Category: News

Home / Category: News

Michel Aumont est décédé ce jeudi 29 août à 82 ans. Célèbre acteur de théâtre, il était apparu au cinéma dans beaucoup de seconds rôles et totalisait trois nominations aux César.

Après un passage au Conservatoire puis à la Comédie Française, Michel Aumont s’illustre sur les planches jusqu’à la moitié des années 70. La télévision fait ensuite appel à lui, principalement pour des adaptations de grandes pièces du répertoire classique. En parallèle, l’acteur fait ses débuts au cinéma en 1972 avec un rôle dans La Femme en bleu de Michel Deville.

Le flic par excellence

Lancé par ce dernier, l’acteur ne tarde pas à séduire les plus grands noms de la mise en scène, qui lui font souvent jouer des rôles de commissaires, tels Claude Chabrol pour Nada ou Claude Zidi pour La Course à l’échalote. On le voit aussi au générique du Jouet de Francis Veber, de Mort d’un pourri de Georges Lautner ou encore de Coup de tête de Jean-Jacques Annaud. Acteur de second plan particulièrement apprécié, également employé en homme politique ou homme de loi, Michel Aumont se fait un peu plus discret dans les années 80, apparaissant toutefois aux génériques des Compères de Francis Veber, en 1983, et d’Un dimanche à la campagne de Bertrand Tavernier un an plus tard.

L’acteur refait le commissaire en 1990 pour Ripoux contre ripoux et reçoit dix ans plus tard le titre d’Officier de la Légion d’Honneur. Variant les genres, il s’illustre ensuite en costumes dans le Beaumarchais, l’insolent d’Edouard Molinaro et poursuit sa riche collaboration avec Francis Veber, en le retrouvant pour ses réalisations des années 2000 (Le Placard, Tais-toi !, La Doublure). En 2004, il fait une apparition dans Clara et moi d’Arnaud Viard avant de se glisser dans la peau du chef du protocole, dans la comédie Palais royal ! de Valérie Lemercier l’année suivante.

Tous les rôles, tous les genres

Après deux années centrées sur le théâtre, l’acteur revient au cinéma grâce au drame dans lequel il interprète le père de Catherine Frot. Il s’oriente ensuite vers la télévision, enchaînant série (A droite toute) et téléfilms (Braquage en famille, La Reine morte). Après avoir participé à la comédie chorale Bancs publics (Versailles rive droite) de Bruno Podalydès, Michel Aumont s’essaye au thriller politique avec La Sainte Victoire, côtoyant ainsi Christian Clavier et Clovis Cornillac. L’année 2010 est une année chargée pour lui, l’acteur étant en moins d’un mois à l’affiche de deux comédies, Toutes les filles pleurent de Judith Godrèche, et Les Invités de mon père d’Anne Le Ny, ainsi que du film policier d’Alexandre Arcady, Comme les cinq doigts de la main, avec Patrick Bruel, Vincent Elbaz et Pascal Elbé au casting.

En phase avec la nouvelle génération

L’acteur refait un tour par la comédie quelques mois plus tard en incarnant le “so scottish” Sir Woolish dans Imogène McCarthery, avant de retrouver le drame, genre dans lequel il a commencé en reprenant Sophocle au théâtre. Il joue ainsi dans Un balcon sur la mer, puis Je m’appelle Bernadette, pour lequel il endosse le costume de l’abbé Peyramale aux prises avec Bernadette Soubirous, la miraculée de Lourdes. Définitivement à l’aise dans tous les registres, Michel Aumont se plaît à varier les genres, à l’instar d’un musicien faisant ses gammes. En 2012, l’un des derniers grands seigneurs du théâtre français n’hésite ainsi pas à participer au décomplexé La Clinique de l’amour ! et au très léger Paris Manhattan, pour lequel il retrouve Alice Taglioni et Patrick Bruel.

Ces dernières années, il était revenu au cinéma pour Olivier Baroux (On a marché sur Bangkok), Jean-François Davy (Vive la crise) et Patrice Gautier (Moi et le Che). Il avait enfin été le père de François Damiens dans la drôle de comédie Des nouvelles de la planète Mars.

Découvrez-le en Sir Woolish dans “Imogène McCarthery” :

Imogène McCarthery Bande-annonce VF

 

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Formula 1 starts Ultra HD TV trials

November 28, 2019 | News | No Comments

Formula 1 is finally moving into the ultra high definition arena following a conclusive trial at the Singapore Grand Prix and ahead of broadcasting the entire 2017 season in UHD.

Production and broadcasting last weekend was handled by F1 technical partner Tata in association with Sky, and included several state-of-the-art UHD cameras whose images were blended with those supplied by FOM’s Broadcast Centre.

“UHD offers four times higher resolution than HD, making F1 a more powerful, immersive experience for fans than ever before,” said Keith Lane, Sky’s director of operations.

“The success of this proof of concept in Singapore shows that we’re on track to show every race live in UHD next season using our next-generation Sky Q home entertainment service, and to continue to give our customers the action-packed F1 experiences that they crave.”

UHD requires superfast network connectivity, the backbone of which could also be used for Formula 1’s plans involving a Virtual Reality experience.

“Other game-changing technologies like Virtual Reality will rely on ubiquitous, superfast connectivity too,” explained Mehul Kapadia, the managing director of F1 business at Tata Communications.

“As the break-neck speed of technology innovation continues, we’ll work with Formula One Management to enable fans to experience the exhilarating world of F1 in new ways.”

Scene at the 2016 Singapore Grand Prix

Quotes of the week – 2016 Singapore Grand Prix

2016 Singapore Grand Prix – Driver ratings

REPORT: Rosberg takes title lead after Singapore thriller 

Keep up to date with all the F1 news via Facebook and Twitter

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Based on the pace Force India’s drivers had shown since the start of the weekend, Sergio Perez solid P5 qualifying performance came as no surprise this afternoon at Spa.

The Mexican put in a series of consistent runs in each segment, ending up just over two tenths behind second-row man Daniel Ricciardo while just edging out team mate Nico Hulkenberg.

“My lap was a good one,” said Perez.

“We got as much as we could out of the session: I made a small mistake at the end of my lap and I could have been about a tenth faster, but that’s all we lost.

“Q3 was a bit more difficult with the wind picking up, both my runs were not ideal but even if we had gotten the perfect lap I don’t think we could have beaten Ricciardo. I think we are in a really strong position for the race and I am really looking forward to tomorrow. “

REPORT: Rosberg edges out Verstappen and Raikkonen for pole at Spa

Perez is expecting a difficult start to his afternoon tomorrow however, as he will be launching his race on the fragile SuperSoft compound which are scheduled to last only a handful of laps if the weather remains hot.

Checo remains optimistic nevertheless, and resolute on extracting the most of the potential opportunity he believes he enjoys.

“Some of the cars ahead of me are starting on the soft tyre compound, which should be a big advantage for them, but we are still in good shape to get a strong result.

“It’s important tomorrow – and the rest of the year – to make sure we maximize the whole potential of the car.

“There will be a variety of strategies at play and I hope we can move forward, enjoy the battles and bring home some points.

“The hot weather is making it really difficult for everyone – you reach a point where you can’t go any further with the tyres.

“Strategy and making the right calls at the right time will be very important: you don’t want to be on the wrong tyres at the start of such a long lap because it’s going to cost you.”

While Force India appears to now have a firm upper hand over Williams, Perez believes the team should exclusively focus on itself and not its relative performance compared to its rivals.

“To be honest, we’re not really concerned about Williams. We’re basically focusing on ourselves and making sure that we maximize every single session.  Tomorrow will be an important race for the championship.”

Silbermann says … Spa too hot

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Romain Grosjean column: More motivated than ever

Chris Medland’s 2016 Belgian Grand Prix preview

Keep up to date with all the F1 news via Facebook and Twitter

Célèbre interprète du ténébreux Floki dans la série “Vikings”, Gustaf Skarsgård fera partie des personnalités invitées lors du Comic Con Paris 2019, qui se tiendra les 25, 26 et 27 octobre prochains à la Grande Halle de La Villette.

Notamment célèbre pour avoir incarné le bâtisseur de drakkars Floki dans la série Vikings et le chef des opérations de Delos dans la saison 2 de Westworld, l’acteur suédois Gustaf Skarsgård, fils de Stellan Skarsgård, viendra à la rencontre de ses fans les samedi 26 et dimanche 27 octobre à la Grande Halle de La Villette, à l’occasion du Comic Con Paris 2019.

Personnage emblématique de Vikings depuis la toute première saison de la série, Floki a compté parmi les alliés les plus fidèles de Ragnar, risquant sa vie pour lui à de nombreuses reprises. Dans la dernière saison, il partait sur les mystérieuses côtes islandaises dans l’espoir d’y fonder une colonie digne des dieux nordiques.

Les invités ciné-séries du Comic-Con Paris 2019 :

l’équipe de Comment je suis devenu super-héros

Gustaf Skarsgård (Vikings, Westworld…)

Karen Gillan (Doctor Who, Avengers…)

Callan Mulvey (Hartley, coeurs à vif, Batman v Superman…)

Amy Acker (Angel, Person of Interest…)

Ryan Meinerding (directeur de création de Marvel Studios et auteur de bon nombre de concept arts pour les films)

En attendant le Comic Con Paris 2019, (re)découvrez la bande-annonce de “Vikings” saison 6…

Vikings – saison 6 Bande-annonce VO

 

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

There could be some good news on the way for thousands of ordinary depositors in the scam-hit Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative Bank (PMC) who had been running from pillar-to-post to get their money back.

This after the promoters of the now-bankrupt Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL) has sought to sell off their assets, including a yacht, a Rolls Royce and an aircraft, to pay off the bank’s dues.

BCCL

MEXICO CITY — 

Mexican authorities were seeking a high-level meeting with their U.S. counterparts Tuesday following President Trump’s revelation that Washington planned to designate Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations.

The statement — made by Trump in an interview with Bill O’Reilly, the former Fox News host — appeared to stun Mexican officials, who have already declared their opposition to the idea.

“Absolutely, they will be designated,” Trump said of the Mexican cartels, according to a transcript of the radio interview posted on O’Reilly’s website. “Look, we are losing 100,000 people a year to what is happening and what is coming through from Mexico.”

Trump’s comments came almost three weeks after gunmen in northern Mexico killed six children and three women, U.S. citizens and members of a Mormon fundamentalist group residing in Mexico’s Sonora state. Mexican officials have said that the victims may have been ambushed in a case of mistaken identity in a zone where rival drug gangs battle for turf.

Those killings highlighted the ongoing cartel violence that has cost tens of thousands of lives in Mexico in recent years.

Many in Mexico, however, worry that a formal U.S. designation of Mexican cartels as terrorist groups could lead to greater U.S. interference in Mexico’s internal affairs.

“Mexico will not allow any action that signifies violation of its national sovereignty,” Mexico’s foreign secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, said Tuesday in a Twitter message following Trump’s comments. “Mutual respect is the basis of cooperation.”

Trump’s comments immediately ignited an uproar from Mexican lawmakers and other critics, while the country’s foreign ministry said that Ebrard was seeking to clarify the issue with U.S. Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo.

“Given the good relations that exist between both countries, the Government of Mexico will seek a high-level meeting as soon as possible to present the position of Mexico and to learn the points of view of authorities in the United States,” Mexico’s foreign ministry said in a statement Tuesday.

Mexican authorities have repeatedly stressed that illicit drugs shipped via Mexico are destined for the U.S. market and that guns and cash bound for cartels enter Mexico from U.S. territory.

The government of Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador — a leftist who took office nearly a year ago — has maintained cordial relations with the Trump administration and has cooperated with Washington on a number of thorny bilateral issues, notably immigration.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

It was unclear if the State Department — which is the U.S. government agency tasked with designating groups as “foreign terrorist organizations” — had yet alerted Congress of its intention to name Mexican drug cartels as terrorist groups.

Cecilia Sanchez of The Times’ Mexico City bureau contributed to this report.


Column: Trump's war on the rule of law

November 28, 2019 | News | No Comments

WASHINGTON — 

Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a decorated Navy SEAL, was accused by other members of his unit of war crimes, including stabbing a wounded prisoner in Iraq who was awaiting medical care.

After a military trial delayed by prosecutorial misconduct, Gallagher was acquitted of murder this summer but convicted of posing for a photograph with the prisoner’s corpse. He had texted the picture with a caption: “Got him with my hunting knife.”

Gallagher said he was railroaded by subordinates who chafed under his leadership. He found a powerful ally in Fox News, which brought his case to the attention of a more powerful ally, President Trump.

Over the weekend, Trump intervened to stop the Navy from stripping Gallagher of his membership in their elite ranks and taking away his SEAL badge, the Trident.

In doing that, Trump overruled his own secretary of Defense, Mark Esper; his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Mark Milley; his secretary of the Navy, Richard V. Spencer; and the SEAL commander, Rear Adm. Collin Green.

“I’m standing up for our armed forces,” Trump said.

He was blunter last month. “We train our boys to be killing machines, then prosecute them when they kill!” he tweeted.

Let’s add up the damage here.

Trump has suggested that U.S. troops shouldn’t be prosecuted for murdering civilians, even though it’s a violation of military law. In addition to Gallagher, he has pardoned three Army officers convicted in military courts of murder, including one who killed an unarmed, naked Iraqi man during an interrogation.

Trump has made clear that military justice can be derailed by anyone with well-connected backing. And he has undercut the authority of the Pentagon’s entire chain of command.

“It’s an invitation to chaos,” Eugene Fidell, who teaches military law at Yale, told me.

“The president has weaponized the administration of the armed forces. Who gets promoted? Who gets to retain their aviator’s wings? Who gets to keep their rank? It depends on whether you have influential friends or a lawyer who can call the White House.”

Trump’s personal intervention in the administration of justice extends to civilian cases, too — at least when his friends are involved.

He has pardoned former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, one of his most vociferous allies, convicted of violating a court order to stop racially profiling Latinos; conservative author Dinesh D’Souza, another supporter, convicted of directing illegal campaign donations to a U.S. Senate candidate; and Conrad Black, a former newspaper mogul convicted of fraud, who wrote an enthusiastic book titled “Donald J. Trump: A President Like No Other.”

The president also commuted the sentence of a woman serving life in prison for nonviolent cocaine trafficking charges — but only after reality television star Kim Kardashian West pleaded the woman’s case in the Oval Office.

Whatever the merits, all of those cases had one thing in common: None went through the Justice Department’s formal process for pardons and clemency. All were arranged through personal appeals to the president — a patronage channel that turns justice into a question of personal favors.

By the same token, Trump has often demanded that federal authorities investigate, or even imprison, his critics, adversaries and political opponents.

He provided a handy catalog of his targets in a single tweet after a federal jury convicted his longtime confidant Roger Stone on all charges, including lying to Congress and tampering with a witness.

“So they now convict Roger Stone of lying and want to jail him for many years,” the president complained, and then named a dozen supposed enemies, from Hillary Clinton to former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. “Didn’t they lie? A double standard like never before in the history of our Country?”

It sounds as if Trump’s already planning a pardon for Stone and other loyalists convicted of federal crimes in his service, including Michael Flynn, his first national security advisor, and Paul Manafort, his 2016 campaign chairman — presumably after the 2020 presidential election.

Meanwhile, the president and his lawyers say he is immune from every kind of prosecution.

His lawyers have argued that a sitting president cannot be investigated, let alone indicted — not even if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue. His White House counsel claims the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is somehow “unconstitutional,” and asserts he is exempt from answering congressional subpoenas.

As usual, Trump is saying the quiet part out loud. Through his pardons, both military and civilian, he’s sending a clear message: If you’re on his side, as former Navy Secretary Spencer put it, “You can get away with things.”

Trump is often criticized for breaking “norms,” a word that makes it sound like he used the wrong fork at a state dinner.

But his abuse of the pardon power, his sweeping assertions of immunity and his demands that the Justice Department bend to his will suggest what can happen if enough norms are broken over and over.

He has done his utmost to make the administration of justice an instrument to reward his friends and harass his adversaries.

He’s seeking to replace the rule of law with the rule of Trump.


Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

We’re back to 18. Eighteen Democrats seeking the party’s presidential nomination, trying to get some, any, voter attention before the caucuses and primaries begin.

The latest late entry to etch his name on the roster is one of the world’s richest men, who once ran one of its richest cities — a big-B billionaire who says he will fund his own campaign, taking no donations to show he “can’t be bought” but bringing derision from rivals that he is the one doing the buying.

Michael R. Bloomberg, former New York mayor and owner of a media company that bears his name, isn’t the only billionaire in the race. California’s Tom Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, is also spending millions in pursuit of the White House.

But Steyer’s been in the race long enough to try to make a dent in early voting states. The former mayor — late to the game after saying months earlier he would not run — is aiming to do well on Super Tuesday, March 3, when Democrats in California and 13 other states make their primary preferences known. (Republicans vote in 13 states that day.)

That gives Bloomberg three months to try to sway voters that he is best positioned to take on President Trump, and his ads are already running on television sets across California. What do voters in the state think of his candidacy?

Rick Spickelmier, 60, San Francisco

Rick Spickelmier likes Michael Bloomberg. He appreciates the millions he’s spent promoting causes like gun control and addressing climate change.

But Spickelmier doesn’t think much of the billionaire’s bid for the White House.

“I’m not a big fan of businesspeople running for president,” the 60-year-old software engineer said Monday. Why not? Just look at Trump, he said with a laugh.

“I think somebody like Bloomberg or Trump tend to be the kings within their organization,” Spickelmier said. “That doesn’t work very well when you go into government, when you have to work with people to get things done. I think it’s just the wrong mindset.”

A political independent and self-described middle-of-the-roader, Spickelmier is leaning toward former Vice President Joe Biden. But he sees a continued role for Bloomberg and his Midas fortune.

“I like his ideas,” Spickelmeier said. “I’d like him to keep funding those causes — outside of government.”

Mark Z. Barabak

Raynell Douglas, Inglewood

Raynell Douglas isn’t optimistic about the state of the nation.

“America is going down,” the cleaning-business owner said as she left Dulan’s Soul Food Kitchen in Inglewood with a bag of side dishes for Thanksgiving. “People in other countries are over there laughing at us.”

Douglas voted for President Obama twice, and she voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 in hopes of helping her become the country’s first female president. The Democrat expresses no love for Trump: “I’ll pray for him. That’s all I’ll say about it.”

Douglas declined to give her age but says she’s thinking of retiring next year and is old enough to receive Medicare, a benefit she wants the next president, whoever he or she is, to protect. Douglas likes Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders but isn’t familiar enough with the junior U.S. senator from her own state, Kamala Harris, to form more than a generally positive impression of her.

Bloomberg is still mostly an unknown quantity to her. Douglas only knows he’s a billionaire with a history as a Republican. But given her fears that the country is on the wrong track, Douglas is willing to give Bloomberg a chance, especially if he’ll help the poor, the homeless and seniors — and do something to stem climate change.

“If he’s for something that’s right, I’ll think about him,” Douglas said.

– Tyrone Beason

~~~

Michael Paleno, 56, from West L.A.

Michael Paleno, 56, considers himself “semi-political” and is only somewhat following the election, he said.

“I just got burned out on it, to be honest with you,” the real estate appraiser from West L.A. said while getting coffee in Culver City. The registered Republican who has voted for Democratic presidential candidates in the past — Barack Obama, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton — plans on voting in the Democratic primary and is looking for a centrist candidate.

“Everything’s too far. It’s gone too far this way, and now the candidates think they have to go all the way over there to get people,” he said, spreading his arms to emphasize the gulf. “But I don’t think that’s the case.”

He said he’s unsure about Bloomberg’s candidacy and doesn’t know that much about the former mayor.

“I just know he’s a finance guy from New York. I know he just wants to beat Trump. He thinks he has what it takes,” he said.

“Here comes a guy that’s not a politician coming in, and I don’t know if it works or not, to be honest with you.”

– Melanie Mason

~~~

Jay Brown, 72, Sacramento

Jay Brown, 72, of Sacramento, said he doesn’t know too much about this presidential election because “I stopped watching TV … ever since Trump’s been in office.” Standing in his shop, where colorful African-made apparel is crammed onto racks and the walls are lined with photos of Muhammad Ali, Bob Marley and Malcolm X, Brown said that he takes voting seriously but waits until a few weeks before the election to start paying attention to candidates. Right now, “there are too many to think about,” said Brown.

King of Curls, a black hair and apparel boutique, is iconic in the state capital, known as one of the most diverse cities in the state. Its concrete block exterior is painted in Rastafarian colors, and the Martin Luther King Jr. quote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” is written on a poster board that hangs in the window.

“The last few months, I get it to what I’m going to look at, and then I decide right then,” said Brown of how he decides his vote. He said the economy and education are two of his top issues. “Education over everything I think should be free.”

But he wouldn’t give his vote to Sanders or Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, both of whom support tuition-free college education and reductions of student loans, based just on that single issue. Brown is looking at “a combination of things,” including the economy, he said.

Brown said he is skeptical of Bloomberg because of his wealth. “He’s like the super-rich that was here at the beginning of this country, and he’s still from that line of thinking,” he said. “So he would have to something to show that he’s for the people.”

– Anita Chabria

~~~

Joel Perales, 34, East Los Angeles

Joel Perales was working Tuesday morning on a new fan hood at the Eggslut food stand in Grand Central Market in downtown L.A. The heating, air conditioning and ventilation technician wondered about Bloomberg’s spending choices, including his massive TV ad buy.

Perales, a 34-year-old independent who lives in East Los Angeles, voted for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein in 2016 and is leaning toward Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii in 2020.

Bloomberg carries no appeal for Perales. He knows he was New York City mayor, but otherwise does not know much about him.

“It’s suspicious that people are willing to invest all this money to become a public servant,” he said. “You don’t invest that kind of money unless there’s an outcome.”

To Perales, Bloomberg’s age is another downside. “A 77-year-old billionaire must be so out of touch with modern American culture, modern American labor, modern American food,” he said.

– Michael Finnegan

~~~

Phillip Aleman, 45, Van Nuys

Phillip Aleman, 45, wasn’t looking for another billionaire in the presidential race, but he’s keeping an open mind.

“Everyone has a right to run,” he said during a shopping trip at Westfield Century City mall on Monday evening.

The Democrat has been following the race closely and wants a candidate who works for the people and doesn’t take contributions from corporations. So far, he said, his top choice is Warren. South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Harris are distant second choices.

Aleman, a national marketing director for Broadway shows, lived briefly in New York during Bloomberg’s time in office, but couldn’t recall how the mayor’s policies affected him.

The ultimate goal for 2020, he said, is to have a candidate who can beat Trump. He said he couldn’t see supporting Bloomberg in the primary, but the general election is different.

“He’s a billionaire, and I don’t feel we need another billionaire in the White House,” he said, “but if it’s him versus Donald Trump, then I will vote for Bloomberg.”

– Melissa Gomez

~~~

Kaitlin Overturf, 22, Riverside

Kaitlin Overturf, 22, of Riverside, supports former Housing Secretary Julián Castro’s presidential bid but has been discouraged by his meager showing in the polls — and even more discouraged by the fact that Steyer was on the most recent Democratic debate stage and Castro was not.

“You’re here because you have a lot of money,” Overturf said she thought of Steyer.

So Overturf was not exactly thrilled to learn that another self-funding billionaire had just entered the race and was announcing his arrival with an expensive series of television advertisements.

“I saw his ad 15 minutes ago on my TV. I’m not a fan,” Overturf, a college student, said of Bloomberg while sitting at a cafe inside a Barnes and Noble in Riverside on Monday afternoon. “I was sitting next to my mom on the couch — we both just looked at each other and rolled our eyes.”

Overturf doesn’t mind if a billionaire runs for president, and she’s not bothered by his age, either.

But she didn’t like Bloomberg’s late arrival, which she sees as opportunistic, and she’s bothered by what little she knows of his tenure as New York’s mayor. Last weekend, she watched a “Saturday Night Live” segment about Bloomberg newly apologizing for his “stop and frisk” policy as mayor, which she saw as self-serving, given his past defenses of the policing strategy that disproportionately affected people of color.

It didn’t help that the “SNL” segment came right after she watched another Steyer ad — the only other candidate whose TV ads she’s seen. “They’re not endearing themselves to me by running for president when there are other things they can be doing with their money.”

– Matt Pearce

~~~

Matthew Gomez, 28, Sacramento

Mathew Gomez, a computer science student at Sacramento City College, says he is “in between” Republican and Democrat and likes Harris so far. “She seems really promising,” Gomez, 28, said of the California senator. “She means what she says, and I think she’s probably going to stick to it.”

He was not impressed by Bloomberg.

“Yeah, you got money, you can just jump in the race like Donald Trump did, just buy your way into it,” he said.

“Be like everyone else. Earn your votes.”

When it comes to the next president, Gomez is looking for “someone who can do the job without putting up … red flags and making us look bad like Trump.”

– Anita Chabria

~~~

Jessica Lorenzo, 30, Long Beach

Jessica Lorenzo of Long Beach said she’ll start doing research on candidates as the March 3 primary nears.

“The most important thing is getting Trump out of office. That’s number one,” said the former doula and stay-at-home mom of three.

Lorenzo, 30, said she liked several candidates, including Harris: “She’s honest; she seems hardworking to me.”

But what she’d really like is another Obama in the White House. “I was very happy when Obama was president. … If Michelle would run that would be great!”

She had never heard of Bloomberg, but after being told he planned to not accept donations, she said, “That’s interesting. That seems good.”

She said as the election gets closer she will examine the candidates’ records. “What they stand for and what party they’re in. Is he a Democrat?”

– Seema Mehta

~~~

Morgan McGlothan, 23, Inglewood

For barista Morgan McGlothan, 23, the problem with the primary race isn’t just too many candidates, but that they’re all running to lead a federal government that she believes is out of touch with average working people.

“It’s so chaotic at this point and there’s no flashy, stand-out candidate,” she said. “So it’s been easy to tune out.”

McGlothan, who lives in Inglewood, considers herself a “radically liberal” independent, but she votes Democratic.

Bloomberg’s Republican Party roots take him out of contention as a possible candidate to support, she said. And as for his late entry into the crowded field: “We’re already so far into the race. Get over yourself.”

“I know I live in a bubble,” McGlothan said of the progressive political world she dwells in, “but no one that I know is even talking about him.”

McGlothan is taking a wait-and-see approach to the primary, but one thing is certain: “I don’t like Joe Biden,” she said. The former vice president, she added, “represents that old-school Democrat,” much the way Hillary Clinton did in 2016.

– Tyrone Beason

~~~

Matthew Berdiago, 20, Loyola Marymount University

Matthew Berdiago hadn’t heard that Bloomberg was running for president, or anything else about him.

Berdiago, 20, was waiting at Loyola Marymount University in L.A. for his Monday afternoon class to start. He plans to attend medical school and wants to support a candidate who advocates for access to affordable healthcare. He is leaning more toward candidates like Sanders and Warren.

He did like the fact that Bloomberg said he would not be taking campaign contributions.

“That’s something I feel like I’ve never heard about from a candidate,” Berdiago said, adding that Bloomberg’s decision gives him a reason to research his platform.

– Melissa Gomez

~~~

Archie Mendoza, 50, Santa Clarita

Archie Mendoza was a registered Republican for about 25 years. Now, the Santa Clarita resident said, he is “disgusted” with the Republican Party and by elected officials making excuses for Trump. Mendoza, 50, is now an independent.

The real estate agent said the last Republican presidential candidate he voted for was George H.W. Bush. Next year, he will vote for anyone who can beat Trump, he said. “I just want a candidate who’s going to win.”

For a while, Mendoza said, he believed that was Biden, until the former vice president’s campaign took hits from Trump and didn’t return them. The progressive candidates have gone too far left, Mendoza said.

Bloomberg helped transform New York while he was mayor, Mendoza said. The mayor’s stop-and-frisk directive was a problem, he said, but he credited Bloomberg for at least addressing crime in the city.

“He’s good. I’m interested to see what he does,” Mendoza said. “He can go toe to toe with Trump, I believe it.”

– Melissa Gomez

~~~

Zane Lowry, 27, Culver City

Zane Lowry and James Smith sipped coffee drinks from oversized mugs outside the Conservatory coffee shop in Culver City. They share progressive politics — both are not registered with a political party, voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary and are leaning toward backing Sanders or Warren next year.

Lowry said he was aware Bloomberg was flirting with a run, but hadn’t heard that he had officially jumped in.

“I’d imagine that he’s bigger on the East Coast, being from New York and everything,” Lowry said. “But I don’t know a whole lot about him, and I’ve also heard of him being discussed as one of the more moderate candidates in this race, trying to fill a vacuum left by Biden defectors. Personally, I’m not very interested.”

Smith was skeptical about Bloomberg’s self-funding pitch.

“Honestly, the way he’s jumped in and the language he’s used has sounded a lot like Trump’s campaign in 2016. That was the exact campaign that Trump ran on — he was going to spend his own money, he wasn’t going to take a salary, he was going to donate his salary,” Smith said. Trump, who has a fraction of Bloomberg’s wealth, ultimately did not self-fund his campaign.

He said he was not impressed with Bloomberg’s decision to jump in so late in the game.

“It really didn’t sound too genuine for me,” he said. “The language that he’s used has been primarily, ‘We just need to beat Trump, we need to beat Trump.’ That’s not my only agenda.”

– Melanie Mason

~~~

Fariba Beighlie, Seal Beach

Seal Beach architect Fariba Beighlie is an ardent supporter of Warren.

“I like everything about her. She’s strong. She’s well educated. She’s compassionate,” said Beighlie, who said she is in her 50s. “And I think she stands a good chance.”

She doesn’t think the rest of the field is strong enough to compete with Trump. She has heard about Bloomberg entering the race, but said she doesn’t know much about him.

“I just know that he’s a smart guy who knows how to make money. … I don’t know if he can represent everybody. I want somebody who’s more of a human, more in touch.”

She was thrilled, however, to hear that he would not accept donations.

“I think that’s awesome. And he can do it, he has the money to do it. He can probably get the votes,” she said. “If it comes to the point that I have to choose him over Elizabeth to make sure we get elected, as Democrats, then I would choose him.”

– Seema Mehta

~~~

Daniel Pearce, 20, Yucaipa

The news of Bloomberg entering the race came as a surprise to Daniel Pearce, 20, of Yucaipa, Calif.

Largely because Bloomberg’s existence was a surprise to Pearce.

“Never heard of him,” said Pearce, a college student and retail worker, as he hung out in the Galleria at Tyler mall in Riverside. “I know that sounds bad.”

This will be Pearce’s first time voting in a presidential election, and he plans to vote in the Democratic primary, though he hasn’t been paying close attention yet. He didn’t see any of Bloomberg’s massive ad buy because he doesn’t watch TV, and he didn’t like learning Bloomberg is 77 years old — “People don’t like to vote for somebody who’s not peak health.”

But the billionaire thing doesn’t necessarily bother him, as long as Bloomberg donates his money to causes Pearce supports, such as gun control and protecting the environment — “as long as they’re using their money for more than just themselves.”

Kristen Linares, 20, a college student from Yucaipa hanging out with Pearce who is currently interested in Harris, Warren and Sanders, said the wealth of “Bloomfield” or Steyer didn’t bother her, and she was pleased to learn about their large contributions to liberal causes.

“That is something important to me,” said Linares, whose top issues are gun control and climate change.

Pearce agreed. The big political spending “wouldn’t be the thing that makes us not for him,” Pearce said, adding, “If everybody’s a billionaire running, does it really matter?”

– Matt Pearce

~~~

David Hauschild, 75, Minneapolis

Members of the Hauschild and Norby families — most in town from Minnesota and Virginia and happily soaking up the Culver City sun — were eager to delve into politics during a morning coffee outing.

Lois Hauschild said she was following the presidential primary “very closely,” as her relatives laughed in agreement. “Every day. It’s like overload. I used to not to be into politics, but now since Trump has destroyed us, I’m into it every day.”

The family said they were well aware there was a new entrant in the race.

“I think he’s a centrist,” said Kristen Norby, reciting what she knew about Bloomberg. “Billionaire. I think he can stick it to Trump a little bit too. I think he can compete on the same level with Trump.”

“He said he would spend whatever it takes,” chimed in her father, David Hauschild. “If it’s successful, I like it. I don’t like the idea of someone buying the presidency or the nomination, but it’s so important that this man be defeated that I would bend my morals and my ethics in order to see that happen.”

But the family wasn’t ready to pronounce that Bloomberg would be the best positioned to beat Trump. “I don’t think we know enough about his stance on things,” Kristen Norby said.

But Bloomberg, like other septuagenarian candidates, will have to contend with his age weighing on the minds of voters, the family said.

“It’s important. Very important,” David Hauschild said. “Whatever age someone is today, they’re going to be at least five years older before they finish their term if they’re elected. That would make them one of, if not the oldest, president serving. And by the way, I’m elderly too. I’m not prejudiced against elderly people. But the rule of averages….”

Reese Norby, youngest in the group at 19, said, “For me, I can relate to Pete [Buttigieg, age 37] more than I can relate to Biden,” who is 77.

“The elderly?” California relative Andrew Hauschild suggested. “The elderly,” Reese repeated in agreement.

– Melanie Mason

~~~

Rey Camoras, 52, San Diego

Rey Camoras, 52, a San Diego software developer, was visiting downtown L.A. on Tuesday morning while his wife was at a medical appointment. Camoras is an independent who voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and is leaning toward Warren or Buttigieg in 2020. Camoras is looking for a candidate “who is rational, non-impulsive, not corrupt.”

Camoras is familiar with Bloomberg’s record, and he won’t vote for him, “mostly because of his racist stop-and-frisk program that he expanded in New York City.”

“It didn’t really affect the crime rate,” he said. “All it did was make the lives of people of color more difficult in the city.”

Bloomberg reminds Camoras of former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who flirted with the idea of running for president.

“He’s just a rich guy trying to buy his way into the White House,” Camoras said of Bloomberg. And he’s turned off by the candidate’s age: “That’s probably too old.”

Camoras does appreciate Bloomberg’s spending on gun control and the fight against climate change, both mentioned in a Bloomberg ad he saw Monday night. “That’s important, but it wouldn’t get me to vote for him,” he said.

– Michael Finnegan

~~~

John Cook, Ventura

“Choice is a really good thing, but when you’re trying to settle down to a candidate that will run against Trump, it’s almost too much now,” said Ventura Democrat John Cook said of the Democratic primary field as he took his dog, Finnegan, out for a walk Tuesday.

Cook said he knew of Bloomberg as a former mayor and his support for a soda tax. But he said Bloomberg choosing to self-finance his campaign worried him. “Money in politics concerns me in a huge way,” he said.

Bloomberg’s age also concerns him, Cook said, the same with Sanders, now 78, whom he supported in the 2016 primary. But he said he’s willing to look into Bloomberg by examining his policies and talking to his friends in New York about his time as mayor. “I have to do more studying.”

– Melissa Gomez

~~~

Todd Covington, 38, Long Beach

Todd Covington lived in New York during part of Bloomberg’s tenure as mayor and doesn’t have fond memories of his leadership.

“Everything was a mess,” Covington said, recalling what he described as Bloomberg’s tepid response to a work-stoppage among city workers that left New York’s streets poorly tended after a particularly bad snowstorm.

“He’s not available and he’s not accountable,” the chiropractor said. “We need someone who can stand up and say, ‘Maybe what I did last week didn’t work… Here’s what we need to do to get it right.’”

Now Covington lives in Long Beach, and he talked about the Democratic field during his weekly visit to Sip & Sonder coffeehouse on Inglewood’s historic main strip.

He could be open to voting for Bloomberg if the former mayor ran a transparent campaign and vowed to hold himself more answerable as president — and if he championed issues such as prison and education reform.

But Covington, 38, feels uneasy about Democrats’ prospects for defeating Trump. “They lack one common voice,” he said.

– Tyrone Beason

~~~

Michael Muir, 60, San Diego

The Democratic field did not need another billionaire to jump into the race, said Michael Muir of San Diego.

“We already have a billionaire [running], Tom Steyer, and he’s a very good philanthropist, and he’s done a lot,” said Muir, 60, a retired construction worker now in sales. “What I worry about Bloomberg, he was previously a Republican.”

One thing that does not concern Muir about Bloomberg: his age.

“He’s a wiser old fellow,” Muir said. “If someone takes care of themselves, they’re still sharp, I don’t see a problem with that.”

– Celina Tebor and Hafsa Fathima

~~~

Esther Brombart, 70, of San Diego

Retired preschool teacher Esther Brombart said she believes Warren is the best candidate to represent and work for the people.

“I just think that she is down to earth,” said Brombart, a San Diego resident who was walking around downtown Ventura with her family on Tuesday.

She doesn’t think as much of Bloomberg. “I’m not impressed right at the moment.”

The 70-year-old said she would research his platform to see what kind of candidate he would be, but she believes Bloomberg is wasting his money on his campaign.

“I just wish his money would go to help the poor, the homeless, the hungry,” she said.

– Melissa Gomez

Ben Garcia, 53, Azusa

Ben Garcia of Azusa stopped to eat a persimmon Tuesday on a bench across from the Angels Flight funicular in downtown L.A. Garcia, 53, an administrator at the L.A. County Sheriff’s Office, is a political independent who has not made up his mind on a 2020 presidential candidate, but he won’t support Trump. He voted in 2016 for a third-party candidate, but can’t remember which one.

The Navy veteran has heard very little about Bloomberg, but is open to supporting him once he finds out more; he doesn’t see Bloomberg’s spending as disqualifying.

“Now the naysayers are claiming he shouldn’t be able to buy the presidency.” Garcia is skeptical. “Says who? The guy who’s already in the race trying to win the presidency?”

As for Bloomberg’s age, Garcia said: “It concerns me, his age, but I think our median age is going up exponentially as we go on. If he’s still upright, if he still moves, he still has the mobility, let him take it.”

– Michael Finnegan

~~~

Christopher Macy, 65, Berkeley

“There’s something very insidious about most of this billionaire class,” said Christopher Macy, 65.

Macy was on a walk through downtown Berkeley with his border collie mix, Daisy, and had stopped to examine a house. He thought he might offer to repair its broken garage door if he could rent the garage to use for his home-repair business.

An independent who voted for Stein in 2016, Macy has been following this election cycle closely.

“I think the Earth is at stake. There’s a great silver lining with Trump to make a big change because he is sort of showing the level of corruption that already exists, because he’s so blatant about it.”

Protecting the environment and preserving democracy, at home and abroad, are Macy’s top concerns. Although he leans toward supporting Sanders now, that doesn’t mean Bloomberg’s billionaire status is disqualifying to Macy, who has also been impressed by Steyer and Gabbard.

“Mainstream Democrats are really selling us out, and there’s an opportunity to move beyond that entrenched power,” he said.

– Jeff Bercovici

~~~

Catherine Schoenherr of Ventura

Catherine Schoenherr of Ventura said she knew Bloomberg had entered the race, but he isn’t a candidate she would support.

She plans to back Sanders in the primary. “He’s had the same message unwaveringly for what, 30, 40 years. I really admire that,” the Democrat said.

Bloomberg’s status as a billionaire isn’t disqualifying, she said, but it comes down to his policies. She said she did not like that he backed the stop-and-frisk mandate in New York City, which she called “horrible.”

“I understand people can change,” she said of Bloomberg apologizing for the policing strategy, which disproportionately affected people of color. But she found the timing of his apology suspect.

“I know enough to know I won’t support him,” she said. “I wouldn’t vote for him over Bernie or Elizabeth.”

– Melissa Gomez

Sabina Mahavni, 19, Berkeley

As an environmental economics major planning a career in environmental law, UC Berkeley sophomore Sabina Mahavni, 19, expects to cast her first vote for Sanders in California’s primary.

Mahavni does not know much about Bloomberg’s background or positions, she said during a break from her shift at the Berkeley Student Food Collective. Having gone through active-shooter drills as a high school student in Granite Bay, Calif., she was glad to hear the three-term New York mayor had spent some of his wealth pushing gun control legislation

But that wealth itself is cause for skepticism in her eyes, even if it allows him to turn down money from special interests.

“I’m all in favor of not taking any campaign contributions, but I do have a little issue, maybe an internal bias, against billionaires, just in terms of the way they made their money in corporate America,” she said. “So it’s not really a plus for me.”

– Jeff Bercovici


Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

WASHINGTON — 

The effort to impeach President Trump still has months to run, but already has produced at least one clear winner: Rep. Adam B. Schiff has emerged from two weeks of public hearings as a rising star among Democrats, one with enhanced power to aid his House colleagues even as he bedevils the president.

With no special counsel involved in investigating Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, Schiff, a federal prosecutor before he won his Burbank-based congressional seat, has taken the role of lead inquisitor and public face of the probe. He’s the Kenneth Starr of the Trump impeachment — or to use the comparison he would prefer, the Leon Jaworski, special prosecutor during Watergate.

Republicans from Trump on down accuse him of unfairness and bias. Schiff’s fellow Democrats, however, have heaped praise on the way he kept Republicans at bay and maintained control during the impeachment hearings while generating enough news to keep the inquiry — and his name — in headlines for weeks on end.

“Most members of Congress from Los Angeles have a very low profile,” said Democratic strategist Rose Kapolczynski, noting the dozens of lawmakers who compete for attention in Southern California. “That all changed in the Trump era for Adam Schiff.”

Even before the hearings got underway, Schiff had emerged as one of the Democrats’ leading figures. He’s the top House Democratic fundraiser this year — bringing in $4.4 million through the third quarter, according to federal filings.

Schiff’s haul bested even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and powerhouse freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. Those totals don’t include additional money Pelosi raises through the House Democrats’ campaign committee.

Schiff hasn’t had a serious election challenge since his first race in 2000, giving him latitude to spread that money widely. So far, he’s given to 44 vulnerable freshmen. Pelosi also tasked him with leading the fundraising for the “frontliners,” the freshman members who face the most electoral risk next year.

Schiff has helped those members even more with his management of the probe into whether Trump tried to strong-arm Ukrainian officials into helping him battle his domestic political rivals.

When the inquiry began, many Democrats feared — and a lot of Republicans hoped — it would follow the path of the Republican effort in 1998 to remove President Clinton based on Starr’s charge that he lied about sexual contact with a White House intern. A majority of the public rejected that effort, and it became increasingly unpopular as it wore on, harming the GOP.

That hasn’t happened this time. Polls show the impeachment inquiry has changed few minds — the country remains closely divided on whether to remove Trump from office. But Democrats have emerged more unified and have suffered no backlash, vindicating the decision by Pelosi, with whom Schiff is close, to give him and the Intelligence Committee the lead role.

Pelosi and Schiff share a similarly cautious approach that has sometimes frustrated colleagues on the party’s left but has won praise from Democrats in more conservative districts whose jobs would be on the line if the inquiry were viewed as overly partisan.

Schiff has long aspired to higher office, but has been stymied by the difficulty of using a position in the House as a springboard in a state as big as California. In 2015, when he thought about running for the Senate seat being vacated by Sen. Barbara Boxer, a USC-Dornsife Los Angeles Times poll found only 19% of California voters recognized his name.

By contrast YouGov polling this year found him with 63% name recognition nationwide, putting him on par with former Gov. Jerry Brown and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York.

Now, a Senate vacancy might not be his only route upward: His role in the impeachment hearings has built a case among House colleagues that he could one day succeed Pelosi as speaker.

“Certainly if he wanted to throw his hat into the ring, I think he’d have a great deal of support,” said Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Hillsborough). “He’s obviously become a mega fundraiser and is known around the country.”

Several other Democrats have made louder overtures for the job, which is not expected to open up until after the 2020 election at the earliest. And House Democrats, keen on diversity, might balk at electing a white male — and another Californian — as Pelosi’s successor. But the impeachment process has significantly improved his prospects.

“I have personally seen and heard nothing but praise for him from the Democratic establishment,” said Margaret L. Taylor, a Brookings Institution scholar who previously worked for Senate Democrats.

Schiff, himself, is tight-lipped about any such speculation. In an interview shortly after last week’s hearings ended, he said he hasn’t thought beyond the investigation.

“I have no idea,” he said. “I’ve literally been saying to myself every day, I just need to get through the day.”

Democratic praise for Schiff is matched by his dramatically lowered stock among Republicans, who once considered him relatively bipartisan.

Trump and Republicans such as Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York have used their opposition to Schiff as a rallying cry for their own fundraising.

Rep. Mike Conaway of Texas, a retiring Republican who worked closely with Schiff during the Russia investigation, criticized Schiff’s impeachment process as “very dictatorial.”

Schiff used the impeachment rules “to his full advantage, which created an un-level played field,” Conaway said.

“It’s great to be in the majority,” he added, sarcastically. “From time to time, the tyranny of the majority does work.”

Indeed, Schiff went into the inquiry with clear hopes of blunting Republicans’ ability to divert the proceedings as they were able to do in other high-profile congressional hearings this year, such as those with former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III or former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.

Through hours of hearings stretched across five days, Schiff sat stone-faced as Republicans sought to disrupt his plans, staring straight at witnesses or toward the back of the hearing room, seldom even looking at Rep. Devin Nunes of Tulare, his GOP counterpart on the panel.

He did muster a smile when Nunes handed control of the microphone back to Schiff at one point while warning parents to put their children to bed before the chairman spoke.

“I was glad we were able to maintain decorum even though my colleagues made for some very unpleasant listening from time to time,” he said in an interview after the hearings ended.

In the interview, Schiff refused to say whether he has made a final decision about impeachment, but left little to the imagination.

“We are going to have to make a decision about whether we’re prepared to say the kind of conduct that has been demonstrated in these hearings is compatible with the office of the presidency,” he said. “Are we willing to accept that kind of flagrant misconduct?”

The committee is preparing a report on its findings, which would then be passed along to the House Judiciary Committee, which would be empowered to draft an impeachment resolution on which the full House would vote, likely in late December.

Even as the inquiry leaves his panel, the spotlight is likely to remain on Schiff. He’s widely expected to be the Democrats’ lead messenger on impeachment through a House vote and as a leader of the House’s case when a trial is conducted in the Senate.

Schiff refused to speculate on his future role, saying it would be up to Pelosi.

One possibility is for him to present the case to the Judiciary Committee as Starr did in 1998, although he would probably face pointed questions from Republicans about his and his committee’s interactions with the whistleblower whose anonymous complaint kicked off the scandal.

Republicans have consistently criticized Schiff for indicating early on that his committee had not had direct contact with the whistleblower. In fact, the person did speak to a member of the committee’s staff before filing the complaint.

The staff member advised the whistleblower to get an experienced lawyer and follow the process set out in federal law, Schiff subsequently said, admitting that he should have made that clear from the outset.

Trump has also repeatedly attacked Schiff for his words in a September hearing in which the congressman recited a fictionalized version of the call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, using the tone of a Mafia boss.

While the president has denounced that as a lie, Democrats chalked it up as a minor misstep, a mere “blip” as one lawmaker described it.

Still, Schiff has embraced the enmity from Trump, who once dubbed him “Little Pencil-Neck Adam Schiff.”

His campaign website has taken to selling pencils as a fundraising gimmick.

The inscription offers a promise: “This pencil neck won’t break.”


Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Trump scandals are rich pickings for D.C. lawyers

November 28, 2019 | News | No Comments

WASHINGTON — 

Michael Volkov ran his client, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, through a “murder board” in preparation for his recent testimony under the glare of TV lights in the House impeachment hearings.

Over more than a dozen intense days, Volkov and Vindman reviewed facts, dates and conversations and practiced answering meandering or bellicose questions from lawmakers.

As a final touch, the attorney tried to rattle the decorated Army officer and National Security Council staff member. Glaring menacingly over reading glasses, Volkov launched a harangue.

“I pulled my best Jim Jordan,” Volkov said, referring to the Ohio Republican known for his rapid-fire, high-decibel questioning of witnesses. “But I couldn’t throw him off. That is what you have to do in cases like this.”

Their labors paid off: Vindman came across as knowledgeable and unflappable in his Nov. 19 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, part of the Democratic-led chamber’s impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to launch politically beneficial investigations.

For lawyers like Volkov, the impeachment proceedings provide the latest in a string of high-profile investigations that over the last few years have been a boon for Washington’s criminal defense bar.

Whether representing witnesses in the special counsel investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, probes into scandals at various federal agencies or the Hillary Clinton email saga, white-collar defense attorneys in Washington say they have never been this consistently busy.

Such probes require a specialized blend of skills — finesse and the ability to navigate the intersection of law and polarized politics in an age in which social media amplifies every comment, every mistake, every accusation.

Lawyers for witnesses said much of their time has been spent helping clients navigate that fraught partisan landscape.

“This isn’t like answering questions in a witness box next to a federal judge,” said Ken Wainstein, a former top Justice Department official who represents a staffer at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv.

“In situations like this, you spend a lot of time preparing for the political lines of attack and anticipating the political agenda behind them. You want to make sure your answers cannot be intentionally or unintentionally misconstrued for political purposes.”

While such investigations often raise a lawyer’s profile, they are generally money losers. Most government witnesses are either reimbursed by their agencies or through insurance programs that cap payments at about $300 an hour, far short of rates that can exceed $1,000 an hour.

“We do not make money on these types of cases,” said Charles Cooper, a legend in conservative legal circles who represents one of the impeachment’s most sought-after witnesses, John Bolton, the former national security advisor.

“They take a lot of time,” Cooper said. “They require extensive preparation.”

Barbara “Biz” Van Gelder represents two clients who have been questioned by House lawmakers: Timothy Morrison, the former senior director for Europe and Russia on the National Security Council, and Mark Sandy, a career employee at the Office of Management and Budget.

As a former federal prosecutor, Van Gelder said, she felt compelled to help government workers.

“If you are served with one of these subpoenas,” she said, “it can be a daunting process, especially on a government salary.”

Her clients, she said, were caught in a tough situation: Congress was demanding they testify; the White House was telling them not to show up.

Van Gelder counseled Morrison and Sandy that based on her reading of the law, they should appear if subpoenaed. She would fight back if questions strayed into areas of executive or other privileges.

During Morrison’s closed-door deposition last month, Van Gelder fended off questions about his conversations with the president, arguing such queries would have to be litigated in court on a question-by-question basis, according to a transcript of the proceeding.

“At this point it’s a hard stop,” Van Gelder told Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), chairman of the committee, cutting short one line of inquiry.

Van Gelder and several other lawyers said the impeachment proceedings were especially daunting because the White House and agencies would not grant lawyers or Congress access to witnesses’ notes, emails, records and call logs. The House was also working very quickly, she and other lawyers said.

Morrison had two weeks to prepare for his deposition and only a few days to review the transcript of that testimony before his public hearing on Nov. 20. Sandy had even less time — 11 days to prep for his deposition, she said.

“In cases like this,” Van Gelder said, “you are always sitting beside your client or behind your client and thinking, ‘I wish I had a few more hours to prepare.’ But you have to rely on your instincts and get them as prepared as you can.”

Lee Wolosky, an attorney for Fiona Hill, the NSC’s Russia expert, said he had never faced a situation so harried.

In the days before her public hearing, Wolosky and Hill were watching live television coverage of impeachment testimony.

“The ground was shifting even as we were preparing,” Wolosky said.

Volkov and Vindman tried to leave nothing to chance. As they reviewed depositions that seemed to be released daily by Democrats, Volkov surmised that Republicans would pounce on Morrison’s closed-door testimony that he had concerns about Vindman’s judgment. Morrison had testified that Hill had similar worries.

When Jordan pressed Vindman at his public hearing about Morrison’s critique, Volkov was ready. The attorney slid Vindman a piece of paper. It was a performance review, signed by Hill.

“I guess I’ll start by reading Dr. Hill’s own words,” Vindman testified, looking down at the evaluation.

“She attested to, in my last evaluation that was dated middle of July right before she left, ‘Alex is a top 1% military officer and the best army officer I’ve worked with in my 15 years of government service. He is brilliant, unflappable and exercises excellent judgment.’”

Jordan immediately shifted to another line of questioning.

“It was a beautiful moment,” Volkov said.


Click Here: liverpool mens jersey