Mediaboss Marketing

Federal, state and local law enforcement officers and prosecutors have honored a longstanding practice to assure public safety and the rule of law by enforcing the laws that legislatures enact. In that spirit, Department of Justice policies since the 1980s directed federal prosecutors to charge the most serious readily provable offense, unless justice required otherwise. Its undisputed that this charging practice, applied over the course of several Republican and Democratic administrations in recent decades, contributed to the reduction of violent crime by half between 1991 and 2014.

The Obama administrations Smart on Crime initiative touted by former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in a recent oped in the Washington Post titled Making America scared again wont make us safer undermined those hard-fought gains in public safety, and ushered in significant increases in violent crime. In 2015, violent crime rose 5.6 percentthe greatest increase since 1991and included a shocking 10.8 percent increase in homicide rates. And, although the final numbers for 2016 have not been published, the preliminary data suggests another substantial increase in the violent crime rate.

Among the policies championed by then Attorney General Eric Holder and Deputy Attorney General Yates was one that reversed long-standing charging policies and directed federal prosecutors to avoid minimum sentences against drug traffickers, as mandated by Congress, and instead pursue lesser charges. Despite the well-known and deadly violence associated with drug cartels, gangs and their networks, the Holder-Yates policies directed federal prosecutors in certain cases to under-charge drug trafficking cases and avoid triggering statutory minimum penalties by not pressing charges on the actual amount of drugs that traffickers distributed, such as heroin, crack cocaine, and methamphetamine.

Despite the evocative second chance narrative that stirs support among sentencing reformers, law enforcement professionals also know that the people who end up in federal prison work hard to get there.

Changes in federal law enforcement policy can ripple through communities across the country and affect their safety. Smart on Crime was part of a larger policy shift within the Obama administration from drug abstinence and accountability to drug acceptance and victimization. Since its inception, correlative increases in drug abuse, overdose deaths and violent crime have had a devastating impact on every community, regardless of sex or demographics. The reduced charging and sentencing of thousands of drug traffickers and their early release from prison - all hallmarks of the Holder-Yates policies of the Obama years have begun to leave their devastating mark downstream on the safety of communities across the nation. The surge in violent crime should not be surprising. Drug trafficking by its very nature, is a violent crime.

Take the recent account of Michael Bell, a former federally-convicted methamphetamine dealer who, when facing new state charges in Tennessee for kidnapping and domestic assault, shot two sheriffs deputies during a court proceeding. Bell would have still been in federal prison had he not been released in 2015, three years earlier than scheduled, because of the across-the-board sentencing reductions prior administration leaders pushed the U.S. Sentencing Commission to impose.

Not surprisingly, those former officials continue to use the term low level, non-violent offender to promote a sanitized narrative of drug trafficking for profit. Law enforcement professionals know that drug trafficking enterprises are comprised of integrated networks of street corner dealers, mid-level traffickers, distributors, producers and cartel leaders, whose collective efforts inherently rely on violence and have contributed to the deaths of over 50,000 Americans last year in drug overdoses alone.

Despite the evocative second chance narrative that stirs support among sentencing reformers, law enforcement professionals also know that the people who end up in federal prison work hard to get there. Few offenders go to prison for their first offense, or even the second or third. Many of the people who end up in federal prison have committed violent crimes, are members of drug trafficking and criminal organizations or simply have chosen to continue to disregard our laws. Because the majority of criminals admit their guilt, plea bargaining involves the dismissal or reduction of related charges, which greatly reduces the criminal histories and sentences of countless criminals. That means the numbers and types of crimes for which many of them are arrested, but never charged or convicted, are incalculable. Criminals are committing thousands of crimes and violent acts against our citizens for which they are never held accountable.

Seeking justice and keeping the peace, it is federal law enforcement agencies and their state and local partners who will strive to enforce the laws that Congress enacted to protect our country and its citizens. The surest way to preserve public safety is to honor the laws the people have passed and to enforce them to the fullest.

Lawrence J. Leiser is president of the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys. Nathan Catura is president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. Bob Bushman is president of the National Narcotics Officers Associations Coalition. Al Regnery is chairman of the Law Enforcement Action Network. Ron Hosko is president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund.Harold Eavenson is President of the National Sheriffs Association.Larry Langberg is President of the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI.

Read the original:
Law Enforcement leaders: How smart was Obama's 'Smart on Crime' initiative? Not very - Fox News

BBC News

Obama tartan officially registered in Edinburgh BBC News The Obama tartan specially commissioned for the former US president's recent visit to Edinburgh has been officially registered in the capital. Barack Obama was gifted a kilt and a pair of trousers in his new family tartan when he attended a charity ... Barack Obama officially has his own tartan and apparently he loves itBT.com Barack Obama honoured with official tartan in EdinburghThe Scotsman all 3 news articles »

View original post here:
Obama tartan officially registered in Edinburgh - BBC News

Malia Obama doesn't just observe the nation's birthday every Fourth of Julyshe also celebrates her own.

Born on July 4, 1998,Obama turns 19 on Tuesday. And what a year it's been, with a turbulent campaign season, the victory of Republican Donald Trump and the end of her father's presidential term. Ever since her dad, Barack Obama, left office this January, Malia Obama has nearly vanished from the spotlight.

Related: Malia Obamas gap year: A fad not just for presidents kids

Daily Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

Here's what we know about what she's been up to:

Obama, along with her sister, mom and friends, had a slumber party for their last night in the White House.

Barack Obama and his daughter Malia walk from Marine One to board Air Force One upon their departure from O'Hare Airport in Chicago on April 7, 2016. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

"They had a sleepover because of course on Inauguration Day, because my girls are so normal, they're like, 'Well, eight girls are gonna be sleeping here because it's our last time, and we want pizza and we want nuggets.' And it's like, really?" former first lady Michelle Obama said in April.

Malia Obama is scheduled to attend Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts,this fall. She announced last May that she was taking a gap year before starting college.

Obama went to the Sundance Film Festival in Utah to take part in a demonstration against the Dakota Access Pipeline, the $3.7 billion pipeline causing controversy for allegedly disrupting Native American land.

"It was amazing to see Malia," actress and activist Shailene Woodley told DemocracyNow.comin January. "To witness a human being and a woman coming into her own outside of her family and outside of the attachments that this country has on her, but someone who's willing to participate in democracy because she chooses to, because she recognizes, regardless of her last name, that if she doesn't participate in democracy, there will be no world for her future children."

Starting in February, Obama headed to work withHarvey Weinstein, the movieproducer who co-founded Miramax. Paparazzi caught her in New York City going to the Weinstein Company's offices. TMZ reported that she was helping the executives with scripts.

Obama and her father attended The Pricealong with former senior adviser Valerie Jarrett in February, according to The New York Times. At intermission, the trio went backstage to meet the cast and crew.

On the heels of a secret trip to South America and a ski trip with friends in Aspen, Colorado, Obama was spotted in Indonesia with her mom, dad and sister last month. As the group walked around Bali, Obama carried a camera and wore a sarong paired with a graphic tee. She even went rafting with the family, complete with a bright yellow helmet.

View post:
Where Is Malia Obama? On Her Birthday, a Look Back at What She's Done Since Trump Took Office - Newsweek

The congressional Republican leaderships almost-hysterical need to repeal Obamacare seems rooted in motives that have little to do with the health of millions of Americans who need it most, including some of their own constituents.

In what has become almost-obsessive behavior since the Affordable Care Act was adopted in 2010, GOP conservatives have made its demise the partys No. 1 political goal. This unreasonable determination comes even in the face of expert predictions that the House-passed and Senate-written versions of its replacement would ultimately leave more than 20 million of the nations poorest without insurance.

Clearly, President Donald Trumps failure to achieve his premier campaign promise has embarrassed him and divided the party.

The long-term anger among Republicans over the ACA seemingly stems from a dark place, the stubborn racism in the partys Southern base the one it inherited from the old Democratic solid South. How else could one explain the palatable dislike approaching hatred of the first black president among those on the GOP right, evident from the very beginning of Barack Obamas tenure?

Wiping out Obamas most important achievement, whatever the cost, would go a long way toward diminishing his presidency. Never mind that his successor openly admitted in a sort of gee-whiz statement that health care is a lot more complex than he imagined. But then most things required in running the country are above Trumps understanding. He has a long record of telling people what ought to be done without the background, experience or knowledge needed to accomplish it.

He does know that the ACA replacement is mean but thats OK because it also delivers a tax cut for the wealthiest of us. Clearing the decks of Obamacare would allow him to go on national television with pen in hand (probably in the Rose Garden) to proclaim to the faithful that he is good as his word on abolishing a series of Obama administration regulations. Halleluiah!

So, here comes the Senate Republican majority leader, whose state of Kentucky is one of the neediest in health care and has benefited the most from it, determined at whatever cost to eliminate Obamas health act.

Is Mitch McConnell crazy? Or is he so afraid of losing his job by angering his conservative base and his president (who seems to think at times he is an idiot) that he will move forward despite the consequences to his own constituents? By the way, Kentucky voters reportedly still back Trump while conceding the risk to their well-being. Incredible!

All this has brought the Republicans near the brink of intraparty warfare and even has McConnell and the White House gang uttering the dreaded C-word, compromise.

In some ways, the Democrats are to blame here, and that includes Obama, for not working hard enough to include a bipartisan approach to health care reform in the first place. The 2,700-page bill was oversold by the then-Democratic majority and passed on a single party vote. It was difficult to understand and to implement and it cost the party dearly in the 2010 midterm election, boosting tea party influence and returning House control to the Republicans.

But that was nearly seven years ago, a long time in a political realm in which things are given and then taken away in regular cycles.

What is obviously needed now are some adjustments to the act not tearing it up and beginning again. Hopefully, if radical-right lawmakers can put aside their dislike of Obama and the new president learns that bipartisanship isnt a dirty concept, this is what will happen.

But what will it take to bring some statesmanship back into the process? Your guess is as good as mine.

But what would help is for right-wing politicians to realize that detesting Barrack Obama for his race or his aloofness or any other social reason is not a legitimate way to perform ones obligations as a member of the government of the people. Nor is just trying to convince the world you belong on the job by fulfilling a skeptical campaign promise at the expense of voters who dont understand the ramifications.

If Trump wishes to show that he is at all presidential, he should call in the leadership of both parties and urge them to put their heads together, not apart, and do so without calling them names.

Dan Thomasson is an op-ed columnist for Tribune News Service and a former vice president of Scripps Howard Newspapers. Readers may send him email at: thomassondan@aol.com.

View post:
Thomasson: Right-wing pols must put nation's health above Obama disdain - Daily Commercial

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, (front left to right) NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, US President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Theresa May and President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, during the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) summit on May 25, 2017 in Brussels, Belgium.Stefan Rousseau/Pool/Getty Images

When President Donald Trump took office, many expected him to usher in a new "independent" U.S. foreign policy, breaking the bridges forged by President Obama to multi-national organizations and significantly shifting the direction of American statecraft.

That hasnt happened.

This Independence Day, hardly anyone argues anymore that the new administration is seeking independence from international institutions or binding treaties. Indeed, the U.S. has been forward-leaning on the global stagereassuring NATO; broadly engaging in the Middle East; laying out new initiatives in Latin America; renegotiating, not scrapping NAFTA; talking tough on North Korea; sparring with China; embracing India; and redoubling efforts in Afghanistan.

Critics now complain that Trump is decoupling the U.S. from the post-World War II liberal order, the network of international institutions that fostered globalization. At least philosophically, there is no question that Trump and Obama come at foreign policy from opposite perspectives. Obama was a structuralist who believed that the keys to peace and prosperity are global institutions that normalize the behavior of states. Trump, on the other hand, is a realist. The sitting president holds that nation-states are the coin of the realm, the real power in the global order.

But in practice, the kid from Chicago and businessman from the Big Apple are less far apart than their rhetoric suggests.

For starters, the Constitution still binds the left and right. It still limits what presidents can do overseas, both through specified and imposed powers given to the executive branch, and the separation of powers that gives both the courts and Congress some say in what America does in the world.

In addition, regardless of their politics, presidents get elected to protect the nations interests. Those interests don't change dramatically unless the world dramatically changes. Thats why U.S. foreign policy always has more continuity than change from one administration to the next.

Further, presidents are hardly purists. Obama had a predilection for multi-nationalism, but he was perfectly willing to go his own way when he thought it suited U.S. policy. Likewise, Trump has no prohibitions against a multi-national approach. U.S. commitment to NATO is as strong as ever. Rather than pulling out of the United Nations, the U.S. has been proactive in its leadership role. Trump went to the G7, and hes going to the G20 and ASEAN summit.

There are still distinct differences between Trump and Obama. Some are mostly stylistic. The Paris climate accord is a case in point. Obama committed to it because it fit his politics, not because it really moved the ball on dealing with climate change. Trump pulled out because he didn't care about a symbolic commitment. Neither president's choice tells us much about the real exercise of American power in the world.

Other differences are more substantive. Obama's instinct was to make a deal and then use the deal and multi-national instruments to normalize the behavior of adversarial states. That was the plan with the Russian reset and New START treaty, chemical weapons accord with Assad, and Iran nuclear deal. Trump's instincts are to take action where there is a clear deliverable to U.S. interests on the front end, not trust the global order to tutor good behavior on the backside.

However, to portray these differences of statecraft as moving from interdependence to independencean unmooring of the U.S. from the liberal world orderis a profound oversimplification. In practice, Trump will be seen using different approaches to solving America and the world's problemssometimes acting unilaterally, but mostly working with friends and allies, and often through multi-national institutions.

Trump will certainly in the end have different policies. He may in the end produce different outcomes. But, in the final judgment, it may be far more difficult to differentiate between interdependent and independent foreign policies than the current raging controversy over Trumps international leadership suggests.

James Jay Carafano is vice president of the Heritage Foundation and directs the think tanks research on foreign relations and national security issues.

See the original post:
Trump's America Isn't Any More Independent Than Obama's - Fortune