Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Monday, March 10, 2025
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 880)
Opinion, Video

This week on McLaughlin Group, Pat Buchanan, Eleanor Clift, Mortimer Zuckerman and Tom Rogan join John McLaughlin to debate the Senate CIA report, the U.S.-U.K. alliance on the fritz, and the $1.1 trillion CRomnibus spending bill.

A Democrat-led Senate panel headed up by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) released the CIA report on enhanced interrogation Tuesday despite dire warnings from lawmakers and intel officials. In response, the GOP minority released a rebuttal report refuting the claims made in the Democrats’ majority report, which criticized the CIA enhanced interrogation program as ineffective and misleading.

Pushback from the CIA head, former CIA heads and former CIA officials once again resurrected the debate over alleged torture — or “enhanced interrogation techniques” that may or may not actually equate to torture — which has been ongoing in the U.S. since the post-9/11 period.

While the FNS panel speculated on public views on enhanced interrogation, PPD released survey results from the most recent PPD Poll, as well as examined other public polling.

Meanwhile, the Senate passed a $1.1 trillion spending bill late Saturday around 10:00 P.M. ET that funds the government through next September, avoiding a partial government shutdown. Congress will now send the measure to President Barack Obama’s desk to be signed.

This week on McLaughlin Group, Pat Buchanan,

Politics

congress_capitol_hill

U.S. Congress on Capitol Hill, Washington D.C. (Photo: Reuters)

WASHINGTON –  Proponents of openness and transparency in government suffered a defeat after Congress failed to update the Freedom of Information Act, despite bipartisan support in the House and Senate.

In November, the Senate Judiciary Committee released an amended version of the FOIA bill that would have forced government agencies to be more transparent. The legislation, which had bipartisan support and is backed by open government advocates, was co-sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), the ranking Republican and soon-to-be chairman of the committee.

The Senate approved a bill this week that would have addressed Exemption 5, which applies to government records that are part of a behind-the-scenes “deliberative” decision-making process and covers any “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters,” drafts, and attorney-client records. The discretionary exemption gives government agencies an easy path to waive Freedom of Information Requests in favor of disclosure.

The act would have forced government agencies to make records available for public inspection in an electronic format, as well as reform the process by which agencies could claim Exemption 5.

Sen. Leahy, who claimed agencies cited the exemption more than 79,000 times in 2012, a 41 percent increase compared with the previous year, said he was deeply disappointed that the House adjourned Friday without taking up the Senate version of the bill.

Leahy said he was shocked House Republican leaders didn’t jump on the chance to support the measure considering their alleged desire to increase oversight of the Obama administration, make big government more accountable and increase transparency.

“[Republicans] have chosen secrecy over sunlight,” Leahy said.

However, the House did pass a similar FOIA reform bill back in February, but Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) delayed debate on the bill and, ultimately, the two chambers could not agree on final language.

In a response, Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA) said he also was disappointed that the House “ran out of time to address concerns in the Senate bill,” but said the upper chamber could still send a bipartisan FOIA bill to the president’s desk if Leahy and other senators were willing to accept the House language.

“The reality is that, even today, the Senate could still send a bipartisan FOIA bill to the president if they were willing to accept some minimal differences,” Issa, who co-sponsored the House bill with Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) said in a statement.

While Congress is taking the brunt of the blame, it is also true that President Obama did little to help push a bill that would’ve fulfilled a two-time campaign promise — to increase transparency in government. Obama, Biden, and other top White House officials made last-minute calls Thursday to push for passage of the $1.1 trillion CRomnibus spending bill, but did not make a single call advocating the FOIA Improvement Act of 2014.

Transparency advocates suffered a legislative defeat after

Economy

federal_reserve

The Federal Reserve (Photo: REUTERS)

The policy-setting Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC) will decide next week whether interest rates will remain low for “a considerable period” or not.

The Fed committee will meet on Tuesday and Wednesday next week an announcement is scheduled for 2 P.M. ET Wednesday. Fed Chair Janet Yellen will hold a press conference following the announcement.

Markets and investors expect the Fed to finally address the question of when they will decide to hike interest rates, as they may potentially change the language of its statement by eliminating the phrase “a considerable period.” The phrase was added earlier this year to vaguely describe the duration of time interest rates would stay low — largely because they simply didn’t know — after the Fed ended its monthly bond-buying program.

The Fed decided to end its bond-buying program known as quantitative in October, and most analysts have interpreted the “considerable period” to end in mid-2015. Fed policy-makers have sent signals to the markets that the phrase could be replaced with an even more vague single-term — “patience.”

If the Fed’s language sounds as if they aren’t even sure what is the correct course of action to take, at least they will have some fresh new economic data to draw from this week.

Several economic indicators are also scheduled to be released next week, including a report on industrial production on Monday, data from the National Association of Realtors on November housing starts on Tuesday; and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the Commerce Department on Wednesday.

The CPI, specifically, will be closely watched and scrutinized by economists and traders alike, as the Fed’s 2 to 3 percent inflation mark has become a key indicator for when the central bank might raise interest rates.

The policy-setting Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC)

Politics

sen_jeff_sessions

Dec. 12, 2014: Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., talks to reporters on Capitol Hill as the Senate considers a spending bill. (Photo: AP)

WASHINGTON – The Senate will have a rare Saturday session after negotiations to pass a $1.1 trillion bill to fund the government Friday night progressed. However, lawmakers failed to hatch out a deal after two Republican senators demanded the bill be stripped of money that could be used to implement President Obama’s new immigration policy.

While Senate Republican leadership pledged to fight Obama’s executive action on immigration next year — when they take control of the upper chamber — but after the spectacle in the House of Representatives, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) doesn’t trust them to keep their pledge.

“We will learn soon enough if those statements are genuine and sincere,” Cruz said of presumptive Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).

Regardless, leadership in both parties contend the bill remains on track for a Monday vote after a nearly-empty House passed a second stopgap measure Friday afternoon, buying the Senate additional time to discuss and vote on a $1.1 trillion government-wide spending bill.

However, it is a potentially unneeded measure, as Senate leaders say they are hopeful the CRomnibus — as it has been dubbed — House budget bill can be resurrected. Speaker Boehner and President Obama corralled enough votes to overcome an outright Democrat rebellion by a slim 219 – 206 vote margin in the House of Representatives Thursday, leading to “Fallout Friday.” Both liberal Democrats and conservatives are outraged that Obama and Boehner twisted members’ arms together to get a less-than-palatable bill through.

“These leaders betrayed their campaign promises as well as their oaths to support and defend the Constitution,” Ken Cuccinelli, President of Senate Conservatives Fund said in an email to PPD. “Now, they must be held accountable.”

Conservatives wanted to force a short-term continuing resolution so that the fight could again be waged with a far larger Republican majority in the House and new majority in the Senate. Now, the current plan would fund the government through September 2015, but immigration services would only be funded through late February.

The Saturday Senate session will also address President Obama’s nominees, which Sen. Ted Cruz and others wanted to hold up until the immigration order was defunded.

WASHINGTON – The Senate will have

Economy

Google

Headquarters for Internet giant Google. (Photo: REUTERS)

Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL) will shut down its engineering office in Russia amid the Kremlin’s crackdown on internet freedoms, specifically objecting to a law regarding data-handling practices. The Internet search engine giant is now considering whether to hold on to some of their employees in order to assist in sales, business partnerships, user support, marketing and communications.

Russia’s parliament, the State Duma, which consists of the Federal Assembly of Russia (lower parliament) and the Federation Council of Russia (upper), passed a law in July forcing Internet sites that store the personal data of Russian citizens to do so inside the country only, a policy the Kremlin actually claims is for data protection. However, critics view the new law as an attack on social media networks, which can be used to mobilize political support and opposition.

The law was passed soon after new rules were established requiring blogs attracting more than 3,000 daily visits to register with a communications watchdog and a regulation allowing websites to be shut without a court order.

Google did not respond to a request for comment.

Internet giant Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL) will shut

Politics, Video

Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist and architect of ObamaCare who testified in front of the House Oversight Committee earlier this week, said under oath “I am not the architect of ObamaCare.”

However, American Commitment President Phil Kerpan dug up more video of Gruber telling his students at MIT that he has a bias because he “wrote part of the law.”

“What does this bill do?” Gruber facetiously self-questioned. “This bill tries to…full disclaimer, I’m going to describe objectively but I helped write it. I’ll be objective, I’ll try to be objective but full-disclaimer I was involved in writing the legislation so there is some bias involved here.”

Gruber made headlines after being caught on video bragging that Democrats used a “lack of transparency” and “the stupidity of the American voter” to pass the bill.

Under tough questioning by North Carolina Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry, Gruber admitted that kicking working Americans off of their health insurance plans “was part of the calculation” when designing ObamaCare.

“I concluded there would be churn in the market the entire time,” Gruber said. “We did model that some individuals would lose their existing plans and move to new forms of coverage… I don’t know the national estimate for how many people lost health insurance, so I don’t know how it compares to what I projected.”

In testimony this week, he went on to confirm that he told the White House that people would lose their plans.

“I was present for discussion of those numbers and interpretation of what they meant in terms of how the law would affect individuals,” Gruber said.

Of course, Gruber attempted to argue during the hearing that he was simply trying to appear smarter than he was in front of his students, but even if this wasn’t the fifth video, Americans wouldn’t be buying that excuse.

Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist and architect

Polls

cia-hq-langley

CIA headquarters in McLean, Virginia. Pentagon and intelligence officials confirmed early Monday they believe that releasing the Senate report on alleged use of torture by the CIA will spark violence home and abroad. (Photo: AP)

A Democrat-led Senate panel headed up by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) released the CIA report on enhanced interrogation Tuesday despite dire warnings from lawmakers and intel officials. In response, the GOP minority released a rebuttal report refuting the claims made in the Democrats’ majority report, which criticized the CIA enhanced interrogation program as ineffective and misleading.

The conflicting reports have once again resurrected the debate over alleged torture — or “enhanced interrogation techniques” that may or may not actually equate to torture — which has been ongoing in the U.S. since the post-9/11 period.

CIA officials pushed back hard on the claims made in the report, including Jose Rodriguez, the ex-CIA chief in charge of the enhanced interrogation program, who said Tuesday that Senate Democrats released a bogus partisan report aimed to throw the CIA “under the bus” in order to cover for themselves; CIA Director John Brennan, who in a first-of-its-kind news conference Thursday slammed the Senate report; former CIA Directors George J. Tenet, Porter J. Goss and Michael V. Hayden, and former CIA Deputy Directors John E. McLaughlin, Albert M. Calland and Stephen R. Kappes, who together all penned an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal claiming, in fact, the program did work and provided detailed accounts of actionable intelligence gathering to prove it.

“Our view on this is shared by the CIA and the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Republican minority,” the three former CIA heads wrote. “Both critiques are clear-eyed, fact-based assessments that challenge the majority’s contentions in a nonpartisan way.”

Meanwhile, former Vice President Dick Cheney flat-out called the report “full of crap,” and a “terrible piece of work” that was “deeply flawed” during an interview with Bret Baier on Special Report.

A group of former CIA officials launched a website called CIASavedLives.com in response to the committee’s majority report, defending the agency’s tactics.

But how do Americans feel about enhanced interrogation, or “torture”? While soon-to-be released polling from the usual suspects will add to this conversation — for better or worse — those results will no doubt depend on how the pollsters word their questions to respondents.

For instance, a new poll released by Rasmussen Reports finds voters strongly believe it would have been better for Congress to keep the CIA’s interrogation methods a secret, particularly if the disclosures put the American public at risk.

A whole 69 percent of likely voters say they feel it is more important to protect the safety of Americans from terrorist attacks than for the public to know the full details of how the CIA got its information. Further, just 23 percent say it’s more important to publicly disclose the full extent of the CIA’s interrogation methods.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on December 9-10, 2014 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

A 2012 FOX Poll found roughly two-thirds of registered voters supported enhanced interrogation to prevent terrorist attacks, as well. A a new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds Americans are more likely than not (48 – 42 percent) to say torture is sometimes justified, but are less likely to support some of the specific tactics used against detainees.

However, according to Gallup, who has never found majority support for the tactic, getting specific on the tactics will result in even less support for the CIA program.

Gallup first asked Americans if they were willing to allow the CIA to torture “terrorists if they know details about future attacks in the U.S.” in October 2001, when 53 percent of Americans said they would not be willing to allow such tactics.

We had a problem with all of the questioning formats, because we felt they didn’t truly get to the heart of the issue, nor accurately depict the choice. So, we conducted a PPD Poll from December 9 – 11, posing to 1,010 American adults several questions that varied in language. The results are clear — words matter. Gallup consistently uses the word torture, as did the Huffington Post/YouGov poll, despite a significant number of Americans changing their response when enhanced interrogation is used?

Here was the first question and the results:

Would you support the CIA using enhanced interrogation techniques on ISIS or other radical Islamic terrorists if it meant preventing another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001?

When posed the initial question above, which made the honest choice to focus only on radical Islam for the obvious reason, 52 percent said they would while 38 percent said they would not. Perhaps a reflection of the ongoing debate, a significant 10 percent said they aren’t sure, of which, 7 percent said they previously had an opinion on the issue.

It would appear many Americans are having second thoughts.

Among a sub-sample of adults who correctly identified at least three of the specific tactics, nearly-thirds (65 percent) said they support enhanced interrogation, while 21 percent said they do not. The results indicate that those who oppose enhanced interrogation due so despite caring a whole lot about the specific facts or tactics. Instead, opposition is based on ideological grounds.

An even more accurate wording was posed to respondents next:

Would you support the CIA using enhanced interrogation techniques if they were required to have a doctor present, detainees were told they would not be physically harmed or killed, and it meant preventing another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001?

This question resulted in a significant increase in support, as 63 percent said they would support the use of enhanced interrogation, while just 22 percent said they would not under these conditions and circumstances. Still, 15 percent of American adults indicated they were unsure.

Despite the telling results from these two questions, they still do not strike at the heart of the moral arguments made by both sides of this issue. The final question was tailored to do just that, and the results were both surprising and unsurprising.

Would you support the CIA enhanced interrogation techniques if it was required to have a doctor present, it meant preventing another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001, and it would save the life of your closest relative or significant other?

Interestingly, even though the level of support among those who correctly identified at least three of the specific tacts remained relatively stable (66 percent), the overall spread from the first question increased significantly. Unsurprisingly, when pressed, those who previously expressed uncertainty, suddenly aren’t so unsure whether they want their loved ones to live, as a total of 73 percent said they would support enhanced interrogation under these circumstances. However, 21 percent still claim a moral objection under these circumstances.

May we pray they never have the courage of their convictions tested in the future.

Subscribe to PPD Unlimited to view cross-tabs, gain unlimited access to detailed information on all public opinion polls,  and much, much more!

Public opinion analysis of enhanced interrogation isn't

Economy

us consumer sentiment

Shoppers look over the offerings at the new Trader Joe’s store in Boulder, Colorado February 14, 2014.
(Photo: REUTERS/RICK WILKING)

U.S. consumer sentiment jumped in December to a near eight-year high on lower gasoline prices, a closely watched survey released on Friday showed. The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan’s preliminary reading on the overall index on consumer sentiment for this month measured in at 93.8, which is the highest reading since January 2007.

The International Energy Agency said Friday it cut its outlook for crude oil demand growth in 2015, predicting non-OPEC supply gains would downward pressure. Consumers are clearly reacting accordingly. The gauge beat the median forecast of 89.5 taken from 70 economists polled by Reuters, and up from the November reading of 88.8.

Gas prices played a vital role, but are not the entire reason for increased optimism.

“Expected wage gains rose to their highest level since 2008, and consumers voiced the most favorable buying attitudes in several decades,” survey director Richard Curtin said in a statement.

The survey’s gauge of consumer expectations also increased to 86.1, up from 79.9 and also the highest measured since January 2007. The numbers, too, beat the median forecast of 80.5.

The survey’s barometer of current economic conditions rose to 105.7 from 102.7 and above the 101.4 forecast. It was the highest level since February 2007.

The survey’s one-year inflation expectation rose to 2.9 percent from 2.8 percent, while its five-year inflation outlook also rose to 2.9 percent from 2.6 percent last month. However, there has been some disparity between private surveys and surveys conducted by and for the government.

For instance, despite the survey’s results, consumer spending during the early holiday shopping season has been down year-over-year. Consumers spent an average 6.4 percent less on in-store purchases than they did on Thanksgiving weekend last year, but over 11 percent less in total year-over-year, according to a recent report from the National Retail Federation.

U.S. consumer sentiment jumped in December to

Economy, Markets

markets_crude_oil

The International Energy Agency said Friday it cut its outlook for crude oil demand growth in 2015, predicting non-OPEC supply gains would downward pressure. The IEA Oil Market Report (OMR) for December cut the outlook by 230 000 barrels per day (230 kb/d) to 0.9 million barrels per day (mb/d), citing lower expectations for the Former Soviet Union and other oil‐exporting countries.

“Global production fell by 340 kb/d in November to 94.1 mb/d on lower OPEC supplies. Annual gains of 2.1 mb/d were split evenly between OPEC and non‐OPEC producers,” the report said. “Surging US light tight oil supply looks set to push total non‐OPEC output to record growth of 1.9 mb/d for 2014, but the pace is expected to slow to 1.3 mb/d for next year.”

Brent crude oil slipped on Friday to below $63 a barrel, its lowest since July 2009. While Brent is down over 8 percent this week, it is under its June peak above $115 per barrel by a whopping 45 percent. U.S. crude was down 55 cents at $59.40 a barrel, after falling to a low of $58.80, also the weakest since July 2009. The contract has lost about 10 percent this week.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which accounts for a third of global oil output, cut its 2015 demand forecast this week to the lowest in more than a decade.

“The market has reacted strongly to the OPEC forecast cut, and it is focusing only on the negative,” said Hans van Cleef, senior energy economist at ABN Amro in Amsterdam.

He also said that there was little technical support until the price reached $50-55 level.

Top energy consumer China, which was just named the world’s largest economy by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), should be of concern for U.S. energy policy moving forward. Though factory output growth was weaker than expected, they released data on Friday showing near-record demand for their refineries in November. High Chinese oil demand, which has remained above 10 million bpd for the past three months, could help provide a floor for prices. This would give the Asian power enormous trade leverage.

Comments from Saudi Arabia’s oil minister reiterating that the kingdom will not cut output, and a surprise jump in U.S. crude and distillate inventories — in spite of administration policy on public lands — have helped to drive down prices this week.

OPEC exporters are battling for market share. Kuwait has set the official selling price for crude sales to Asian buyers for January at $3.95 a barrel below the average of Oman/Dubai quotes, a trader said, its lowest since December 2008.

The International Energy Agency said Friday it

Economy

producer prices and Ford factory worker

Producer prices reported by the Labor Department. A Ford Factory worker on the assembly line. (Photo: REUTERS)

The Labor Department said Friday that U.S. producer prices fell in November in and out of the energy sector, suggesting the inflation benchmark remains a distant goal.

Labor’s producer price index for final demand dipped 0.2 percent, a sharper fall than expected fueled by the continued fall in gasoline prices.

The so-called core measure of producer inflation, which excludes food, energy and trade services, remained flat. That will no doubt be taken as a bad sign by Federal Reserve policymakers who are expected to debate next week whether to keep a previous pledge regarding interest rates. Borrowing costs are likely now to stay next to nothing for a “considerable time.”

When compared to a year earlier, that core index was up just 1.5 percent, and that annual reading has been dropping a tenth of a point each month since September.

Another core reading that only strips out food and energy was also flat on the month and up 1.8 percent year over year.

Fed officials largely view the current low inflation environment as transitory and believe the likelihood of inflation running persistently below the U.S. central bank’s 2 percent target has diminished somewhat since early this year. The drop in gasoline prices, for example, could prove temporary.

The Labor Department said Friday that U.S.

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe