Australian surfer Taj Burrow wed his partner, childrenswear designer Rebecca Jobson, in a picture-perfect wedding at Caves Road Collective, Wilyabrup, in Western Australia, that the bride described as “understated elegance.” “As Taj has travelled so much in his life, our guest list was never going to be small, so we decided to have a cocktail wedding instead of a sit-down, so it was relaxed and unrestricted and it would be easier to spend more time with our guests,” Rebecca shared.

For her big day, the bride worked with the venue’s wedding manager to help bring to life her dream wedding. “I worked very closely with Georgia Dodd, the wedding manager at our venue. She has such a good eye and the same taste as me, so I basically asked her to take inspiration from previous weddings and tweak it to fit our personalities. It was kind of like a festival of love.”

As for her dress, Rebecca chose a gown by Rime Arodaky worn with Saint Laurent shoes for the ceremony, and a dress by Bowie Rae worn with Tony Bianco shoes for the reception. “My girlfriends and I had booked a trip to Paris, so I decided that was the perfect time to do a bridal fitting,” Rebecca shared of finding the perfect dress. “I was recommended a French designer called Rime Arodaky and the very first dress I tried on made my girlfriends and I cry – it was the one. I was fitted then and there and put my order in. A couple of months later I was approached to do a bridal shoot for a designer starting her new modern bride brand, Bowie Rae. I fell in love with her pieces, so she offered to make me a dress for the reception. She pretty much let me work with her to design my ultimate wedding dress and it turned out to be everything I could have ever dreamed of. I wore Saint Laurent heels for the ceremony – I wanted something simple and strappy – and changed into Tony Bianco heels later. They looked amazing and lasted the whole night on the dance floor.”

Scroll through to go inside the couple’s big day.

The bridal bouquet of long-stemmed roses.

Rebecca shows off her bridal shoes.

Guests catch a first glimpse of the bride.

Just married: the couple are cheered by a gathering of 250 guests, many of whom had travelled from overseas to be there.

The bridal party share a drink and laughter amid the gum trees. “We had food stands immediately after the ceremony so people could dine to their liking. We had two luxury grazing boards, an oyster bar, canapés including goat’s cheese tarts, chicken bites with truffle mayo, mushroom arancini, roasted vegetable stacks and then two big paella pans, a taco bar and salad bar. At the conclusion of the night we had buckets of hot chips with gravy – exactly what people needed.”

The bride outside the cellar door with her six bridesmaids wearing custom dresses in oyster coloured silk.

The bride in a Rime Arodaky gown with the groom in a Tagliatore suit, took their vows under a rustic floral arch and exchanged rings by Aprés Jewelry.

Rebecca in her reception dress by Bowie Rae. “I flew my make-up artist Joanna Luhrs over from Sydney, because I’m so obsessed with her work – she’s so good at keeping things natural while still making you feel like a million bucks. I wanted to be dewy and glowy with bronze and peach tones.” Hair was by Karli from Streaks Ahead.

The couple with their daughter and flower girl Bella, who is wearing a dress from her mother’s childrenswear label, Mini Marley. “We had our speeches early in the day as I didn’t want anyone to have to stress over it for too long. Everyone sat on the grass in front of us, so it was like story time and every single guest (minus the hyperactive flower girl) listened so intently and there were so many laughs. It was so touching and I’ve never felt so much love in one place. It was one of the most incredible moments of my life.”

One of the feature floral installations weaving earthy tones with whites, creams and abundant greenery. “I’ve got a thing for contrasting textures, so this was the theme we went with. The brief was to have flowers in white, cream and earthy colours and for the arrangements to be modern and edgy. We had focus pieces for the floristry in the different areas, which consisted of a mix of dehydrated palm foliage, delicate sea corals, cafe latte roses and cream roses with green foliage intertwined, including prickly palm cactus.”

Pouring the champagne tower to kick off the party. “We made the core focus of the reception the dance floor, with everything based around it. We had wooden chandeliers drooped low over some high marble-top cocktail tables, which had flowers intertwined between them. It was like a magic garden meets a New York dive bar.”Click Here: All Blacks Rugby Jersey

Share

23rd Oct 2019

Days after making her international modelling debut, walking exclusively for Anthony Vaccarello’s Saint Laurent spring/summer 2020 show, 21-year-old Australian model Aylah Peterson spoke to Vogue about the edifying experience set under the twinkling lights of the Eiffel Tower.

While the fine-featured model made her foray into the rather competitive industry at just 15 years of age, she decided to forgo modelling when she graduated high school. At the time, not even she could have guessed that the move to cut off her long lengths in her backyard last Christmas would lead her directly to Paris.

Embracing her new look, Peterson was signed by Kult Models in Sydney with a newfound self-confidence that saw her named as one of Vogue Australia’s future faces in the October 2019 issue. “I couldn’t believe it. I was so shocked and excited,” she recalls.

While Peterson was working abroad in London, her agency secured her a meeting with Saint Laurent’s casting team, an audition that would go on to propel the up-and-coming young model to great new heights.

Two weeks after travelling to the brand’s Parisian mansion dressed in “a black skort dress, sneakers and a cap [while] the other girls were in black skinny jeans, high heels and tank tops,” Peterson had her first fitting, shortly before she was cast in Saint Laurent’s highly-anticipated pre-show film.

“As I was walking towards the location for the film, I looked up to see the Eiffel Tower glistening with yellow lights at night and tears welled up in my eyes,” the model tells Vogue. “It was so beautiful and I felt so grateful for everything that had led me to this moment.”

“When I got to the location, they told me I was going to be filming on top of the Eiffel Tower. I cried again,” she confesses. “It was the most magical night of my life and I’ll never forget that feeling.”

Having committed the career-making moment to memory, Peterson recalls a brief interaction with supermodel Naomi Campbell backstage before the show that was equal parts awe-inspiring and comical.

“Naomi was so graceful, classy and polite,” she shares. “At the rehearsal after we practiced closing, she was running through backstage to get ready for what she thought was the whole finale. She said ‘oh there’s no finale? I thought there was a finale’”. In response, Peterson admits she told the ‘90s icon, “Naomi, you are the finale!” The model adds: “There’s no denying the woman’s a queen”.

After celebrating the feat with fellow model Elise van Iterson, who opened the show wearing micro suit shorts and a cropped blazer, with a coffee and a spot of vintage shopping the following day, it was back to work for Peterson, who confesses she’s eager for what’s next.

“I have so many exciting things happening, just waiting to unfold,” she tells Vogue. “I can’t wait to reveal it all to you. Stay tuned whilst I figure out this new crazy life of mine.”

Click Here: IQOS White

In the late 1800s, a young Italian immigrant named Guccio Gucci worked as a liftboy in the exclusive Savoy Hotel in London. Guests would arrive with beautifully made bags, which inspired Gucci to return to his hometown of Florence – a city known for its exquisite craftsmanship – and open his own luggage company in 1921.

The company progressively expanded from luggage into handbags, eventually adding shoes and apparel into the mix. However, it was after Gucci opened a store in New York City in 1953 that business really took off – American celebrities like Jacqueline Kennedy and Princess Grace of Monaco were photographed wearing the brand, transforming its double-G logo into a luxurious status symbol. To this day Gucci is a top pick for celebrities walking the red carpet, with Alessandro Michele currently at its helm as creative director.

Wood chair with embroidered spaniel, $3,531

Since Michele took over four years ago, Gucci has continued to evolve. In 2017 Gucci Décor was debuted; a branch of the business that offers high-end furniture and decorative objects to customers both in-store and online. The latest Gucci Décor collection has a wide range of whimsical and wondrous pieces to turn even the most staid living room into a wild and creative space, with the luxe maximalism Michele is known for on full display. His favourite motifs from the natural world are embroidered on chairs and printed on plates – you can sit on an extravagant bee or tiger-cushioned chair, and store trinkets in an elaborate bowl printed with a languid cat.

The furniture and objects are fanciful and borderline outrageous – all of them would be right at home in the Los Angeles mansion of a bohemian A-lister. There are scented candles for $1,100, incense holders for $320 and trinket boxes for $915, as well as the items featured in this article.

Wood chair with embroidered tiger, $3,885

The historic company has also well and truly entered the 21st century, with a new feature in their app that allows customers to see what Gucci Décor pieces would look like in their home. It’s an extraordinary offering from Italy’s biggest-selling brand – a fashion house that can make a sunglass chain a must-have item, spray Harry Styles with a gender-neutral fragrance, and sell you a trinket tray for a cool $1,025. Scroll down for every new piece from Gucci’s latest homewares drop.

Wood chair with embroidered bee, $3,885

Mystic cat trinket tray, $355 

Star eye hand-shaped trinket tray, $1,025

GG pattern throw blanket, $1,825

Click Here: habitat tord boontje

GG jacquard armchair, $8,460

See the complete Gucci Décor collection at gucci.com

In Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s eye-opening new ITV documentary, which aired in Australia just last night, the royal pair made the most of the opportunity to take viewers behind the headlines by addressing a number of false allegations and inaccuracies recently reported by British tabloid press.

was filmed throughout the course of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s recent African royal tour and hosted by the Duke of Sussex’s friend, journalist and novelist, Tom Bradby. During the documentary, the journalist highlighted the fact that the pair were eager to turn the relentless media attention they’ve garnered into a positive force for change.

“I went intending to make a documentary that was always going to be about their work in Africa and then a little bit about where they are at in life and I knew that everything wasn’t entirely rosy behind the scenes—that’s true,” Bradby revealed on Good Morning America, per E! News.

“But, all the same, I sort of had intended to turn up probably doing a more conventional journalistic job maybe. I told them beforehand I was going to have to put some pretty pointed questions, but I think the reality I’d found was just a couple that just seemed a bit bruised and vulnerable,” he shared. “I think with mental health and all the rest of it, you have to be very careful what words you use, but that was the story I found and it seemed the right journalistic thing to do to try and tell that story as empathetically as I could.”

Bradby also added that while travelling with Prince Harry, the pair had a series of deep discussions. “After those, I said, ‘Well, listen, let’s just go out and tell the truth as you see it and what happens happens’.”

Read on for the documentary’s key learnings and a comprehensive guide to the truth behind recent headlines, as Prince Harry and Markle work to separate fact from fiction in a series of interviews that were no doubt royal protocol-breaking. 

Prince Harry confirmed his relationship with Prince William has changed
In an interview with Prince Harry, Bradby took it upon himself to address rumours of a rift between Prince Harry and his brother, Prince William. When the journalist asked the royal to comment on said reports, Prince Harry shared their relationship has definitely changed. 

“Part of this role and part of this job and this family, being under the pressure that it’s under, inevitably stuff happens,” he told Bradby. “But we’re brothers, we’ll always be brothers. We’re certainly on different paths at the moment, but I will always be there for him, and as I know, he’ll always be there for me. 

“We don’t see each other as much as we used to because we’re so busy, but you know, I love him dearly, and the majority of the stuff is… well the majority of stuff is created out of nothing,” he added. “But, you know, as brothers you have good days, you have bad days.”

Prince Harry addressed whether or not he and his family would move to Africa
A number of recent reports have suggested that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, together with their son, Archie, have plans to move to Africa in the near future. When given the chance, the host of the documentary asked Prince Harry whether or not those rumours were true. 

“Is this a part of a future, do you think?” Bradby quizzed the Duke of Sussex on the possibility of moving to Africa. “Do you intend to spend more time here, even live here perhaps for a while?”

“I don’t know where we could live in Africa at the moment,” Prince Harry responded. “I’ve just come from Cape Town, that would be an amazing place for us to be able to base ourselves, of course it would. But with all the problems that are going on there, I just don’t see how we’d be able to really make as much difference as we’d want to without the issues and the judgement of how we would be with those surrounding,” he added. Before confirming: “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation.”

Prince Harry spoke passionately about his stance on climate change
During the royal tour of Africa, Prince Harry visited Botswana for the Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy Trust, and touched on the current state of affairs, hot off the heels of the launch of his new travel initiative, Travalyst.

“It’s a race against time, and one which we are losing, everyone knows it, there’s no excuse for not knowing that,” Prince Harry told Bradby, sharing he feels it’s not possible to deny the science behind the escalation of the issue. “I don’t understand how anyone in this world, whoever you are, you, us, children, leaders, whoever it is; no one can deny science. Otherwise we live in a very very troubling world,” he added.

Meghan Markle addressed the truth behind recent scrutiny from British tabloid press
During the documentary, Markle revealed she was warned by friends that the British press would inevitably work to tear her down. 

“When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy, but my British friends said to me ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it, because the British tabloids will destroy your life’,” she told Bradby.

“I never thought that this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair. And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile,” said Markle. “When people are saying things that are just untrue and they are being told they’re untrue but they’re allowed to still say them—I don’t know anybody in the world who would feel like that’s okay.”

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry clarified their reasons for breaking royal protocol and addressing recent rumours
Once the documentary aired, a number of outlets questioned the couple’s motives and raised the point that their comments may only serve to fuel the media’s fire and contribute to the vicious cycle they currently find themselves at the centre of. 

Click Here: pandora Bangle cheap

However, if you happened to tune into the entire 60-minute documentary, you’d be aware of the fact that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry addressed their reasons for breaking royal protocol and talking openly about their feelings towards recent false reports. 

Confessing she takes “each day as it comes”, Markle admitted: “I have said for a long time to H, that’s what I call him, ‘It’s not enough to just survive something. That’s not the point of life. You have got to thrive. You have got to feel happy.’ 

“I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a ‘stiff upper lip’. I really tried, but I think that what that does internally is probably really damaging,” she continued, adding she would understand the scrutiny if it were fair. And given that the royal family are quite passionate about mental health, it makes sense for them to speak up about their own.

Prince Harry also addressed his reason for speaking up about his wife’s “ruthless” treatment. “Part of this job and part of any job, like everybody, means putting on a brave face and turning a cheek to a lot of the stuff… [but] for me and for my wife, of course, there’s a lot of stuff that hurts—especially when the majority of it is untrue,” the duke confessed.

“All we need to do is focus on being real, focus on being the people we are and standing up for what we believe in,” he said. Adding: “I will not be bullied into carrying [on] a game that killed my mum.”

Rep. Seth Moulton offered 2020 Democratic front-runner Joe Biden a backhanded compliment on Friday for reversing his position on federal funding for abortions, challenging Biden to do the same over his vote in favor of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

“Bravo to @JoeBiden for doing the right thing and reversing his longstanding support for the Hyde Amendment. It takes courage to admit when you’re wrong, especially when those decisions affect millions of people,” Moulton, a 2020 presidential candidate, wrote in a tweet.

“Now do the Iraq War," the Massachusetts Democrat added.

Although Moulton suggested Friday that Biden has stood behind his past support for the Iraq invasion, the former vice president said in 2005 that he regretted his vote authorizing the invasion. Asked by then-"Meet the Press" host Tim Russert about his vote to authorize the use of military force against the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, Biden, then a Democratic senator from Delaware, said "it was a mistake."

"It was a mistake to assume the president would use the authority we gave him properly," Biden said of then-President George W. Bush. "I never argued that there was an imminent threat. We gave the president the authority to unite the world to isolate Saddam. And the fact of the matter is, we went too soon. We went without sufficient force. And we went without a plan."

Biden on Thursday abandoned his stance in support of the Hyde Amendment less than 24 hours after having reaffirmed his position in favor of it. The provision, included in annual appropriations bills going back decades, bars the use of federal funding for abortions except in cases of rape or incest or to protect the health of the mother. Critics say it disproportionately affects low-income women and women of color.

The former vice president’s previous support for the Hyde Amendment prompted a quick backlash from 2020 rivals eager to ding the front-runner. In a Democratic primary field in which support for abortion rights has become a litmus test, Biden did an about-face.

"I can’t justify leaving millions of women without access to the care they need and the ability to exercise their constitutionally protected right," Biden said Thursday at a Democratic National Committee gala on empowering minorities. "If I believe health care is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone’s ZIP code."

Biden cited a nationwide “assault” by Republicans on abortion rights as the primary reason for his shift, saying the choking off of abortion clinics across the country necessitated his flip.

Click Here: Spain Football Shop

But Moulton’s decision to go after Biden for his support of the Iraq War, which is still ongoing more than 15 years later, is reminiscent of a rift that dogged Hillary Clinton in her two presidential runs, in which her vote in favor of the U.S. invasion was leveraged against her in the 2008 Democratic primary and the 2016 general election.

A POLITICO/Morning Consult poll last month found that voters overwhelmingly see Biden’s foreign policy experience and time as vice president as assets. But nearly 3 in 10 respondents said they were put off by his 2002 vote in favor of invading Iraq, a figure that jumped to more than 40 percent when isolated to voters ages 18 to 29.

Moulton, a Marine Corps veteran who was among the first U.S. troops to land in Baghdad during the 2003 invasion, has made national security a key part of his campaign. He has frequently spotlighted a host of veterans issues, going as far as revealing his struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder, as he hopes to break through the crowded pack of Democratic presidential hopefuls

Moulton is one of 24 Democrats seeking his party’s nomination for president in 2020, but has struggled to gain early traction. He has failed thus far to qualify via either polling or fundraising for the party’s first primary debate, scheduled for later this month in Miami.

When Washington Gov. Jay Inslee heads to the first-in-the-nation presidential primary state of New Hampshire later this month to test the 2020 waters, he might want to consider adding an apology tour.

Inslee’s decision while he chaired the Democratic Governors Association not to invest in New Hampshire’s competitive governor’s race last year still burns some of the state’s leading Democrats. Ray Buckley, the New Hampshire Democratic Party chair, said the move was so surprising that state Democrats assumed Inslee had abandoned any 2020 aspirations.

Under Inslee, the DGA picked up seven seats in 2018 — a record number for Democrats in the last two decades. Yet in the race that mattered most in New Hampshire, the umbrella governors group was nowhere to be found. Democratic gubernatorial nominee Molly Kelly ultimately lost 53 percent to 46 percent in what otherwise turned out to be a strong Democratic year.

The decision not to spend in New Hampshire is likely to dog Inslee’s upcoming travel to the state for a fundraiser with local Democrats and two public events on college campuses. When Inslee’s first visit to the state this year was announced, longtime Democratic political operative Judy Reardon publicly dinged the governor over Twitter for his “terrible judgment” and for appearing with Kelly at an event last fall but never actually steering any money to her campaign.

“Nobody knows who Jay Inslee is in New Hampshire, so his coming to do a press event in New Hampshire wasn’t for Molly Kelly’s benefit, it was for his benefit,” said Reardon, a former state legislator and former counsel to Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.

She panned Inslee’s past boasts about the DGA spending decisions on his watch.

“You spent $130 million to $150 million — are you serious? And you couldn’t spend a dime to help Molly Kelly win her race?” Reardon said, referring to roughly the amount the DGA raised in 2017-18 election cycle. “I’d love to see the breakdown on how much they spent on losing gubernatorial races in other states. My hunch is a fraction of that would have been a help in New Hampshire.”

Buckley told POLITICO that he would meet with Inslee just like he would with any other potential 2020 candidate who comes through the state and that Inslee would ultimately get a fair shake. But he said local Democrats are still scratching their heads over Inslee’s decision not pump money into Kelly’s campaign against incumbent Republican Gov. Chris Sununu.

“I think some folks in New Hampshire had concluded that since they had made a decision at the DGA not to assist the Democratic gubernatorial campaign in New Hampshire, that he wasn’t running. So it might have taken a few people by surprise that he still expressed interest because usually, the DGA is very supportive of Democratic candidates for their first race here in New Hampshire,” Buckley said.

Democrats were especially miffed, Buckley said, because polling showed Kelly within one point of Sununu a week before the election. As the DGA held back, the Republican Governors Association plowed more than $800,000 into the race.

“They knew based on the same polling as we did but they chose not to play,” Buckley said of the DGA. “I just think people were surprised, disappointed. But maybe they knew something that we didn’t know. Hopefully, they’ll fill us in on that and then we move on.”

The blowback against Inslee is unusual since the chairmanship of both parties’ national gubernatorial campaign committees is often utilized as a springboard to a presidential run. And that dimension of the job often results in favorable treatment to the early states. In 2014, for example, as then-chairman of the Republican Governors Association, Chris Christie showered Iowa with $2.3 million in media and direct contributions to boost then-Gov. Terry Branstad’s reelection campaign. The Christie-led RGA spent even more in New Hampshire for unsuccessful GOP nominee Walt Havenstein.

The DGA didn’t completely abandon Kelly in 2016. The organization did spend money on a private poll of the race for Kelly in the fall, according to two Democratic officials with knowledge of the survey, and it found Kelly lagging well behind Sununu.

Inslee also hosted a fundraiser for Kelly in Seattle, according to a Democrat with knowledge of the DGA’s fundraising events.

But the DGA did not spend a cent on television advertising for Kelly — a stark contrast to the $645,000 the RGA spent on ads for Sununu, according to Advertising Analytics. And in the final few weeks of the race, multiple internal polls on both sides showed the contest had tightened. Kelly personally pleaded with Inslee and the DGA to pour more money into the race saying that it was still winnable, according to Democrats with knowledge of those conversations.

Inslee, according to those Democrats, stressed he still supported Kelly but his hands were tied.

“Governor Inslee is proud to have led the Democratic Governors Association to its most successful cycle in 36 years, flipping 7 gubernatorial seats from red to blue,” said Jamal Raad, a spokesman for the governor. “He enjoyed working closely with Molly Kelly and to personally campaign for her election right after the primary."

One GOP campaign official involved in the governor’s race said Republicans were taken aback by the DGA’s decision to forego an investment in the contest.

“We were extremely surprised that the DGA did not invest more resources in the race, especially in the closing days,” the official said. “Instead, the DGA invested resources in places like Alaska, a race that was already lost for them. And they invested significant resources in states like Rhode Island, which ended up being a blowout for Gov. Raimondo. I still think even with resources by Dems, Sununu would have still won. But if DGA would have invested significant resources from the beginning, it could have been a different outcome.”

Still, the decision to stiff Kelly wasn’t completely unwarranted. With its limited resources, the DGA was forced to make hard choices about where to direct its dollars. In New Hampshire, Sununu enjoyed high approval ratings and a formidable warchest going into the election cycle.

“Running against Sununu was honestly tough and everyone knew that,” said former Democratic state Sen. Burt Cohen. “That was no secret.”

Howard Dean, a former DGA chair and presidential candidate, said he isn’t sure who, if anyone, is to blame but expected Inslee to face frustration from New Hampshire Democratic voters as he feels out the state ahead of 2020.

“I happen to think that Molly was a great candidate and I think she could have won,” Dean said. “A lot of my New Hampshire friends agree with me. I can’t get into the merits of this argument but the thing that interests me is because it’s New Hampshire they have a special role in making people’s lives miserable after the fact.”

Brandon Hall, a veteran Democratic consultant, said Inslee’s tenure at the DGA clearly focused on helping the organization win governor’s races — and not his own political ambition.

“If he was in that position while thinking about running for president and he was making decisions based on where the DGA should invest based on his own personal politics rather than the organization, that would be a problem,” Hall said of the governor. “He did not do that.”

The Democratic Governors Association is routinely outraised by its Republican counterpart which pushes the Democratic organization to be strategic about its spending, said Nathan Daschle, who served as DGA executive director from 2007 to 2010.

“It’s often the case that after an election people in state have a different view of the prospect’s the losing candidate had versus people in D.C. So I think this is pretty common,” Daschle said, going on to stress that DGA had an “incredible” election year.

Daschle added that the DGA “often has a much higher burden to have very surgically strategic investments. They don’t have the luxury of throwing around lots of money. So every single dollar has to be well vetted and has to go where you get the best return.”

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

Kamala Harris keeps getting asked if she’s black enough.

And the California Democrat — whose presidential campaign is closely monitoring questions around her candidacy shared among African Americans and young people — has been more than happy to answer.

Harris’ decision to sit for extended radio interviews with black hosts at the outset of her run is part of a broader strategy for the half-Jamaican, half-Indian former prosecutor. It’s designed to give her the chance to directly confront the uncomfortable and offensive internet memes about her personal life before they can metastasize among voters, three advisers to Harris said.

In recent days, Harris has parried skepticism over everything from claims to her black heritage to her decision to marry a white man — bluntly putting down markers on nuanced topics to help inoculate her from false critiques with answers that also illuminate how she views her own identity.

“Nothing that she is saying is newly found or newly acquired,” said Danny J. Bakewell, Sr., executive publisher of the Los Angeles Sentinel, the oldest and largest black-owned newspaper on the West Coast, who has known Harris for years. But Bakewell argued she’s been smart — “not to mention honest” — to take the difficult questions early on rather than ignoring the memes.

“That fuels fire. They can make something out of that,” he added of her critics. “When you hit them square in the eye, and say, ‘Yep, this is what it is’ … That cannot go wrong.”

A Harris strategist told POLITICO that the campaign has been watching the early impressions of her play out online — and looking for the best places where she could address and rebut them.

“We know the memes that are out there,” the aide said. Using one of the senator’s catch-phrases to explain the choice of venues, the adviser added: “She’s meeting people where they are.”

Harris sat for a wide-ranging chat with “The Breakfast Club” that aired Monday. The radio show’s hosts, DJ Envy and Charlamagne Tha God, are both black. She answered doubts about her African-American heritage because her father emigrated from Jamaica and her mother came from India — and because Harris spent time in Canada as a student.

Harris recounted how she was born in Oakland and raised in California, aside from the time she went to high school in Montreal. She compared the treatment to persistent questions asked of Barack Obama and his surrogates — including Harris herself — while he was a candidate in 2007 and 2008, and stretching into his presidency.

“Look, this is the same thing they did to Barack. This is not new to us and so I think that we know what they are trying to do,” Harris said. “They are trying to do what has been happening over the last two years, which is powerful voices trying to sow hate and division among us, and so we need to recognize when we’re being played.”

The hosts asked how she responds to questions about the “legitimacy of your blackness.”

“I think they don’t understand who black people are,” Harris responded. “Because if you do, if you walked on Hampton’s campus, or Howard’s campus, or Morehouse or Spelman or Fisk, you would have a much better appreciation for the diaspora, for the diversity, for the beauty in the diversity of who we are as black people," she said, referring to historically black universities.

"I’m not going to spend my time trying to educate people about who black people are,” Harris concluded, contending she was focused on her tax-credit bill. “We know that we will lift 60 percent of black households with this initiative.”

Still, she later sought to put the race question to rest.

“I am black and I am proud of it," she said bluntly. "I was born black and I’ll die black and I am proud of it. And I am not gonna make any excuses for it, for anybody, because they don’t understand.”

The source of the memes isn’t always clear, though Harris supporters have generally attributed much of the mysterious content that’s not derived or spread by Russian bots to Trump backers or supporters aligned with other Democrats.

Harris’ effort to get ahead of the memes is informed in part by Hillary Clinton’s general refusal to engage with the darker parts of the web, something that worked to Trump’s advantage. And it comes with the experience of having watched Obama early on in his first campaign mostly refuse to entertain deeper examinations of his race.

Harris seldom faced such scrutiny while climbing the ranks in California. But social media slings and arrows have been coming hard at her since she first surfaced on the national scene as a potential presidential candidate. Much of the earlier criticism focused on whether Harris — whose lack of a record on key issues at the time provided an opening — was sufficiently progressive. In more recent months, she’s been heavily scrutinized for her decades in law enforcement in the context of Black Lives Matter.

So Harris has practically invited uncomfortable discussions — and prepared her answers ahead of time.

She’s met questions about her prosecutorial past by diving into systemic racism and problems with mass incarceration. She broadly contends it’s a myth that black people don’t want law enforcement — “We do,” she said in the Monday interview.

“We don’t want excessive force. We don’t want racial profiling. But certainly, if somebody robs, burglarizes my house, I’m going to call the police.”

Harris has used the stops to raise broader discussions of her agenda for African-Americans. When asked, the senator said she is in favor of some form of reparations. “We have got to recognize, back to that earlier point, people aren’t starting out on the same base in terms of their ability to succeed,” she said. “So, we have got to recognize that and give people a lift up.”

Basil Smikle, a Democratic strategist who worked for Clinton and served as the executive director of the New York Democratic Party, said Harris is right to want to get ahead of various concerns because she’ll need the support of the African-American community, and in particular African-American men, who are disproportionately affected by harsh laws.

“If she’s associated with that level of harshness, it will hurt her at a time when criminal justice reform is on the top of the agenda for African Americans, broadly,” Smikle said.

And in an environment where African-American women have emerged as one of the strongest forces behind the Democratic Party, Harris is going to have to be able to glide in and out of the communities and make a case that will motivate them to vote for her.

“The community is not monolithic, so I think evaluations of her blackness are not appropriate,” Smikle said. “But at the same time, she has to articulate an agenda community to community across the country.”

That starts with shooting down falsehoods. On “The Breakfast Club” program, Harris was asked about a meme saying she broke the state record for incarcerating black men.

“That’s just not true,” she said.

Did Harris lock anyone up in her truancy program, she was asked?

“No,” she said, contending the intention of her initiative was to put a spotlight on the issue of children missing school, even if it meant she would be viewed as “the bad guy.”

“There’s going to be all kinds of allegations being made, and I invite — not only invite — I encourage folks to look at the real record.”

Other attacks she’s being asked about are deeply personal, including from those who question why she married a white man.

“Look,” she said, “I love my husband. And he happened to be the one I chose to marry because I love him … And he loves me.”

At another point, the hosts asked the Howard University graduate and daughter of civil rights activists why people say she’s pandering to black people.

Concluded Harris: “They don’t know me.”

Katie Galioto contributed to this report.

ABC News, in partnership with Univision, will host the third Democratic presidential debate in September, the Democratic National Committee announced Wednesday, saying it was raising both the polling and fundraising bars for candidates to qualify.

The debate is set for Sept. 12 and could extend to a second night, Sept. 13, if enough candidates meet the threshold to participate. The location and moderators have not yet been announced.

Like the first two Democratic presidential debates — which are set for next month on NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo and for July on CNN — the September debate and a fourth, to be held in October, will cap participants at 10 per night.

But it will be more difficult for the nearly two dozen 2020 Democratic hopefuls to make the stage.

Unlike the first and second rounds of debates, when candidates must cross either a donor or polling threshold to qualify, candidates will need to surpass both bars to make the stage for the third and fourth debates. For the September event, candidates will have to hit 2 percent in four qualifying polls, versus 1 percent in three polls for the first debates, and they will need 130,000 individual donors, up from 65,000.

Although the polling threshold increase is modest, it could represent a significant barrier for many candidates who have struggled to hit that mark in early polling.

According to a POLITICO analysis, just eight candidates have received more than 2 percent of support in four early polls: former Vice President Joe Biden, Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker, Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas.

Only polls published between June 28 (the day after the first round of Democratic debates) and Aug. 28 will count toward qualifying for the third debate in September.

Most campaigns have released little information about the number of individual donors they have, besides announcing when they cross the 65,000-donor mark. Sanders, Buttigieg, Harris and Warren have all publicly said they’ve surpassed 130,000 donors.

Other candidates who may have already exceeded that threshold include O’Rourke (who said he had 112,000 unique donors in his first day) and Biden (who had 96,000 donors in his first day).

Erin Hill, the executive director of ActBlue, a Democratic online fundraising platform that will verify donations, said in a statement that “candidates who will be prepared to take on Trump in the general should already be working to build programs that can bring in 130,000 donors by the second round of debates.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

As the front-runner in the Democratic primary, Joe Biden is likely to be dodging arrows in Thursday’s debate.

But rival Democrats trying to distinguish themselves from the former vice president — or looking for a breakout moment by sticking it to Biden — might want to proceed with caution.

Many of the same Democrats who are expected to take swipes at Biden, even those not sharing the stage with him, didn’t hesitate to kiss the ring when he served under Barack Obama. Their high praise could come back to haunt them: fanboy comments, selfies, tweets and even news conferences holding up Biden as a beacon in the Democratic Party.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, his closest rival in the polls, is among those expected to draw sharp contrasts with Biden on stage. He’s already criticized Biden for voting for the Iraq War and free trade deals. But it wasn’t that long ago when Sanders, in a press availability, heaped praise on the former vice president.

“Joe Biden is a man who has devoted his entire life to public service and to the well-being of working families and the middle class,” Sanders said in 2015. “He made a difficult decision based on the needs of his family and the view of his future and I respect the decision he made.”

“I want to thank Joe Biden and President Obama for the work that they have done over the last seven years in making very significant improvements to our economy,” Sanders went on. “Obviously, we have a long way to go. But because of Joe Biden, because of President Obama we have seen significant progress in the last seven years.”

Sanders, of course, made the remarks after Biden announced he wouldn’t run for president in 2016.

“In this business you learn early: no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, only permanent issues,” said Antjuan Seawright, a South Carolina-based Democratic strategist. “I think the vice president is getting a taste of that first hand.”

Sen. Kamala Harris, who blasted Biden for his recent remarks about segregationist senators, has also vouched for him in the past. In 2016, she wrote this: “@JoeBiden is a good man with a big heart. He has worked tirelessly throughout his career to improve the lives of millions.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Among the Democratic contenders who will be debating the night before Biden takes the stage, Sen. Cory Booker has been among the most outspoken critics of Biden’s remarks about segregationist senators in recent days, calling on Biden to apologize.

But in 2008, Booker, then still a Newark mayor, was swept up in a Obama-Biden fervor.

“Waving a Biden sign, topped with an American flag, he said the vice presidential nominee had done an exceptional job of showing that John McCain’s ‘longevity doesn’t equal expertise,’” according to an account from the Democratic convention in Denver. “Biden, he said, had shown himself to be a ‘real guy with a good heart who loves his family and loves his country. And people felt that.’”

After Obama tapped Biden as his running mate in 2008, Booker was quoted in his local paper, the Star-Ledger, calling Biden “an old hand, but also a maverick, just like Obama.”

Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan in 2016 said if Biden had run for president “he would have been a powerful candidate.”

“He is an extraordinary public servant who has made it his life’s mission to speak out on the issues important to the nation and be a voice for hard working Americans,” Ryan said at the time.

Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke is another who has described Biden as exceptional leader. In March, when asked if Biden should run for president, he said: “I don’t see why not … I think he’s done an extraordinary job for this country as senator and as vice president … I think very highly of him.”

There is a way for Democrats to get around the fact that they’ve been highly complimentary to Biden in the past and that’s by not taking him on directly, but focusing criticisms on a specific policy or specific comments he’s made, said Doug Rubin, a Boston-based Democratic strategist.

“It’s easier to say: ‘Joe Biden is a good person, but I disagree with him on this certain policy,’” said Rubin. “That will allow them to avoid the hypocrisy argument.”

But there’s still a risk, he said.

“There’s a downside to attacking Joe — he’s well-liked by a lot of Democratic primary voters,” said. “If that’s your strategy and if you think that’s the way to stand out, you got to be smart about it and do it in a way that isn’t going to alienate those voters.”

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team are nowhere close to launching impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump — with the chances diminishing as the 2020 election moves ever closer.

Democratic lawmakers and senior aides say Pelosi and her deputies are unmoved despite a groundswell of impeachment talk among rank-and-file members who are infuriated by Trump’s stonewalling of congressional investigations.

And absent any bombshell testimony from Attorney General William Barr or special counsel Robert Mueller stemming from his report, they say, senior Democrats view the approaching 2020 election season as a likely hard deadline for any impeachment push.

“Everything’s got to be done this year. Next year, forget about it,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell of New Jersey, who said he sees more rank-and-file Democrats leaning toward impeachment but noted everything rides on Pelosi.

Even the most ardent supporters of ousting the president concede that the chance of launching proceedings against Trump gets slimmer once all of Washington — and the country — becomes consumed by the presidential election, and Democrats will be wary of an impeachment backlash.

“There’s a certain point in time … it becomes an issue, for sure,” said Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky, an impeachment supporter, of the looming calendar.

Added a senior Democratic aide: “The closer you get to an election year, it’s not going to happen,” the aide said. “I don’t see any way we go there. I just don’t think there’s enough there.”

It’s a sign of how little has actually changed since the release of Mueller’s report, which some Democratic supporters of impeachment had hoped would be the catalyst they needed to spur a formal impeachment inquiry.

The report, plus Trump’s escalating hostility toward congressional subpoenas and investigations, has sparked even some seasoned Democrats to suggest they’re more open to impeachment than they had been. But they make clear that without Pelosi’s blessing, the effort is dead.

“More members that speak out may think that this is what’s going to bring about a new reality,” Pascrell said. “I don’t think so. Nancy has to be committed.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Even Democrats who have recently spoken up in favor of impeachment, like Rep. Val Demings of Florida, said they see why Pelosi and other members of leadership aren’t moving in that direction.

“I think the leadership has to be like a good quarterback. They have to have the ability to see the entire field,” said Demings, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, the panel tasked with launching impeachment proceedings.

Leadership aides and top lawmakers say Pelosi’s calculus has not changed, despite devastating evidence outlined in Mueller’s report on Trump’s alleged attempts to obstruct justice and the president’s bellicose posture toward congressional subpoenas.

The main conditions Pelosi and other senior lawmakers have said must be met if Democrats are going to pursue impeachment — a well of public support and at least some Republican buy-in — have not materialized since Mueller’s full report was released less than two weeks ago.

And it’s not just Pelosi. Other senior members of her team, like Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, are in lockstep.

Still, Pelosi, Hoyer and Clyburn have not ruled out impeaching the president. They want to allow the six committees investigating Trump’s administration, finances and businesses to continue their work — using the Mueller report as a road map. House Democrats will make a final decision once those probes are finished.

“We are not going to over-politicize, we are not going to over-investigate, we are not going to overreach,” New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the No. 5 House Democrat, said Tuesday. “But we are not going to run away from our constitutional responsibilities.”

But the speaker and her top deputies know they must strike a delicate balance between the party’s liberal base — clamoring for impeachment proceedings — and more moderate swing voters, who might be turned off by what could be perceived as Democratic overreach without any Republican support. House Democrats could win the fight over impeachment and lose the war over Trump’s presidency.

And right now, both the public and the caucus aren’t there.

Impeachment didn’t come up at all during Democrats’ closed-door caucus meeting Tuesday, their first time together since the Mueller report was released. And members across the ideological spectrum said voters rarely — if ever — asked about Mueller report and impeachment in their districts during the two-week congressional recess.

Illinois Rep. Cheri Bustos, a swing-district Democrat who also chairs the caucus’ campaign arm, said no one brought up impeachment during her public events. And Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who represents one of the bluest House districts, said the topics were also barely raised during his time back home.

“While, around here, people like to ask the impeachment question, I think it’s less back home now than prior to the report. Because people understand there’s some easy, simple steps we have to do,” Pocan said in an interview, noting the ongoing investigations by various House panels. “And the president, again, will really expose himself if he doesn’t cooperate.”

Still, the actual appetite for impeachment inside the caucus could soon be on full display. Rep. Al Green of Texas, a longtime impeachment pusher, is promising to force another vote on the issue on the House floor, although he won’t say when. House Democratic leaders are not working behind the scenes to force Green to back off, according to aides, but don’t expect his effort to be successful.

“You can’t impeach someone for threatening to do something,” a senior Democratic aide said of Trump’s promises to continue stymieing House investigations. “Will that lead to more people probably calling for him to be impeached? Yes. But will it lead to impeachment? Not necessarily.”

In the absence of a more concerted push toward impeachment, Democrats have begun floating other draconian measures to punish Trump and his allies — from raising the prospect of levying fines and jailing those who don’t cooperate with their investigations to formally censuring Trump to challenging the president in court.

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee said Democrats’ increasingly aggressive tactics amount to an attempt to convince their base they’re taking the hardest possible line against Trump without actually opening impeachment proceedings.

“They know they don’t have the will or fortitude to have an impeachment resolution,” Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) said.

Collins characterized the Democrats’ efforts to investigate Trump for obstruction of justice and to spar with Barr over access to Mueller’s report as a “sideshow of theatrics” because “they didn’t get what they wanted out of the report.”

Since the Mueller report was published, the president has filed two federal lawsuits to block banks and accounting firms from complying with subpoenas for his financial records, accusing Democrats of trying to stifle his presidency with one-sided investigations.

“I think the president is responsible for the fact that more members are openly talking about it,” said Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.). “He is of the belief that our Article I authority represents a coup. And he is trying to create an environment where it looks like this. So who knows? Maybe he wants this.”

Sarah Ferris contributed to this report.