web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News Media (Page 206)

New F-35-armed Navy amphibious assault ship completes trials

Firing deck-mounted guns, intercepting enemy cruise missiles, launching F-35B Joint Strike Fighters and using Osprey tiltrotor aircraft to attack behind enemy lines — are all mission possibilities envisioned for the Navy’s fast-progressing second big-deck America-class amphibious assault ship, the future USS Tripoli (LHA 7).

The new ship just completed its acceptance trials in the Gulf of Mexico, a series of exercises intended to prepare the amphib for deployment by assessing its propulsion, communication, navigation, weapons systems and aviation platforms, a Navy statement said.

“You have a work-up cycle where you do various exercises and training to prepare for deployment,” a Navy official told Warrior.

The first America-class amphib, the USS America, has been operational for a while now. The America-class amphibs are engineered to carry Marine Corps attack units, F-35B Short-Take-Off-and-Landing Joint Strike Fighters, Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, CH-53 Super Stallions and UH-1Y Huey helicopters.

F-35 SET FOR LASER BOOST

The first America-class amphib, the USS America, has been operational for a while now. Designed as aviation-centric amphibs, the first two America class ships do not have well-deck for amphibious vehicles but rather are engineered with a larger hangar for aircraft, increased storage for parts and support equipment and additional aviation fuel capacity to support a higher op tempo. The third America-class ship, the now under construction LHA 8, will bring back the well deck for amphibious operations.

“The ability to embark Joint Strike Fighters and MV-22 Osprey enable this versatile platform to increase the lethality of our expeditionary warfighters,” said Tom Rivers, amphibious warfare program manager for Program Executive Office Ships, in a Navy report.

Progress with the Tripoli aligns with the Navy’s fast-evolving modern amphibious attack warfare strategy which envisions big-deck, F-35 and Osprey-armed amphibs as host-platforms launching air support for amphibious attack — reaching enemy targets with safer stand-off distance, conducting forward reconnaissance and at times operating small fleets of amphibious assets.

Since potential adversaries now have longer-range weapons, better sensors, targeting technologies and computers with faster processing speeds, amphibious forces approaching the shore may need to disperse in order to make it harder for enemy forces to target them. Therefore, the notion of an air-powered, disaggregated, yet interwoven attack force, less vulnerable to enemy fire, could be launched to hit “multiple landing points” to exploit enemy defenses.

‘FIRST-CUT-OF-STEEL’ BEGINS NEW ERA IN NUCLEAR WEAPONS, SUBMARINE WARFARE

Execution of this new strategy is, depending upon the threat, also reliant upon 5th-generation aircraft; the Corp F-35B, now operational as part of Marine Corps Air Ground Task Forces aboard the USS Wasp and USS Essex, is intended to provide close-air support to advancing attacks, use its sensors to perform forward reconnaissance and launch strikes itself. The success of an amphibious attack needs, or even requires, air supremacy. Extending this logic, an F-35 would be positioned to address enemy air-to-air and airborne air-to-surface threats such as drones, fighter jets or even incoming anti-ship missiles and ballistic missiles. The idea would be to use the F-35 in tandem with surveillance drones and other nodes to find and destroy land-based enemy defenses, clearing the way for a land assault.

A deck-launched Osprey impacts assault strategy as well, bringing new dimensions to air-sea-ground attack. Using its ability to transport Marines, cargo, weapons and communications gear, an Osprey could conduct what’s called Mounted Vertical Maneuver wherein small unit transport into and “drop” behind enemy lines. This could include deploying high-risk, clandestine surveillance teams, adding communications nodes in preparation for attack or even staging small, pinpointed ambushes on critical enemy assets, supply lines, ammunition storage or other key targets.

The entire strategic and conceptual shift is also informed by an increased “sea-basing” focus. Aviation-centric amphibs, potentially operating in a command and control capacity with smaller multi-mission vessels, could launch attack operations as sovereign entities at safer distances. Senior Navy officials have explained that larger “host-ships” would operate as “seaports, hospitals, logistics warehouses and sea-bases for maneuver forces.”

Big-deck amphibs like the America class, in particular, are engineered with expansive medical care facilities such as “hospital beds and an operating room,” a Navy official explained to Warrior.

NEW 40MM CANNON ON MARINE CORP AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT VEHICLE DESTROYS DRONES, PICKUP TRUCKS

A 2014 paper from the Marine Corps Association, the professional journal of the US Marine Corps, points to sea-basing as a foundation upon which the Navy will shift away from traditional amphibious warfare.

“Seabased operations enable Marines to conduct highly mobile, specialized, small unit, amphibious landings by stealth from over the horizon at multiple undefended locations of our own choosing,” the paper writes.

In effect, future “ship-to-shore” amphibious attacks will look nothing like the more linear, aggregated Iwo Jima assault. A Naval War College essay on this topic both predicts and reinforces this thinking.

“The basic requirements of amphibious assault, long held to be vital to success, may no longer be attainable. Unlike the Pacific landings of World War II amphibious objective areas could prove impossible to isolate,” the paper, called “Blitzkrieg From the Sea: Maneuver Warfare and Amphibious Operations,” states (Richard Moore, 1983).

MARINE CORPS FIRES WEAPONS AT ITS NEW AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT VEHICLE

The essay, written in the 80s during the height of the Cold War, seems to anticipate future threats from major-power adversaries. Interestingly, drawing from some elements of a Cold War mentality, the essay foreshadows current “great-power” competition strategy for the Navy as it transitions from more than a decade of counterinsurgency to a new threat environment. In fact, when discussing its now-underway “distributed lethality” strategy, Navy leaders often refer to this need to return its focus upon heavily fortified littoral defenses and open, blue-water warfare against a near-peer adversary – as having some roots in the Cold War era.

Dispersed approaches, using air-ground coordination and forward-positioned surveillance nodes, can increasingly use synchronized assault tactics, pinpointing advantageous areas of attack. Not only can this, as the essay indicates, exploit enemy weakness, but it also brings the advantage of avoiding more condensed or closely-configured approaches far more vulnerable to long-range enemy sensors and weapons. Having an advanced airpower such as an F-35B, which can bring a heavier load of attack firepower, helps enable this identified need to bring assault forces across a wide range of attack locations. None of this, while intended to destroy technologically sophisticated enemies, removes major risks; Russian and Chinese weapons, including emerging 5th-generation fighters, DF-26 anti-ship missiles claimed to reach 900-miles and rapidly-emerging weapons such as drones, lasers and railguns are a variety of systems of concern.

The America Class

Technical adjustments were made to the flight deck of the USS America to enable the ship to withstand the heat generated by the take-off and landing of the F-35B; these changes are also built into the future USS Tripoli.

SUBMARINE SURGE: WHY THE NAVY PLANS 32 NEW ATTACK SUBS BY 2034

The flight deck modifications to the USS America and entailed adding intercostal structural members underneath flight deck landing spots numbers 7 and 9, Navy officials explained. These adjusted landing spots better enable closely timed cyclic flight operations without overstressing the flight deck, Navy developers explained.

LHA 7 incorporates gas turbine propulsion plant, zonal electrical distribution, and fuel-efficient electric auxiliary propulsion systems first installed on USS Makin Island (LHD 8).

The USS Tripoli is designed with the high-tech Navy ship-based computing network called Consolidated Afloat Network and Enterprise Services, or CANES. Overall, the USS Tripoli is 844-feet long and 106-feet wide with a weight of more than 44,000 tons. A fuel-efficient gas turbine propulsion system brings the ship’s speed up to more than 20 knots, a previous Huntington Ingalls statement said.

The Tripoli carries 1,204 and 1,871 troops, meaning the ship is engineered to carry a Marine Expeditionary Unit, the statement added.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

America class ships are outfitted with a group of technologies called a Ship Self Defense System. This includes two Rolling Aircraft Missile RIM-116 Mk 49 launchers; two Raytheon 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts; and seven twin .50 cal. machine guns.

Westlake Legal Group NavyUSSTripoli New F-35-armed Navy amphibious assault ship completes trials Warrior Maven Kris Osborn fox-news/tech/topics/us-navy fox-news/tech/topics/innovation fox-news/tech/topics/armed-forces fnc/tech fnc article 7f8204c7-b06a-5cdc-8127-17300a7ef0ac   Westlake Legal Group NavyUSSTripoli New F-35-armed Navy amphibious assault ship completes trials Warrior Maven Kris Osborn fox-news/tech/topics/us-navy fox-news/tech/topics/innovation fox-news/tech/topics/armed-forces fnc/tech fnc article 7f8204c7-b06a-5cdc-8127-17300a7ef0ac

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Elizabeth Warren Makes Pitch to Black Women In Speech About Racial Inequities

Westlake Legal Group 21dems-warren-facebookJumbo Elizabeth Warren Makes Pitch to Black Women In Speech About Racial Inequities Warren, Elizabeth Race and Ethnicity Presidential Election of 2020 Harris, Kamala D Debates (Political) Buttigieg, Pete (1982- ) Booker, Cory A Blacks Biden, Joseph R Jr

ATLANTA — One day after a televised debate featuring significant exchanges about race, Democratic presidential candidates fanned out across this capital of black political power to pitch their message to black voters and send a clear signal: Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. should not take support from African-Americans for granted.

Mr. Biden’s strength with black voters has been a key force in helping him maintain a polling edge in the race, even as the candidacies of Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont ascended among progressives. But on Thursday, both challengers — as well as Senators Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, two black candidates in the race, and other contenders — made explicit appeals about how they would address concerns and priorities of black voters.

Ms. Warren, who is Mr. Biden’s leading rival in many state and national polls, took direct aim at his reliance on black support by delivering one of her biggest speeches of the campaign, describing how governments and powerful corporations use racism and racial injustice as a wedge to divide working class people. And she argued that it was time for the nation’s policies to include specific correctives to address discrimination.

“Don’t talk about race-neutral laws,” she said at a rally on Thursday evening at Clark Atlanta University, a historically black institution. “The federal government helped create the racial divide in this country through decades of active, state-sponsored discrimination, and that means the federal government has a responsibility to fix it.”

“The rich and the powerful want us to be afraid of each other,” Ms. Warren told the crowd. “And why? Because they are afraid of us. Afraid of our numbers. Afraid of seeing us stand together.”

Ms. Warren also spoke directly to white voters, and pushed back on the notion that racial equity comes at the cost of white Americans.

“I just want to speak directly to the question on some white people’s minds when we talk about the need to address what our government has done in black communities: the uncomfortable question of, ‘What will this mean for me?’” Ms. Warren said. “The truth is, when we come together, we can all move forward.”

Ms. Warren’s speech was a thematic continuation of her rally in New York City in September, when she used the Triangle shirtwaist factory fire of 1911 to tell a story of government regulation and the political power of women’s voices. In her speech on Thursday Ms. Warren leaned on history again, citing the black women-led strike of Atlanta washerwomen in 1881.

Ms. Warren was introduced by Representative Ayanna S. Pressley of Massachusetts, the black lawmaker who has become one of Ms. Warren’s top surrogates after her recent endorsement. Ms. Pressley helped Ms. Warren calm a group of pro-charter school protesters who disrupted her speech.

Earlier that day, several other candidates also targeted black voters, speaking at a breakfast held by the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. Ms. Harris held a “black women’s breakfast” with several of Atlanta’s leading black women professionals. And Mr. Sanders also held a rally on the campus of a historically black college.

At Morehouse College, standing near a statue of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Mr. Sanders invoked his own background in a pitch to black voters. As a Jewish man whose family escaped Nazi Germany, he learned about the cruelties of racism through his family’s stories of fleeing discrimination, he said.

“A lot of people in my father’s family didn’t make it out of Poland, and they were murdered by the father of white supremacy, Adolf Hitler,” he said.

Black voters are an important constituency in the Democratic Party, and the candidate who has won a majority of the black vote has almost always gone on to be the party’s nominee. But in a race with multiple black candidates and with white candidates promising policies specifically addressing racial inequities, the diversity of the black electorate — with respect to age, gender, education levels and ideology — has been on display.

Still, it has been difficult for candidates to wrest black support away from Mr. Biden. He has been buttressed by sky-high name recognition, association with former President Barack Obama and his promise that he is best suited to win the white working-class voters who helped deliver the last election to President Trump.

On Thursday, Mr. Biden met with a group of black mayors, including Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta, who has endorsed him, before leaving for a town hall event in South Carolina, an early primary state where he leads in the polls.

Speaking to reporters in Atlanta, Mr. Biden cited his long relationship with the African-American community in Delaware when asked about his support among black voters. “I’ve always been comfortable in the community, and I think that the community’s always been comfortable with me,” Mr. Biden said.

In Wednesday night’s debate, Mr. Booker criticized Mr. Biden for his opposition to legalizing marijuana, noting that black marijuana users are more frequently penalized than white ones.

“Black voters are pissed off and they’re worried,” Mr. Booker said, adding that while he had “a lot of respect” for Mr. Biden, “this week I hear him literally say that ‘I don’t think we should legalize marijuana.’”

Looking directly at Mr. Biden, Mr. Booker said, “I thought you might have been high when you said it.”

At a ministers’ breakfast meeting sponsored by the National Action Network, Mr. Booker continued his pitch a day later as the best candidate to address racial inequities in the economy and criminal justice.

“The black-white wealth gap is growing. The leading cause of death for African-American boys and men is murder,” Mr. Booker said. “We are at a point now where there are more African-Americans under criminal supervision than all the slaves in the 1850s.”

In impassioned remarks colored with scripture, Mr. Booker said the country needed to “ensure that the next president of the United States doesn’t have an academic appreciation of these issues, but actually has a passion, an instinctual connection — is someone that we can trust to bring these issues to the front and center of the national agenda.”

A number of other candidates also toured Atlanta, making a concerted pitch to black voters. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., the entrepreneur Andrew Yang and the billionaire former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer attended Mr. Sharpton’s breakfast, too.

Mr. Buttigieg sought to establish common ground with the black audience, pointing out that, as a gay man, he had benefited from black activism during the civil rights movement.

But he has struggled to build support among this constituency. A recent South Carolina poll showed he is the choice of fewer than 1 percent of black likely Democratic voters there.

Ms. Harris held a morning breakfast event for black women in Atlanta. Though her candidacy has fallen from its once front-runner status, Ms. Harris made clear that she remains the only black woman in the race, and pitched herself as someone who can uniquely understand black communities.

Ms. Harris said her criminal justice record was better than those of the race’s white front-runners.

“There are people on that stage who wrote the crime bill, who voted for the crime bill and who just learned how to talk about justice. Are you kidding me?” Ms. Harris said. “Where were these folks when I was creating a national model on what we need to do to end mass incarceration?”

At the debate, Mr. Biden touted his support among black voters, saying, “I come out of the black community in terms of my support.” But then he mistakenly said he had the endorsement of the “only African-American woman that had ever been elected to the United States Senate.”

He was apparently referring to former Senator Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois — the first black woman to become a senator.

He failed to mention Ms. Harris, the second black woman elected to the Senate, who was standing on the same stage.

Stephanie Saul contributed reporting from New York.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected ‘rock-solid sausages’

An 18-year-old woman said a trip to the salon for lip fillers landed her in the hospital for a week after her lips swelled to look like “rock solid sausages” and began leaking “green and yellow pus.”

Lauren Winstanley, who said she received a recommendation for the salon from a friend, claims she paid about $220 for the fillers.

RUSSIAN ‘POPEYE’ HAS 3 POUNDS OF ‘DEAD’ MUSCLE REMOVED AFTER DIY BODYBUILDING INJECTIONS

“They started swelling straight away, when I looked in the mirror at them I was shocked because I’d never seen myself with bigger lips,” Winstanley told Kennedy News & Media, according to Mirror.co.uk. “The beautician said the swelling would go down and I listened to her and thought, ‘fair enough.’”

Westlake Legal Group Lauren-Winstanley-2-Kennedy-News Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected 'rock-solid sausages' fox-news/health/healthy-living/health-care fox-news/health/beauty-and-skin/cosmetic-surgery fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 06aabef3-06df-5ead-8a5b-84c0c4fe7022

Winstanley, pictured before the fillers, said the salon was recommended by a friend. (Kennedy News & Media)

But the swelling didn’t go down. Instead, her lips tripled in size and pain started setting in.

“I started to panic and feel unwell so I went to the hospital to get it checked out,” she told the news outlet.

Winstanley claims that painkillers failed to help and that hours after she was sent home from the infirmary, she was rushed back to Whiston Hospital in Merseyside where she was admitted and underwent surgery to remove the infected filler.

Westlake Legal Group Lauren-Winstanley-3-Kennedy-News Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected 'rock-solid sausages' fox-news/health/healthy-living/health-care fox-news/health/beauty-and-skin/cosmetic-surgery fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 06aabef3-06df-5ead-8a5b-84c0c4fe7022

She said her lips swelled to three times the size within days.  (Kennedy News & Media)

“My lips looked like rock-solid sausages and felt bruised and were stinging,” she told the news outlet. “I started to feel sick, had a temperature and my neck and cheek felt bruised. I was put on IV antibiotics and painkillers straight away and they did blood tests, which showed I had group A strep infection. I couldn’t eat or drink as my lips were still triple their usual size and kept growing and filling with green and yellow pus.”

MORE THAN 75,000 POUNDS OF SALAD PRODUCTS RECALLED OVER E.COLI CONCERNS

Group A strep can cause several different infections, including strep throat, scarlet fever, necrotizing fasciitis, rheumatic fever and post-streptococcal glomerulonephritis.

“I could feel my chin keep getting wet from the infection in my lip leaking out,” she said. “When the doctor tried draining them while I was awake I ended up screaming and crying. I begged them to put me to sleep while they [treated] me as I was in agony. When I looked in the mirror it knocked me sick, my lips were disgusting.”

Westlake Legal Group Lauren-Winstanley-1-Kennedy-News Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected 'rock-solid sausages' fox-news/health/healthy-living/health-care fox-news/health/beauty-and-skin/cosmetic-surgery fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 06aabef3-06df-5ead-8a5b-84c0c4fe7022

After a week in the hospital, she was finally sent home but said her ordeal is not yet over.  (Kennedy News & Media)

Winstanley said that after nearly a week in the hospital she was released. But her ordeal is not over.

“I wish I’d have paid extra and had it done by someone medically trained like a dentist or dermal nurse,” she told the news outlet. “I’ve since found out she’d not even done them for five months when I had them done. It’s put me off getting them done again in the future. I would never wish that pain on anyone, it was traumatizing.”

Winstanley is not the first to warn against seeking cheap lip fillers. A dentist in England spoke out recently after she was left with “huge blue lumps” in her lips. Sarah Najjar said she paid about $390 for her lip fillers, and while there was no lasting damage, she was so traumatized that she decided to train in facial aesthetics so she could safely perform the procedure on patients.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Risks of dermal fillers include infection, a lump appearance under the skin, the filler moving away from the treatment area, scarring, or blocked blood vessels which can cause tissue death and permanent blindness, according to the NHS. The health agency recommends researching who will be doing the fillers before booking the appointment and to ensure that they are registered to administer the fillers.

Westlake Legal Group Lauren-Winstanley-4-Kennedy-News Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected 'rock-solid sausages' fox-news/health/healthy-living/health-care fox-news/health/beauty-and-skin/cosmetic-surgery fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 06aabef3-06df-5ead-8a5b-84c0c4fe7022   Westlake Legal Group Lauren-Winstanley-4-Kennedy-News Woman claims cheap lip fillers left her with infected 'rock-solid sausages' fox-news/health/healthy-living/health-care fox-news/health/beauty-and-skin/cosmetic-surgery fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 06aabef3-06df-5ead-8a5b-84c0c4fe7022

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump ‘Stands With Xi’ (and With Hong Kong’s Protesters)

Westlake Legal Group 22dc-diplo1-facebookJumbo Trump ‘Stands With Xi’ (and With Hong Kong’s Protesters) Xi Jinping United States International Relations Trump, Donald J Hong Kong Protests (2019) Hong Kong Demonstrations, Protests and Riots

WASHINGTON — President Trump would not commit Friday to signing legislation overwhelmingly passed by Congress to support pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong in an interview on Fox News.

He also claimed that China’s government would have “obliterated” Hong Kong and killed “thousands” of people there were it not for him.

And he spoke warmly about China’s president, Xi Jinping, whom he is trying to coax into striking a trade deal that has become one of the central goals of his presidency.

“We have to stand with Hong Kong, but I’m also standing with President Xi,” Mr. Trump said during a nearly hour long interview on the morning program “Fox & Friends.” “He is a friend of mine. He is an incredible guy.

But he added: “I stand with Hong Kong. I stand with freedom. I stand with all of the things we want to do. But we’re also in the process of making the largest trade deal in history.”

The legislation approved by Congress this week would impose sanctions on Chinese officials who commit human rights abuses in the semiautonomous island territory and place Hong Kong’s special economic status under greater scrutiny.

Security forces in Hong Kong have escalated their crackdown on pro-democracy protesters this month, prompting Congress to approve a Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act it had been considering for months.

In the interview, Mr. Trump said that the protests were a complicating factor in his trade negotiations with Beijing, which have stalled ahead of an important Dec. 15 deadline, when Mr. Trump must decide whether to issue yet more tariffs on Chinese goods.

But he also took credit for the fact that China had not extinguished the protests with a sweeping and violent crackdown.

“If it weren’t for me, Hong Kong would have been obliterated in 14 minutes,” Mr. Trump said.

Mr. Trump and other administration officials have warned that an overwhelming Chinese response would have wider repercussions in the relationship between China and Beijing, including in the trade talks.

But analysts say there are many reasons China’s government has refrained from an all-out violent crackdown like the one that snuffed pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in Beijing in 1989. They include the risk of an enormous international backlash and lasting damage to Hong Kong’s powerhouse economy.

Congress passed its Hong Kong bill with an overwhelming majority, meaning that it could probably override a presidential veto easily, the first override of his presidency. Mr. Trump could also choose not to sign the bill without vetoing it, in which case it would also become law.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Don’t quit now, Democrats: Wrapping up impeachment early is the dumbest idea ever – Pence, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton and numerous others were clearly involved. What’s the point of stopping now?

Westlake Legal Group bJcbCkYAIBBUCPD097g8aF6qHDv-_zeb26hMn_csm64 Don't quit now, Democrats: Wrapping up impeachment early is the dumbest idea ever - Pence, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton and numerous others were clearly involved. What's the point of stopping now? r/politics

I was confused by this as well. Here is what is happening next as I understand it.

Impeachment now moves to the House Judiciary Committee, led by Jerry Nadler. They will be the ones to draft Articles of Impeachment, and in doing so, they will have the ability to continue gathering evidence and call any additional witnesses that have withheld testimony.

Many Democrats have publicly expressed that they do not want impeachment to get dragged out by Trump-loyalists like Giuliani, Bolton, Pompeo, or Mulvaney, but the House Judiciary Committee is the best suited for navigating through our complicated legal system. However, impeachment powers give house investigators additional power in the judicial system. The most relevant case currently proceeding through our legal system for Charles Kupperman, the former Deputy National Security Advisor, has final arguments scheduled for December 10th. This is the case that will likely set the precedent that all future cases will refer to regarding the constitutional crisis between the White House and Congress, and whether or not witnesses need to comply with the House’s subpoenas. The primary question at hand is whether or not Trump has executive privilege in the face of the impeachment inquiry.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Pushes Debunked Ukraine Theory In Long, Rambling Call To ‘Fox & Friends’

Westlake Legal Group 5dd7f4bb210000787e34dc41 Trump Pushes Debunked Ukraine Theory In Long, Rambling Call To ‘Fox & Friends’

President Donald Trump on Friday pushed a false right-wing conspiracy theory roundly debunked by U.S. officials — including during this week’s House impeachment hearings — among a cornucopia of false and nonsensical claims he made during a nearly hourlong phone call on “Fox & Friends.”

Trump seized on false reports that Ukraine hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s server during the 2016 election. (U.S. intelligence officials have repeatedly affirmed it was Russia who interfered in the 2016 election.)

“A lot of it had to do, they say, with Ukraine. They have the server, right? From the DNC,” he said. “That’s what the word is.”

In damning testimony on Thursday, former National Security Council official Fiona Hill repeatedly urged Republicans to stop pushing the conspiracy theory.

“I refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the Ukrainian government is a U.S. adversary, and that Ukraine, not Russia, attacked us in 2016,” Hill said. “These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes.”

Friday’s nearly hourlong interview devolved into a soliloquy, which frequently occurs when Trump calls into “Fox & Friends,” Fox News’ morning program that is typically friendly toward him.

Trump rambled and mentioned, often without context, some of his favorite targets, including (but not limited to): “shifty” and “sick puppy” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who’s leading the House impeachment inquiry; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), whom Trump referred to as “a bedbug”; former FBI Director James Comey, whom he called “a totally disgusting human being”; and “the two lovers,” former FBI staffers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

Even the “Fox & Friends” hosts seemed perplexed at times, trying to squeeze in questions for the president and get him back on track — to little avail.

Co-host Ainsley Earhardt repeatedly tried to shift the conversation to the 2020 campaign, but Trump frequently brought it back to his grievances over the impeachment proceedings.

When Trump finally did field questions on the Democratic primary field, he suggested former Vice President Joe Biden might not “make it mentally. He’s off.”

Trump also revived his racial slur against Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), referring to her as “Pocahontas.”

At times, the hosts attempted to push back on his false claims or ask him to clarify. Co-host Steve Doocy asked Trump to provide a source for his spurious assertion that former President Barack Obama’s administration “spied on my campaign.” Trump would not name a source.

Doocy also debunked Trump’s false claim that only the U.S. gives aid to Ukraine, one of his defenses against the July 25 call to Ukraine’s president, which is at the center of the impeachment inquiry.

More than 50 minutes into Friday’s phone interview, after asking about the president’s health, co-host Brian Kilmeade suggested Trump call into the program every week as a form of “stress relief.” 

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Why Everyone Is Angry at Facebook Over Its Political Ads Policy

Westlake Legal Group 22facebook-facebookJumbo Why Everyone Is Angry at Facebook Over Its Political Ads Policy Zuckerberg, Mark E United States Politics and Government Social Media Rumors and Misinformation Presidential Election of 2020 Political Advertising Online Advertising Facebook Inc Corporate Social Responsibility Computers and the Internet

SAN FRANCISCO — After Google announced restrictions on political advertising this week, campaign strategists in Washington quickly turned their attention to a different company: Facebook.

Some strategists voiced concerns to Facebook about how Google’s decision would affect it, said two people who talked to the company. They told Facebook that if it followed Google by limiting how political campaigns target audiences, it would hurt their ability to reach unregistered voters and make it tougher for smaller organizations to collect donations online, the people said.

The conversations added to the pressure on Facebook as it weighs how to handle political advertising. Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive, has made it clear that Facebook will run all political ads — even if they contain lies — in the interest of free speech. But the social network is discussing some ad changes, like restricting how precisely campaigns can reach specific groups, said three people briefed by the company.

Facebook has made no final ruling on its political advertising guidelines, said the people, who declined to be identified because the discussions were confidential. On Thursday at a happy hour discussion with roughly 500 digital strategists, campaign officials and political operatives at Facebook’s offices in Washington, company executives were adamant that they would not make any news about political ads, said two people who attended the event.

But Facebook risks being whipsawed by its indecision, especially since Google and Twitter have already rolled out revised political advertising policies ahead of the 2020 American presidential election.

“Twitter fired the starting gun, and Google just cranked it up to 11,” said Eric Wilson, a Republican digital advertising strategist. “Now the pressure is on Facebook — they’re going to have to act.”

Political advertising on social media and internet platforms has become particularly fraught in this election cycle because of how campaigns increasingly rely on the digital channels to spread their messages and reach voters. Yet few companies are getting caught in that fray as much as Facebook.

On the one hand, the company wants to curtail the spread of disinformation across its site. At the same time, it wants to avoid alienating the groups and candidates who depend on its platform for fund-raising and organizing. So in trying to find a way to please everyone on the issue, Facebook has managed to please no one.

The social network has now become an outlier in how freely it lets political candidates and elected officials advertise on its platform. While Mr. Zuckerberg declared last month that Facebook would not police political ads, Twitter said it would ban all such ads because of their negative impact on civic discourse. On Wednesday, Google said it would no longer allow political ads to be directed to specific audiences based on people’s public voter records or political affiliations.

“As we’ve said, we are looking at different ways we might refine our approach to political ads,” a Facebook spokesman said in a statement.

The pressure on Facebook over what to do about political ad targeting has been unrelenting. Organizations on both sides of the political aisle — from as large as President Trump’s re-election campaign to smaller, grass-roots groups — have tried to persuade Facebook not to rein in the ad targeting.

“Making major changes to platform ad targeting would severely disadvantage Democrats and progressives who rely on Facebook for fund-raising and currently have a much smaller organic audience and current database of supporters to engage on and off the platform than Donald Trump,” said Tara McGowan, founder and chief executive of Acronym, a progressive nonprofit group.

Some Republican strategists said they also feared losing the ability to raise significant campaign donations online if Facebook reduced ad targeting.

The company has been contacting ad buyers and advocacy groups for feedback on what changes to political ads, if any, they could stomach. In one recent call with political advertising groups, Facebook said it was considering some tweaks, such as the possibility of raising the minimum number of people who could be targeted to 1,000 from 100, according to two people familiar with the discussion. The potential change was earlier reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Facebook also is updating and refining its advertising library, a collection of current and past ads that were paid for by political candidates, in an effort to increase transparency, the people said.

On Thursday at Facebook’s Washington event with digital strategists and campaign officials, executives ticked through their current ad policies for 90 minutes, before breaking for a question-and-answer period that lasted roughly 15 minutes.

Despite Facebook’s pledge that it would not announce any new ad policies, those in attendance tried to pry out some information, said two people who were there. One member of the Trump campaign asked if Facebook was considering eliminating certain data and the ability to reach specific audiences. Facebook said it welcomed all feedback and was considering all the issues.

Another questioner professed hope that Facebook would not follow in Google’s footsteps, said the attendees. Facebook officials reiterated that they would not be making any news.

When asked if the social network would treat Democrats and Republicans equally in the 2020 elections, though, Facebook officials were quick to respond.

Their answer: Yes, everyone will be treated the same, the attendees said.

Nick Corasaniti contributed reporting from New York.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Jungle Prince of Delhi

For 40 years, journalists chronicled the eccentric royal family of Oudh, deposed aristocrats who lived in a ruined palace in the Indian capital. It was a tragic, astonishing story. But was it true?

By

Nov. 22, 2019


NEW DELHI — On a spring afternoon in 2016, when I was working in India, I received a telephone message from a recluse who lived in a forest in the middle of Delhi.

The message was passed on by our office manager through Gchat, and it thrilled me so much that I preserved it.

Office manager: Ellen have you been trying to get in touch with the royal family of Oudh?

Ellen: this has to be the best telephone message ever

Office manager: It was quite strange! The secretary left precise instructions for when you should call her — tomorrow between 11 am and 12 noon

Ellen: oh my god

I knew about the royal family of Oudh, of course. They were one of the city’s great mysteries. Their story was passed between tea sellers and rickshaw drivers and shopkeepers in Old Delhi: In a forest, they said, in a palace cut off from the city that surrounds it, lived a prince, a princess and a queen, said to be the last of a storied Shiite Muslim royal line.

There were different versions, depending on whom you spoke to. Some people said the Oudh family had been there since the British had annexed their kingdom, in 1856, and that the forest had grown up around the palace, engulfing it. Some said they were a family of jinns, the supernatural beings of Arabian folklore.

ImageWestlake Legal Group xxcyrus2-articleLarge The Jungle Prince of Delhi Royal Families Pakistan Oudh Family (Delhi, India) News and News Media India Delhi (India) Cyrus, Prince of Oudh

Prince Cyrus of Oudh at his family home in New Delhi in 2016.Credit…Andrea Bruce for The New York Times

An acquaintance who had once glimpsed the princess through a telephoto lens said her hair had not been cut or washed for so many years that it fell to the ground in matted branches.

One thing was sure: They didn’t want company. They lived in a 14th-century hunting lodge, which they surrounded with loops of razor wire and ferocious dogs. The perimeter was marked with menacing signs. INTRUDERS SHALL BE GUNDOWN, said one.

Every few years, the family agreed to admit a journalist, always a foreigner, to tell of their grievances against the state. The journalists emerged with deliciously macabre stories, which I had studied admiringly. In 1997, the prince and the princess told The Times of London that their mother, in a final gesture of protest against the treachery of Britain and India, had killed herself by drinking a poison mixed with crushed diamonds and pearls.

I could see why these stories resonated so. The country was imprinted with trauma, by the epic deceit of the British conquest and then the blood bath of the British departure, known as Partition, which carved out Pakistan from India and set off convulsions of Hindu-Muslim violence.

This family, displaying its own ruin, was a physical representation of all that India had suffered.

A few grainy photographs of the siblings had been published: They were beautiful, pale and high-cheekboned, but also somehow ravaged, harrowed.

Nearly every day, dropping my children at school, I drove past the narrow road that led into the middle of the forest, which was surrounded by an ornate wrought-iron fence. The woods were so thick that it was impossible to see much, and inhabited by gangs of monkeys. At night, you could hear jackals howling.

The day after I got the message, I dialed the phone number. After a few rings, someone picked up, and I heard a high-pitched, quavering voice on the other end.

On the following Monday, I asked our driver to take me into the woods at 5:30 in the afternoon, as instructed.

The woods themselves were a bit magical, a thicket in the middle of a city of 20 million. British colonial officers had introduced mesquite trees in the 19th century, and they spread rapidly, swallowing pastures and roads and villages — everything that had been there before. Biologists would later describe it as a “massive invasion” by an “alien species.”

We drove farther, until the tree canopy was tormented, thick enough to block out the light.

Reader, I should confess that I wanted to write the story.

That week, the contents of my inbox were not inspiring: There had been a fire at an ammunition depot. There were budget reports, an unending cycle of state and local elections, the introduction of a goods and services tax.

These events, which filled so many of my days at that time, did not entirely satisfy my literary urge. The House of Oudh, now that was a story!

The person on the phone had told me to leave the car at the end of the road, beside the high wall of an Indian military compound, and to come alone. This did not surprise me: The Oudh family refused, famously, to meet with Indians. I asked the driver to wait at a distance and stood in the woods, somewhat awkwardly, holding my notebook and wondering what came next.

Then the bushes rustled, and a man appeared.

He was elfin and wore high-waisted mom jeans. He had high cheekbones with hollows beneath them and wild gray hair that stood up in tufts.

“I am Cyrus,” the prince said. It was the high-pitched voice I had heard on the phone. He spoke in bursts, like a person who spent most of his time alone.

Then he turned and led me into the woods. I tried to keep up, stepping over a tangle of roots and thorns, and climbed a flight of massive stone stairs leading to the old hunting lodge. It was half-ruined, open to the air, and surrounded by metal gratings; one steel bar was loose, and the prince moved it aside with a great clank so that we could enter.

I stepped into spare, medieval grandeur, a bare stone antechamber lined with palm trees in brass pots and faded, once-elegant carpets. On the wall hung an oil painting of the prince’s mother swathed in voluminous, dark robes, her eyes closed as if in a trance.

The prince led me up to the roof to show me the view. We stopped at the edge of the building, gazing across green treetops to the dusty city, shimmering in the heat.

Other great cities may be built on top of ruins, but Delhi is built of them. It is almost impossible to go from one point to another without stumbling over a 700-year-old tomb or a 500-year-old fort.

Seven successive Muslim dynasties built their capitals here, each swept aside when its time had passed. The ruins are a reminder that the present dispensation — democracy, Starbucks, Hindu nationalism — is only the blink of an eye in India. We were here, they seem to breathe. This was ours.

My idea was to interview the prince and write the story. When I asked about his family, he launched into an animated speech about the perfidy of the British and Indian governments.

I recognized quotes from articles I had read, written by colleagues from The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times. He ranted a little, complaining of persecution by a criminal gang. He was flinging his hands wide, declaiming and then dropping to a dramatic whisper, as he spoke of the decline of the house of Oudh.

“I am shrinking,” he said. “We are shrinking. The princess is shrinking. We are shrinking.”

When I asked if I could publish our interview, he balked. For this, he said, I would need the permission of his sister, Princess Sakina, who was not in Delhi. I would have to come back.

It struck me as strange, though.

Why summon a journalist if you don’t want to be written about?

The story began with his mother. She appeared, on the platform of New Delhi’s train station in the early 1970s, seemingly from nowhere, announcing herself as Wilayat, Begum of Oudh.

Oudh (pronounced Uh-vud) was a kingdom that no longer existed. The British annexed it in 1856, a trauma from which its capital, Lucknow, never recovered. The core of the city is still made of Oudh’s vaulted shrines and palaces.

The begum declared that she would stay in the station until these properties had been restored to her. She settled in the V.I.P. waiting room, and unloaded a whole household there: carpets, potted palms, a silver tea set, Nepali servants in livery, glossy Great Danes. She also had two grown children, Prince Ali Raza and Princess Sakina, a son and a daughter who appeared to be in their 20s. They addressed her as “Your Highness.”

The begum was an arresting-looking woman, tall and broad-shouldered, with a face as craggy and immobile as an Easter Island statue. She wore a sari of dark, heavy silk and kept a pistol in its folds. She and her children settled on red plastic chairs, and waited. For years.

“Sitting, sitting like yogis,” recalled Father John, a Catholic charity worker who distributed food in the train station. The children were strangely submissive, he said, reluctant even to accept a banana without their mother’s permission.

“They were more obedient than the dogs,” he said. “They were absolutely under her control.”

The begum’s behavior was imperious and dramatic. She refused direct conversation, demanding that queries be written on embossed stationery, placed on a silver platter and carried to her by a servant, who read them aloud. If the station master gave her any trouble, she threatened to kill herself by drinking snake venom.

“The Nepali servants, they would walk on their knees,” said Saleem Kidwai, a historian who sought them out at the time.

Government officials scrambled to find her somewhere to live. She was attracting attention from the media, and officials feared the Shiite population in Lucknow could explode into civil unrest if they believed she was being abused.

“It was such a romantic image,” Mr. Kidwai said. “She is out of the castle, now living in the railway station.”

Ammar Rizvi, an aide to the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, was sent to New Delhi as a liaison. He recalled handing Wilayat an envelope with 10,000 rupees so that they could set up a household in Lucknow.

“In 1975, that was a big sum,” he recalled. “But she got angry and threw the envelope. The notes were flying everywhere, and my public relations officer had to catch this note here, that note there. She said no, she would not go, the amount was very little.”

In the months that followed, Mr. Rizvi tried to persuade the begum to accept a four-bedroom house in Lucknow, but she refused, saying it was too small.

He was getting anxious. Muslims were mobilizing; once, Mr. Rizvi visited during Muharram, an annual ritual of mourning, and found her surrounded by pilgrims, flagellating themselves with chains to which razor blades had been attached.

“Poor passengers, they were looking at the whole scene,” he said. “There was blood all over the place.”

Around this time, Wilayat identified a far more effective way to make her case: foreign correspondents.

The family at the New Delhi train station in 1975.Credit… N Thyagarajan/Hindustan Times, via Getty Images Wilayat, left, and her children received visitors at the station.Credit… N Thyagarajan/Hindustan Times, via Getty Images

“India Princess Reigns in Rail Station,” a Times correspondent wrote in 1981, describing her “genuine commitment to redeem the ancestors, to right wrongs suffered over centuries and to obtain justice.” People magazine recorded her declaring, “Let the world know how the descendant of the last nawab of Oudh is treated.”

Foreign correspondents arrived, one after another, and readers began to send letters from all corners of the world, expressing outrage on her behalf. The begum imposed stringent conditions — she “could only be photographed when the moon was waning,” United Press International reported — and journalists complied, delighted with the Gothic peculiarity of it all.

In 1984, her efforts paid off. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi accepted their claim, granting them use of a 14th century hunting lodge known as Malcha Mahal. They left the train station roughly a decade after they first appeared there. Wilayat never appeared in public again.

My responsibilities in New Delhi included a great many diplomatic receptions and buffet dinners, which I found exhausting. It was like being drawn into an imperial court, in which every personal relationship was a series of transactions — exchanges, usually, of bits of status for bits of information. I did not have the clothes for this kind of work, or the personality.

So I found it a relief to drive into the forest and sit on Cyrus’s porch, eating pistachios and watching motes of pollen circulate in the sunlight.

In a meandering, roundabout way, I was trying to excavate his past. I felt flattered that he allowed me in, again and again, when so many others had been turned away. And yet something also nagged at me about the little family unit, the way they seemed to have scoured away any relationships from before their appearance at the train station.

When our conversations had gone on for about nine months, I traveled to Lucknow, a large city in northern India that was the cradle of the Oudh dynasty. I was there to interview detectives for an unrelated story, but I knew that Cyrus had lived there with his mother and sister in the 1970s, so I went to the neighborhood where I had heard that Oudh descendants lived.

There, to my surprise, the old-timers remembered Cyrus and his family. But they told me, almost as an aside, that they had been dismissed as impostors. The Oudh descendants in Kolkata, where the nawab died in exile, had also rejected their claim. And there were questions Cyrus himself seemed unable to answer. Where was he born? Who was his father? How do you crush diamonds, anyway?

His sister, Princess Sakina, had not turned up but he gave me a book that she had written, documenting their lives. The book was almost unreadable, haphazardly capitalized, lacking punctuation and written in florid, apocalyptic prose.

But sprinkled in the rambling text were flashes of genuine tenderness between the siblings, as if they were two small children, stranded together on a lifeboat.

Sakina wrote that she had intended to follow her mother into suicide, but for her brother. The question of his future nagged at her. “ABOUT PRINCE CYRUS RIZA MY BROTHER WHAT STEP SHALL HE FOLLOW?” it says. “MY SILENT SINCEREST SILENCE HAS A WISH THAT PRINCE SHOULD BE BLESSED WITH HAPPINESS.”

One night Cyrus called me, howling unintelligibly, to tell me that his sister had in fact died seven months earlier. He had told no one, burying her body himself. He had lied to me about it for months, and seemed a bit ashamed by it. I curled up on my daughter’s bunk bed and listened to his voice over the phone. He said that I should never visit again, and also that he was so lonely.

I waited a few days, and then showed up with a Filet O’ Fish from McDonald’s. Our relationship seemed to knit itself back together. He asked me to procure him a gun and a girlfriend, which I did not; and a tarpaulin and a recording of “Fiddler on the Roof,” which I did. He was solicitous and a little corny, with pop culture references that seemed to date from the 1960s.

Once, he asked me to kiss him on the cheek — his skin felt fragile, like tissue paper — and he told me that it was the first time he had been kissed in 10 years. “When you are over here, my heart goes doopity doo, Sophia Loren,” he said.

He even said I could write something about him, as long as I didn’t go into much detail.

“I have to tell the truth,” I told him.

“O.K., you have to tell the truth,” he said. “Then again, there is a hole in the bucket, Harry Belafonte.”

Video

transcript

Princess Sakina, in Her Own Words

During a 1996 visit by Reuters to the family’s home, Princess Sakina spoke of the “vindictiveness” and “cold logic” that had left them holed up in a dilapidated dwelling. “I do not wish to live in this world,” she said.

The former rulers of Oudh get few visitors these days. Princess Sakina Mahal her brother Ali Reza prefer the company of their dogs. They’ve been living in this ancient hunting lodge on the edge of New Delhi for 10 years. In spite of trying to keep up appearances, they have no running water or electricity, and share their crumbling dwelling with the local wildlife. The sole survivors of a troubled Muslim dynasty in what is now Uttar Pradesh, they are continuing their mother’s fight with the government to regain their palaces, which they say was seized unlawfully by the British at the turn of the century. “It is cold logic behind, backed by vindictiveness that the burrowing bureaucrats of the government, they are deployed to keep honorable standards and the honors of highnesses.” Their mother, who staged a 10-year protest at Delhi’s railway station, killed herself by swallowing crushed diamonds. Her remains are given pride of place, and her daughter has vowed to do the same to put further pressure on the government. “I do not wish to live in this world. It is a meaningless place. Untrustworthy calculations all around us, that’s all. That’s all I would like to say.”

Westlake Legal Group oudh_cover-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600 The Jungle Prince of Delhi Royal Families Pakistan Oudh Family (Delhi, India) News and News Media India Delhi (India) Cyrus, Prince of Oudh

During a 1996 visit by Reuters to the family’s home, Princess Sakina spoke of the “vindictiveness” and “cold logic” that had left them holed up in a dilapidated dwelling. “I do not wish to live in this world,” she said.CreditCredit…Screenocean/Reuters

We had been debating this for 15 months, and I was due to leave India soon and take up a new assignment in London. This sort of exchange made up the balance of our final conversations: I was trying to get him to reveal something about his origins — anything, really — and he was twisting away from me.

“You are just a very mysterious person, because I don’t know who you are,” I said once. His response was coy.

“Oh really,” he said, in a singsong voice. “Well, anyway. Oh, really? If you have said me mysterious, I am just sitting before you.”

In our last conversation, a few hours before I boarded a flight for London, he asked me how someone could get word to me, should he die. I asked if he planned to commit suicide.

“So far, I am going to preserve myself,” he said.

“Good. Well, then, I’ll see you again,” I said.

I think I hugged him goodbye. The last I saw of him, he was replacing the clanking iron bars that protected him from intruders.

Three months later, I was in an airport, on my way home from interviewing the Swedish foreign minister, when I learned Cyrus had died. I got the news on Facebook messenger, from a friend at the BBC.

I put down my bag and sat on the airport floor, feeling a little in shock.

This feeling was partly selfish. I had a thick file of interviews in a manila envelope labeled “Prince Cyrus.”

I had figured that, in this family’s story, there was a parable about India, something about trauma that went unresolved as one empire replaced another.

And then there was a second feeling. I was sad that I was not there to help him. I had enjoyed our conversations, the maddening dance of 18 months. I could not believe that he had died alone in that forsaken place.

I was sure that in the dark, he had wanted someone to hold his hand.

Thinking about this made it difficult to breathe. I stayed there for a moment, in the corridor at the airport, while people hurried past, rolling suitcases behind them.

It was the guards at the military facility next door — they called him “rajah,” or king — who later recounted how he had died.

Three weeks after we said goodbye, he was seen trying to wheel his bicycle down the road, shaking violently. An electrician from the military facility helped him to his feet, and he staggered back to the hunting lodge. He asked for a bottle of lemonade and an ice cream.

Rajinder Kumar, one of the guards, said it seemed to be dengue fever.

I’ve had dengue. It’s like being wiped off the face of the earth. For me, it began with a penetrating ache in my shoulder, and then, as I sweated through the hotel sheets, hallucinations. My senses were altered. When I drank water from the tap, it tasted like a mouthful of tin.

I don’t know what Cyrus hallucinated. His illness may have progressed into hemorrhagic fever, with bleeding from the gums and nose, and under the skin. Patients dying of hemorrhagic fever sometimes have such low blood pressure that no pulse can be detected. Rajinder said Cyrus had refused to be taken to the hospital.

“Madam, I really tried very hard,” he said. “I said we would call the police, we would take you to the hospital, but no, no, no. We are outsiders, third-party people, we can’t apply that kind of pressure. Had we been family we could have just taken his hand and taken him.”

Rajinder thought it came down to pride.

“He used to have the attitude that he was the king,” he said. “That is why he did not want to go to the hospital, that he did not want to be a normal person.”

His illness lasted eight days. A boy, sent up to check on his welfare, saw him stalking the property half-clothed, naked from the waist down, or shivering under a mosquito net. Then, after a day or so, no one saw him, and the boy found him dead, curled on the rock floor.

I climbed the stone stairs to Malcha Mahal several months later with a kind of curiosity that was in some ways like greed.

I had returned to India for a few days, to see what I could find among his possessions.

It is legitimate to ask why I was doing all this. I asked it myself.

“Is Cyrus a white whale?” was the subject line of an email I sent my editor.

I had become curious — O.K., obsessively curious — about how a family with wealth and status had become lost in the forest. About who they were.

Stories like that had always flipped a switch in me, spilling outside the boundaries of the assignment. Something similar had happened to me once, years before, when I pieced together the life story of a woman who had stabbed her children in a basement.

When I felt I was making progress it was a calming feeling, as though a cloud of buzzing, disparate information were being forced through a funnel, into a clear stream. Small breakthroughs would drive me forward, like a gambler. On such assignments it was possible to forget unpaid bills, unanswered telephone calls, to set aside anything not required to follow the trail.

Cyrus and his family had lived through a great historical rupture: the country’s division. My sense was that the answer lay there, in an act of government that disrupted the lives of half a continent. But what made me think I could track them down after all these years? Say I did — what could be more interesting than the story they told about themselves?

This is what was going through my head as I climbed those stairs. Cyrus’s death had received lots of media coverage, inside India and abroad, and thrill seekers had tramped through Malcha Mahal, taking video with their phones, hoping to see a ghost. The floor of the entry hall was a havoc of discarded papers that had been dumped from the wardrobe and chest of drawers.

I leafed through the letters, looking for a birth certificate, a passport, something that anchored this family in the factual world.

What I found instead was a chronicle of 30 years of interactions with journalists. This, it seemed, was the family business. There were dozens of requests from reporters. I have written enough letters of this kind in my life to recognize their pleading tone. Some were written in elaborate, courtly language. Others offered money.

Sitting there on the carpet, I laughed out loud. Cyrus and his family would string them along — as he had strung me along — and then, when the mood struck them, disdainfully refuse the interview. The Oudhs were the ones with the story. They had the upper hand.

Among the family papers was a column from The Statesman, published in 1993, with the headline “When History Is Based on Errors.” Two paragraphs had been marked.

“Have you noticed that a factual error appearing in respected printed form tends to be copied by other researchers in the same field, until, inevitably, it competes with the truth for credibility?” it read. “The writers who perpetuate these mistakes rarely do so from evil motive: They have no axe to grind, they simply do not have time to check and double-check each fact, so they rely on the scholarship of their predecessors.”

After Wilayat Mahal died in 1993, her children set a place for her at their dining table every morning.Credit… Leonie Broekstra Pauw The entry hall was a havoc of discarded papers.Credit… Leonie Broekstra Pauw

Two things genuinely surprised me.

The first was a stack of receipts for regular, small transfers of cash through Western Union from a city in the industrial north of England. The sender identified himself as a “half brother.”

The other thing was a letter. It was handwritten on fragile, blue airmail stationery and sent in 2006. It was cranky yet intimate, conveying both annoyance and concern, a letter that could only have been written by a relative.

“I am in so much pain that I cannot go to the toilet even,” the writer began, and, after an extensive catalog of physical ailments, went on to complain about the burden of providing continuous financial support for Wilayat and her children. He was obviously not a rich man.

“For God’s sake, try to sort yourselves out financially, in case anything goes wrong with me,” the writer told them, appending information for the latest Western Union transfer. “May God help us all.”

The letter was signed “Shahid,” and it was sent from an address in Bradford, Yorkshire.

Let us pause, for a moment, to consider the tragedy of the house of Oudh.

In the mid-19th century, the British East India Company had accelerated its consumption of Indian kingdoms. Having guzzled Punjab and Sindh, it set its ambitions on Oudh, a territory roughly the size of South Carolina.

Oudh was ruled at the time by a nawab, or provincial governor, named Wajid Ali Shah, a dreamy aesthete who spent his time orchestrating lavish entertainments in a harem that he called the Parikhana, or “abode of fairies.” He thought the British were his allies, because his great-uncle had extended them vast loans.

The British thought otherwise. They stripped the nawab of his kingdom on the grounds of mismanagement, thrusting into his hands a treaty declaring that “the territories of Oude shall be henceforth vested for ever, in the Honorable East India Company.”

The nawab wept, solemnly removed his turban and placed it in the envoy’s hands.

Soon thereafter, he set off for exile in Calcutta, and Lucknow was cast into mourning, the historian Rosie Llewellyn-Jones recalls in her biography of Wajid Ali Shah. “The body of the town was left soulless,” Zahuruddin Bilgrami wrote at that time. “Grief rained down from every door and wall. There was no lane, bazaar, or dwelling which did not wail in our full agony of separation.”

The nawab’s mother, in seclusion, sailed to Britain in a desperate attempt to plead her case with Queen Victoria, something the wags at Punch magazine found hilarious:

The Queen of Oude

Is disendowed

Of regions rich and juicy

Their milk and honey

I mean their money

Squeezed out by Lord Dalhousie

Oudh was finished. The vanished kingdom would hang over Lucknow like a pall.

I returned to Lucknow, and took a cab to a warren of residential streets tucked behind the grand shrines and palaces of the old city.

This is where I had encountered witnesses who could remember Cyrus and his family. Horses pulled carts through the narrow lanes, and I could hear tinny music playing on a radio. Nostalgia for Oudh was a cottage industry here. Everywhere I went, I saw the image of the last nawab, Wajid Ali Shah, his expression dreamy, one nipple poking out of his shirt.

Then there were the descendants. Because Wajid Ali Shah had hundreds of wives and concubines, people identifying themselves as descendants are all over the place in Lucknow, fighting like polecats over the veracity of one another’s claims.

When I asked about the family, I encountered instant recognition: Yes, three of them had moved into this complex for a few months in the 1970s.

Abrar Hussain, who had worked for Wilayat as a servant, said the family had caused a sensation, especially among Shiites. Ordinary people were moved to tears at the sight of them, and some were so awed by the begum — so convinced that she was their returning queen — that they refused to turn their backs to her, walking backward, out of respect.

“It wasn’t just me — the whole public was coming to see her, and was going crazy,” he said. “People would cry to see her in this condition.”

But the older men who presided over the neighborhood, mostly descendants of members of the nawab’s court, said the family were impostors. Sayyed Suleiman Naqvi, a former code-breaker for the Indian Army, said he had posed as a journalist in order to check Wilayat’s credentials.

“She said, ‘We have got documentary evidence.’ I said, ‘Get it.’ She said, ‘I will give it only to those persons who are in authority.’ She showed us certain pieces of crockery and all that, which were of course antiques,” recalled Mr. Naqvi, now in his late 70s. “But she did not show us any documents.”

The family left Lucknow abruptly, he said. Something had happened: An elderly aunt said she recognized Wilayat from before Partition. The aunt said Wilayat was an ordinary woman then, the young wife of a civil servant.

Mr. Naqvi, who considers himself a keen student of human nature, said he believed they were frauds, but that they were not motivated by greed.

“To my mind, this lady was a megalomaniac,” he said finally. “She should have been psychologically tested.”

His assessment of her children, however, was quite different. “They believed their mother,” he said, “because she was their mother.”

Everything I had learned in India was fragmentary, neighborhood gossip unbottled after 40 years.

I returned to London with three real leads. The airmail letter from Yorkshire. That name, Shahid. The Western Union receipts, testament that someone had been caring for Cyrus and his family in secret all these years.

I took a train to Bradford, and walked to the address on the envelope. It was a gray, windblown day, and the walk took me past pawnshops, cheap Chinese takeout joints and dinky rowhouses of yellow brick, nearly all of them occupied by immigrants from India and Pakistan.

I arrived, finally, at a small, neat brick house that was surrounded by a large collection of ceramic garden gnomes, teddy bears, Yorkies, mermaids and fairies.

I was so nervous that I paced in front of the house for a while before ringing the bell.

The door swung open, and before me stood a man in tiger-print pajamas. He was barrel-chested and broad-shouldered, and looked to be in his mid-80s. He did not look well: His eyes were rheumy, his chest sunken.

But he had Cyrus’s face, the same jutting cheekbones and hawk nose.

He led me inside, showed me to a chair and then lay down on a cot. His movements were laborious. He glanced without expression at the photographs I had brought with me. When I offered to play him a recording of Cyrus’s voice, he shook his head in refusal, saying it would be too painful.

Beside his sickbed were two framed pictures of Wilayat.

This was Shahid. He was Cyrus’s older brother.

And now, finally, there were some facts.

They were, or had been, an ordinary family.

Their father had been the registrar of Lucknow University, Inayatullah Butt.

My friend’s name was not Prince Cyrus, or Prince Ali Raza, or Prince anything.

He was plain old Mickey Butt.

Here, in this brick house in West Yorkshire, I had found it: The identity that Cyrus and his family had worked so hard to keep secret. Shahid, who spent his adult life working in an iron foundry, could remember a life before Oudh, when they had housemaids and school uniforms. When their mother was not a rebel queen, but a housewife.

Before long, Shahid’s wife, Camellia, came home. She was a friendly, plain-spoken Lancashire woman, animated on the subject of the Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, (whom she despised) and her husband (whom she adored). The two of them met in 1968, when she wore her hair in a blond beehive and Shahid was built like a heavyweight boxer; in those days, she said, dreamily, he could fight four men at once.

She never met her husband’s mother, but had corresponded with her for years. She thought the story about Oudh was, as she put it, “a bloody big act.”

“What was wrong with this woman?” she said of Wilayat. “I believed every word of it at the beginning, but now I doubt all of it. It’s very hard to get Shahid to talk about it. I think it’s painful. I think he was led to believe it was true. Then, as he got older, he realized it was all built on sand.”

Shahid ran away when he was about 14, then emigrated to Britain and rarely mentioned his mother’s claim to the royal house of Oudh. When I asked him about that story, he was evasive. He said he wasn’t even sure whether he was Indian or Pakistani.

“I’m so confused, I don’t know who I am,” he said. “I am like a bird, a long lost bird, a lost lamb.”

I kept asking questions but Shahid was preoccupied by the news of Cyrus’s death — he called him Mickey — and that no one knew exactly where he was buried.

“I should have saved him,” he said.

Now, all of a sudden, the field of witnesses had expanded. There were other relatives, respectable people, scattered across Pakistan, Britain and the United States.

Cyrus’s oldest brother, Salahuddin Zahid Butt, was a pilot in the Pakistani Air Force, a war hero who bombed Indian positions in the 1965 war. He died in 2017, but his wife, Salma, lived in Texas. I called her.

She said her mother-in-law’s claim to royal descent was false.

“She thought she was the princess of Oudh, but this was never, ever,” she said of Wilayat. “We never heard this history about the princess of this, the princess of that. She obviously had some mental disorder.”

Two of Cyrus’s older cousins, Wahida and Khalida, were still in Lahore, so I flew to Pakistan to see them. I parked beside an open sewer full of black, seething water, and walked down a trash-choked alleyway and knocked on a wooden door. It opened into a spacious compound, eerily quiet and green, with rosebushes in bloom.

The cousins were hunched, birdlike women in their 70s.

Wahida had worked for many years as a teacher, and barely spoke. She seemed to communicate by slapping people, hard, across the face. She wandered from one of us to the other, looking for someone to slap. Once, it was me. Mostly it was my interpreter, whose face hardened into a permanent wince. Khalida did most of the talking.

She remembered Wilayat as a tempestuous young woman, but said they hadn’t seen her since the late 1960s, when she suddenly left Pakistan and returned to India. They seemed unwilling to say anything further. After listening to them discuss other subjects for an hour, I pressed the issue, conscious of the passage of time.

“Ask her, did you ever hear that your family was related to the royal nawabs of Oudh?” I relayed to my interpreter.

“I have no idea,” Khalida answered.

“Wilayat said she was the queen of Oudh,” I told them. “She told the Indian government that for many, many years.”

“She was lying,” Khalida said.

I prodded them for hours, until I was tired and frustrated.

“Wilayat is dead,” I said. “Her children are dead. There is no secret anymore.”

“Everything is a lie,” Khalida said. “They are dead. Just leave them. God forgives them, so we should also forgive them.”

Trying to get Shahid to speak about his mother and siblings was painful.

He would get stuck at a particular moment in the story, when his mother sent him out to buy bananas and he fled the family. Camellia said that, to this day, he would not eat bananas. She thought it was guilt.

Besides, he was becoming sicker and sicker. It wasn’t a chest infection, but lung cancer that had metastasized to his lymph nodes. Camellia would not think of allowing him to be admitted to the hospital, but nursed him in the front room until there was nothing to do but give him painkillers.

On my fourth visit to Bradford, the last time I saw him, his voice was raspy, but he told me more than he ever had before.

The story, as he told it, began at Partition.

On June 3, 1947, the British viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, announced that the withdrawal of British Empire would create two independent nations, with Pakistan carved out for Muslims. Lucknow’s educated Muslims began slipping away overnight, headed for Pakistan’s new capital, where they would make up the DNA of a new elite. There were letters promising juicy promotions. And there were, on the other hand, rumors of violence if they stayed.

Shahid’s parents had to make an immediate decision between India or Pakistan. His mother, Wilayat Butt, had never been so happy as she was in Lucknow. She was fiery and strong. Shahid has an image of her, striding out onto her balcony in Lucknow in jodhpurs and riding boots, slapping her thigh with a crop. She simply refused to leave.

But then came one afternoon in the crumbling elegance of the nawab’s city. Shahid’s father — a man in distinguished middle age, wearing wire-rimmed glasses — was riding his bicycle home when he was surrounded by Hindu youths, who began beating him with hockey sticks.

He soon decided to move the whole family to Pakistan, where, in the great reshuffling, he had been offered a job overseeing the new country’s civil aviation agency.

He was right to worry; over the months that followed, the city of his youth, Lahore, would be bathed in blood.

“We were children,” recalled Salma, Wilayat’s daughter-in-law. “Riots were on, and we couldn’t go out at all. Weeks and weeks, the dead bodies were lying around, and when we went to the bazaar to get our food there was so much rioting and robbing, people were robbing. At night it would be very frightening, you could hear people crying and shooting and stabbing. We would be sitting next to the window and watching.”

Wilayat followed her husband, Shahid told me, but she never accepted his decision to leave India. She was obsessed with what she had left behind. In her mind, the grudge sprouted and germinated, and her behavior became volatile. Then her husband suddenly died. Now with all restraining influence on her gone, furious over the expropriation of her property, she accosted Pakistan’s prime minister at a public appearance, Shahid said, and slapped him.

This changed things for Wilayat. She was no longer a well-connected widow, but something shadier.

She was confined to a mental hospital in Lahore for six months after that — the only way, Shahid said, to avoid a long prison sentence. Shahid remembers visiting her there, among the wails and curses of the patients. “It was horrible,” he said. “Women tied up with chains. One poor girl was chained up to a wall. It was four chains. And she was swinging. And spitting at everybody who went past.”

Salma said that Wilayat was given electroshock therapy. “They said she was mental,” she said. “They gave her all these injections.”

When she was free, Wilayat gathered up her youngest children without warning, packed trunks with carpets and jewelry, and smuggled it all back into India, with the goal of reclaiming her property. Shahid set out with them but eventually walked away. He could not put into words why he left. His story flickers out here.

Early this month, Shahid died in the front room of his house, holding Camellia’s hand.

It was Partition that ruined his mother, set her on the course toward the ruined palace, Shahid had told me. “We had to start all over again,” he said.

In the early 1970s, still empty-handed, increasingly bizarre in her behavior, Wilayat announced to the world that she was the queen of Oudh, demanding the vast properties of a kingdom that no longer existed.

An ordinary grievance, unaddressed, had metastasized to become an epic one.

They took on new identities: Farhad became Princess Sakina, occasionally Princess Alexandrina; Mickey became Prince Ali Raza, and later called himself Prince Cyrus. They no longer made any mention of their Pakistani relatives, or the spacious family house in Lahore that was waiting for them should they return. Maybe they forgot it existed. They seemed to shed their past entirely, to come from nowhere.

The rest of the story you already know.

They were so convincing, and so insistent, that for 40 years people believed them.

So there it is: I have plundered their secret. Cyrus would have hated it. He refused to answer questions about his past; it was one of the essential themes of our friendship.

I try to imagine how he would react to all this. His father on his bicycle, being beaten with hockey sticks. His mother in a mental hospital where women were chained to the wall. His older brother running away, abandoning him. Mickey Butt, the name he had left behind.

There is no nice way to put this. I am unraveling the story that was the central work of their lives. It is impossible to know, now that he and his sister are dead, whether they even knew it wasn’t all true.

Either way, this article would have crushed him.

And yet, why do you invite a journalist into your life, if you do not expect this to happen? That is like asking a dog not to bark. I must admit, it offends me a little when people think they can lie to reporters.

But even today there are plenty of autorickshaw drivers in Old Delhi who will tell you about the prince who lived in the jungle. And they will be telling that story long after mine has come and gone.

I was reminded of this on my last trip to Delhi. I visited the cemetery where Cyrus is buried. I had an idea of placing a stone there, something that said Prince Cyrus of Oudh.

But he had been buried as an unclaimed body, assigned the number DD33B. Unclaimed bodies are marked only with chips of stone, and small mounds extend in all directions, to the vanishing point. After wandering the cemetery for what seemed like hours, I sat down, sweaty and miserable.

“He is lost in a city of the dead,” I wrote in my notebook.

My colleague Suhasini was haranguing the clerk, urging him to look through his ledger one more time, when I realized that a man was warming himself beside a stove, listening intently.

He then stood up and presented himself, rather formally. He was Mohammad Aslam Chowdhury, a seller of electrical wiring from Old Delhi.

He was wearing a voluminous, cheap-looking tweed jacket, and had a squiff of hair, dyed jet black. He presented a plastic folder and showed me its contents. It was filled with newspaper clippings about Cyrus’s death.

He said he carried the clippings to remind himself how swiftly earthly glory passes.

“In Old Delhi, this was the only topic of conversation,” he said. “People were saying such a big king passed away like this, in such a way that nobody knew him. How could the scion of such an illustrious royal family get lost in the darkness of oblivion?”

As he spoke of Cyrus’s death, Mr. Chowdhury became distressed.

“I feel really emotional about this, that something like this can happen on an earth made by God,” he cried out, as the other people in the clerk’s office turned to stare. “O destiny, tell me why you are angry with me. What I have done wrong?”

I glanced incredulously at my interpreter: Could this really be happening? But Mr. Chowdhury was in his own world. The story of the royals of Oudh had sounded a note within him. He would be telling the story for years, I realized.

“If a person like this has gone into oblivion, and had this death of anonymity,” he said, wonderingly, “what can you say about the death of a commoner?”

Suhasini Raj contributed reporting.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Don’t quit now, Democrats: Wrapping up impeachment early is the dumbest idea ever – Pence, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton and numerous others were clearly involved. What’s the point of stopping now?

Westlake Legal Group bJcbCkYAIBBUCPD097g8aF6qHDv-_zeb26hMn_csm64 Don't quit now, Democrats: Wrapping up impeachment early is the dumbest idea ever - Pence, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton and numerous others were clearly involved. What's the point of stopping now? r/politics

I was confused by this as well. Here is what is happening next as I understand it.

Impeachment now moves to the House Judiciary Committee, led by Jerry Nadler. They will be the ones to draft Articles of Impeachment, and in doing so, they will have the ability to continue gathering evidence and call any additional witnesses that have withheld testimony.

Many Democrats have publicly expressed that they do not want impeachment to get dragged out by Trump-loyalists like Giuliani, Bolton, Pompeo, or Mulvaney, but the House Judiciary Committee is the best suited for navigating through our complicated legal system. However, impeachment powers give house investigators additional power in the judicial system. The most relevant case currently proceeding through our legal system for Charles Kupperman, the former Deputy National Security Advisor, has final arguments scheduled for December 10th. This is the case that will likely set the precedent that all future cases will refer to regarding the constitutional crisis between the White House and Congress, and whether or not witnesses need to comply with the House’s subpoenas. The primary question at hand is whether or not Trump has executive privilege in the face of the impeachment inquiry.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump calls for Senate trial, seeks whistleblower and Schiff as impeachment witnesses

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6107268298001_6107283718001-vs Trump calls for Senate trial, seeks whistleblower and Schiff as impeachment witnesses fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox news fnc/politics fnc cd6e9c11-460d-5d32-ad8c-6ff028d46e3d Brooke Singman article

President Trump, during a wide-ranging interview Friday morning with “Fox & Friends,” called for a Senate trial should the House impeach him and pressed for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, the whistleblower and others to be called as witnesses.

Calling into “Fox & Friends” after a packed week of hearings where a parade of witnesses alleged high-level involvement in efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate Democrats while aid was withheld, Trump blasted the inquiry as “a continuation of the witch hunt” and downplayed the impact of the testimony.

TRUMP CALLS UPCOMING FISA REPORT ‘HISTORIC’ 

“There’s nothing there,” Trump declared, claiming “there should never be an impeachment” and he “doesn’t know” the majority of the witnesses.

But following a meeting with senators a day earlier, the president announced on the show that if the House impeaches, “Frankly, I want a trial.”

He stressed that Senate trial would provide the opportunity to call other witnesses — including Hunter Biden, whose dealings in Ukraine were at the heart of what he wanted investigated out of Kiev, and especially Schiff.

“There’s only one person I want more than, where’s Hunter, and that is Adam Schiff,” Trump said.

Blasting Schiff’s dramatized reading (later described as a parody) of the now-infamous phone call with Ukraine’s president and challenging his claims not to know the whistleblower, Trump said: “I want to see Adam Schiff testify about the whistleblower.”

He went on to say he also wants to hear from the “fake whistleblower,” saying he and “everybody” know the identity and alleging they filed a “false report” on his July 25 with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“I want the whistleblower, who put in a false report, to testify,” Trump said, adding that he believes the individual “is a political operative.”

At the center of the impeachment inquiry, which began in September, is Trump’s July 25 phone call with Kiev. That call prompted the whistleblower complaint to the intelligence community inspector general, and in turn, the impeachment inquiry in the House.

The president’s request came after millions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen, which Democrats and witnesses have claimed shows a “quid pro quo” arrangement. Trump denies that.

Schiff, D-Calif., is leading impeachment inquiry proceedings in the House, and concluded five days of public hearings late Thursday.

This week, the House Intelligence Committee heard testimony from aide to Vice President Mike Pence, Jennifer Williams; National Security Council official Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman; former U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine Amb. Kurt Volker; former National Security Council aide Tim Morrison; ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland; Pentagon official Laura Cooper, State Department official David Hale; State Department official David Holmes and former National Security Council senior director Dr. Fiona Hill.

The president claimed Friday that he “hardly knows” Sondland, who testified for hours on Wednesday. Sondland said that there was, in fact, a “quid pro quo” tying a White House meeting to the push for investigations — concerning former Vice President Joe Biden’s role ousting a prosecutor who had been looking into Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma, where his son Hunter worked on the board. Sondland described a potential quid pro quo linked to the military aid, but said he never heard that directly from Trump.

Trump also said he did not know Volker, while saying he “only had a couple of conversations with [Sondland].”

“He was really the ambassador to the E.U., and all of a sudden, he’s working on this,” Trump said.

But Sondland and Hill testified this week that the president tasked Sondland with Ukraine efforts.

Trump also went on to blast Holmes, who testified on Thursday that he overheard a conversation between Trump and Sondland on July 26.

“How about that guy with the telephone? I guarantee that never took place,” Trump said. “I have really good hearing and I’ve watched guys for 40 years making phone calls and I can’t hear the other side.”

Trump also went on to blast fired U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who testified before the committee last week, calling her “an Obama person,” and saying she was “rude.”

“This was not an angel, this woman, and okay, there were a lot of things she did that I didn’t like, but I just want you to know, this is not a baby we’re dealing with,” Trump said.

During Yovanovitch’s hearing last week, the president criticized her record via Twitter—a move which Schiff, Yovanovitch and others characterized as witness intimidation.

Meanwhile, Trump maintained that there was “no quid pro quo” and that he wanted “nothing” from Ukraine.

Should the House introduce articles of impeachment, all that is needed to impeach Trump is a simple majority vote by those lawmakers present and voting. But at that point, removal from the Oval Office is hardly a certainty. The Senate would have to hold a trial.

While some Senate Republicans have voiced concerns about Trump’s actions, impeachment does not at this stage appear to have enough support in the Senate to threaten Trump in the long run. Most GOP senators have stopped short of condemning the president for his controversial phone call, while others have outright defended him.

The president, though, touted the GOP’s unity on Friday.

“The Republican Party has never been more unified,” Trump said. “In the Senate and the House, Mitch [McConnell], Lindsey [Graham], I could name 20 names up there.”

He added: “The Republicans, I have never seen anything like it, they’re sticking together.”

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6107268298001_6107283718001-vs Trump calls for Senate trial, seeks whistleblower and Schiff as impeachment witnesses fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox news fnc/politics fnc cd6e9c11-460d-5d32-ad8c-6ff028d46e3d Brooke Singman article   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6107268298001_6107283718001-vs Trump calls for Senate trial, seeks whistleblower and Schiff as impeachment witnesses fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox news fnc/politics fnc cd6e9c11-460d-5d32-ad8c-6ff028d46e3d Brooke Singman article

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com