think about the fact that older Americans make up the base of both the cable and talk radio audiences . More than a third of talk radio listeners are over age 65 , and half of Fox News ’ s audience is over age 68 . As bad as getting your news from Facebook can be , it ’ s often far better than relying on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh .\nThe authors ’ data only goes until 2012 , so it can ’ t tell us much about the 2016 election . But even though Trump ’ s use of Twitter was remarkable , my guess is the main way it mattered was by setting the agenda for more traditional news outlets , particularly cable news and talk radio . Remember , it was seniors — only 6 percent of whom use Twitter — who pushed Trump to the White House . He won 53 percent of voters ages 65 and over , but only 37 percent of voters ages 29 and younger . Trump is the Twitter-using president , not the president chosen by Twitter ’ s users .\nSocial media is new , it is transformative , and it is certainly changing American politics . But it ’ s not the only force at play , nor even the main one . And while it ’ s hard for news junkies ( myself included ) to remember , most people ’ s media feeds tilt more toward baby pictures , wedding announcements , and funny videos than political punditry . Those of us who follow lots of politicians and politicized news sources are outliers , and we shouldn ’ t extrapolate too much from our weird experience .\nWhatever is tearing our politics apart is deeper and more universal than the digital filter bubbles that get so much attention — and it seems to be most powerful among the people least likely to get their news from social media .


Unfortunately , there is no Uncle Sam-sponsored miracle cure that can solve a problem at the root of our nation ’ s government .\nPolitical polarization is harming the effectiveness of the federal government and our ability to solve problems .\nYou could spin a wheel and pick almost any topic under the sun — immigration , Planned Parenthood , religious liberty and the federal deficit to name a few — and find insane comments made about it from the left and right wings of the issue .\nAll of these , and many more , are critical issues that affect almost all of us . Yet there is no approachable middle ground to be found in America today .\nA Pew Research Center survey from 2014 found that we as Americans are more polarized than we have been at any point in the last two decades .\n92 percent of Republicans are more conservative than the average Democrat , which is up from 70 percent in 2004 . And 94 percent of Democrats are more liberal than the average Republican , up from 68 percent of the same year .\nWhile it ’ s no surprise that Democrats are more liberal than Republicans are , it ’ s disappointing to see that each party is now more entrenched within its own views than it ever has been before .\nSo far , very few of the candidates running for president can boast that they have successful bipartisan leadership experience to bring to the table .\nWhile Hillary Clinton did work with congressional Republicans during her tenure as first lady and as a senator from New York , too often her messages towards Republicans have been negative and accusatory .\nHowever , the Republicans themselves are definitely not blameless either . Their current front-runner , businessman Donald Trump , has been characterized by many political figures as being a bully for his remarks towards Democrats and other politicians .\nWho can we look to provide positive examples of cooperation ?\nWe need more leaders like Jon Huntsman , Tom Davis and Richard Lugar , who represented our great state for a total of 36 years .\nWhile each of these political figures might lean more towards one side than the other , they are not afraid to reach across divided aisle ways to find common sense solutions to problems .\nEach of these politicians have served under both Democratic and Republican presidents . They have voted for bills that were crafted by the opposing party , and sometimes they even helped create bills with people from the opposite side of Congress .\nThey are also not motivated to see how popular they can get on cable news or social media .\nThey have ideas , they have experience and they have a vision to get things done . And that ’ s what brings them together .\nI ’ d like to see the talking heads on any cable network be able to do that .\nLike what you 're reading ? Support independent , award-winning college journalism on this site . Donate here .