Monday, December 5, 2016

Donald Trump’s Message Sparks Anger in China

from WSJ



President-elect’s Taiwan call, tweets signal his approach will be more adversarial

Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen speaks on the phone with U.S. president-elect Donald Trump at her office in Taipei on Dec. 3. ENLARGE
Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen speaks on the phone with U.S. president-elect Donald Trump at her office in Taipei on Dec. 3. PHOTO: TAIWAN PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE/REUTERS
The verbal confrontation between President-elect Donald Trumpand the Chinese government escalated on Monday, as China responded harshly to attacks by Mr. Trump on its economic and security positions.
The exchange signaled a new and potentially more adversarial relationship between the world’s two largest economies, as Mr. Trump moves to follow through on his campaign-trail promises to challenge China’s trade and currency policies.
Chinese officials late Friday and early Saturday played down Mr. Trump’s precedent-breaking phone call with Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen, which a transition official said had been arranged by Bob Dole, the former Republican senator and presidential nominee. The call went beyond pleasantries and included a discussion about China and stability in the Asia-Pacific, according to a person familiar with the call. The Chinese directed their ire at Taiwan and not at Mr. Trump.
But they signaled their displeasure with a series of Twitter posts Mr. Trump leveled at China over the weekend, as he criticized its currency policies and military presence in the South China Sea.
In a packed press briefing Monday, China’s foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang suggested that Beijing had made its unhappiness directly known to members of Mr. Trump’s team.
The People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s leading newspaper, said in a front-page commentary in Monday’s overseas editions that “Trump and his transition team ought to recognize that creating trouble for China-U.S. relations is just creating trouble for the U.S. itself.” It criticized Mr. Trump’s tweets for portraying the phone call “as not a big deal” and warned that if such “petty tricks” are allowed to go unanswered, Beijing could expect to see more of these provocations once he’s in office.
0:00 / 0:00
President-elect Donald Trump took to Twitter to criticize China over its economic and military policies. China’s Foreign Ministry’s response to the tweets suggested that Beijing had made its displeasure known directly to Mr. Trump’s team. Photo: Getty Images
Mr. Dole, in an interview, said the law firm he is affiliated with does work with the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the U.S., and that the firm played a role in arranging the phone call. “It’s fair to say that we may have had some influence,” Mr. Dole said.
U.S.-China experts said both Mr. Trump and Beijing appear to be trying to establish boundaries for a new relationship between the countries, which is expected to be more adversarial than that favored by President Barack Obama since 2009.
At the White House, officials fielded multiple calls from Chinese officials over the weekend in which China complained about Mr. Trump’s actions and said it needs stability and predictability in its relationship with the U.S., a senior Obama administration official said.
The Chinese also were seeking guidance on Mr. Trump’s policy intentions, and White House officials said they didn’t know what they are, the administration official said.
“What you have seen in the past eight years is possibly too much predictability” from the U.S. in its approach to China, said Christopher Johnson, a former senior China analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency. “A little unpredictability is a good thing, but too much is scary. There’s a fine line there between good unpredictability and scary, and that’s the balance that has to be found.”
A man reads a newspaper with the headline that reads ‘U.S. President-elect Donald Trump delivers a mighty shock to America’ at a newsstand in Beijing on Nov. 10.ENLARGE
A man reads a newspaper with the headline that reads ‘U.S. President-elect Donald Trump delivers a mighty shock to America’ at a newsstand in Beijing on Nov. 10. PHOTO:ANDY WONG/ASSOCIATED PRESS
After Mr. Trump becomes president on Jan. 20, his first real test with China could arise in mid-April. That’s when the Treasury Department is required to make public a “currency” report that details the behavior of other nations. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Trump vowed to label China a “currency manipulator,” a designation that would require negotiations between both countries and could be a step toward penalizing Beijing. Such talks could reset the way they engage with each other.
On Sunday, Vice President-elect Mike Pence declined to say during an interview on NBC whether Mr. Trump would label China as a currency manipulator. Jason Miller, a spokesman for Mr. Trump’s transition operation, declined on Monday to expand on Mr. Pence’s comments.
Mr. Trump hammered China during the campaign for its currency and trade policies, and threatened to impose tariffs of between 35% and 45% on Chinese exports to the U.S. It was unclear if he would soften those pledges once elected, but his Friday call with Ms. Tsai brought questions about his approach to China into sharper focus.
Messrs. Trump and Pence described the conversation between Mr. Trump and Ms. Tsai as a congratulatory call initiated by Taiwan. But during the discussion with Taiwan’s leader, which lasted for about 12 minutes, Mr. Trump stressed to Ms. Tsai that his top priority is the U.S. economy, said the person familiar with the call.
“The conversation was about regional stability,” said the person, adding the call was planned weeks in advance. It marked the first of its kind since at least 1979, when the U.S. established formal relations with Beijing.
The terse exchanges between an incoming U.S. president and the country with the world’s second-largest economy have, over the course of 72 hours, broken from more than a decade of fragile diplomacy, experts said.
A rise in U.S.-China tensions before Mr. Trump takes office could shape any cooperation between the two countries on high-stakes issues. It comes amid growing alarm over the nuclear threat from North Korea, for which Mr. Trump will need China’s help to resolve.
Mr. Trump’s call with Ms. Tsai and subsequent tweets accusing China of currency manipulation, over-taxing U.S. imports and building “a massive military complex in the middle of the South China Sea” have generated a “tremendous amount of uncertainty” in Beijing, said David Dollar, the Treasury Department’s economic and financial emissary to China during Mr. Obama’s first term.
“Some of the issues with China are best settled quietly and confidentially,” Mr. Dollar said. “If the whole policy is diplomacy-by-tweet, it’s hard to think that’s going to meet U.S. objectives.”
A number of conservatives, including Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Tom Cotton of Arkansas, have cheered Mr. Trump’s engagement with Taiwan. Mr. Cotton said it was a sign that the U.S. wasn’t going to be complacent anymore over China’s behavior. During the campaign, Mr. Trump complained about Beijing’s ability to lure U.S. manufacturers to relocate to China, a message that resonated with voters in Rust Belt states that helped sweep Mr. Trump to victory. For some observers, his confrontation with China is a welcome change.
Last Friday morning, Mr. Trump’s secretary received a call at Trump Tower from Ms. Tsai and patched her through to the president-elect, according to people familiar with the call. It was 10 a.m. in New York and 11 p.m. in Taipei. Ms. Tsai had a prepared set of talking points and was surrounded by Taiwan’s foreign minister, David Lee, as well as two top National Security Council officials and her spokesman, Alex Huang.
Stephen Yates, a former national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney who worked as a Mormon missionary in Taiwan, said that for at least a week Ms. Tsai’s name was on Mr. Trump’s list of foreign leaders whom he would speak with by phone.
“To my knowledge, Taiwan was on that list early, and it took some time to arrange,” said Mr. Yates, who is seen as a candidate for a post on Mr. Trump’s national security team. “It was a message in the sense that Donald Trump is not necessarily going to be told what he can or can’t do because a foreign leader says so. That’s exactly the kind of thing that millions of Americans detest about Washington,” said Mr. Yates, who currently is visiting Taiwan for meetings with senior officials.
“If it’s going to cause some pain, then so be it,” he said.
He said the call didn’t necessarily signal a change in policy or strategy on Taiwan, which didn’t rank among the top global challenges for the incoming administration.
“Definitely, there was preparation so the president-elect was not blindsided that there might be reaction from China, from China experts, from the State Department and the White House,” he said. “I don’t think any part of the Trump team is looking for a military conflict. But I also don’t think you have to walk on eggshells to get anything out of Beijing.”
Mr. Yates played a role in introducing the strongest-ever statement of support for Taiwan in the Republic Party’s platform at its national convention this year. The platform incorporated for the first time the “six assurances” given by President Ronald Reagan to Taiwan in 1982. Those include a pledge not to set a date for ending arms sales.
Mr. Trump’s complaints about China are often focused on its economy, which has for decades relied on the purchasing power of consumers in other countries, particularly the U.S.
Mr. Trump used Twitter on Sunday to complain that China “heavily” taxes U.S. products entering their country, but that the U.S. doesn’t tax Chinese imports. China does impose a tariff, a sort of import tax, ranging between 5% and 9.7%, on many products.
The U.S. in many cases charges a tariff on imports from China and many other countries, ranging between 2.5% and 2.9%. Mr. Trump has in the past floated the idea of imposing a tariff against China more than ten times larger.
While Mr. Trump has appeared to soften some of his other campaign stances, on issues such as climate change and torture of terrorism suspects, he has not backed off his calls to more aggressively challenge Beijing.
His approach in recent days “could force the Chinese to feel they have to respond,” said Michael Auslin, a resident scholar in Asian Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Auslin said China could decide to take any number of steps, including putting “another 1,000 missiles across the [Taiwan] strait.” It also could signal that it will back away from recent United Nations sanctions against North Korea, or launch a round of cyberattacks against U.S. agencies.
Write to Damian Paletta at damian.paletta@wsj.com, Carol E. Lee at carol.lee@wsj.com and Jeremy Page at jeremy.page@wsj.com

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Italian prime minister resigns in populist revolt

from washingtonpost



 
   Europe’s embattled political establishment lost another round Sunday in its effort to thwart the anti-elite movement, as Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi resigned following a voter rejection of his constitutional reforms. But a center-left presidential candidate in Austria handily defeated his far-right challenger.
The thorough rejection of Renzi’s efforts to streamline lawmaking was a significant boost for the country’s surging populist forces just weeks after Donald Trump prevailed in the United States. Renzi’s loss also risked unleashing financial upheaval in Europe’s third-largest economy, as Italy’s weak banks struggle to contain the fallout.
But the surprisingly strong presidential victory in Austria for an elder statesman formerly of the Green Party suggested that there were still some limits to a wave of anti-elite anger that began with British vote to leave the European Union and continued with Trump last month.
A populist takeover of Italy is still an uncertain prospect, since Renzi’s center-left Democratic Party remains in control of the parliament and national elections do not have to be called until 2018. But much will depend on the makeup of the next government and how the anti-immigrant, euroskeptic parties capitalize on their success.
“I have not managed to reach victory,” an emotional Renzi said early Monday, conceding defeat at the Palazzo Chigi, his official residence. “My government ends today.” 
 With nearly two-thirds of the vote counted, 60 percent of voters rejected the reform, a drubbing that far outpaced opinion polls ahead of the referendum.
Viewed narrowly, Sunday’s vote was actually in favor of the status quo, since the constitution will now remain the same. But the referendum to streamline the political system and diminish the role of the Senate long ago turned into a broader vote of confidence in Renzi, the youthful, Twitter-loving leader who portrayed himself as a lone warrior against Euroskeptic forces.
The lead opposition to Renzi, the insurgent Five Star movement, ran a spirited campaign against the prime minister’s reforms, joining forces with an unlikely cross-section of allies, including some in Renzi’s own party. Many establishment politicians also questioned whether the reforms truly made sense as the country contends with grim prospects for growth and a wave of migration from Africa. Some said the changes were poorly written and, by removing checks on the prime minister’s power, could actually enable populists should they ever win the country’s top job.
Renzi, who took office in February 2014, always struggled to budge unemployment and improve the economy. For many voters the referendum was as much a rejection of Renzi personally as it was an endorsement of his populist opponents. 
Italy, which has had 63 governments in the last 70 years, is no stranger to political chaos. What comes next will depend partially on Italian President Sergio Mattarella, who is charged with picking a new person to try form a government and whether to hold early elections. Elections are a key demand from the Five Star movement, which is running a close second to Renzi’s party in the polls. The euro dropped one percent against the dollar in early Asian trading following the release of initial exit polls, but financial analysts cautioned against panic.
In the wake of Renzi’s resignation, Italy’s mainstream political parties are likely to change voting laws to dilute the possibility an insurgent force could seize power in the next elections by making it more difficult to rule without a wide coalition. That would be a further check against the Five Star movement, although it would also further entrench Italy’s general political dysfunction.
Renzi’s anti-establishment opponents were trying to capitalize on a wave of skepticism about the ability of elites to deal with globalization and the long, painful effects of the economic crisis that started nearly a decade ago. The Trump victory last month cheered the Five Star Movement, an insurgent anti-euro force that has support on the left and the right.
“Today the arrogance that's remained in power these last years has lost,” said Luigi Di Maio, who is expected to be the party’s candidate for prime minister in the next election. “So ends the era of shortcuts and tweets.”
Sunday’s votes in Austria and Italy  captured the extent to which Europeans are as politically polarized as Americans, split on issues including immigration and free trade.
In Austria, the far-right Freedom Party’s Norbert Hofer conceded defeat on his Facebook page less than 30 minutes after polls closed and following projections showing a surprisingly strong lead for Alexander Van der Bellen. The 72-year-old statesman and former Green Party politician was winning by 53.3 percent to 46.7 percent with nearly 100 percent of the votes counted.
The result was an unexpectedly clear victory for Austria’s beleaguered political establishment — one suggesting the aggressive tactics and Trump-style campaign deployed by the Austrian far-right may have hurt more than they helped.
Sunday’s election, in fact, was a rerun of one in May in which Hofer lost by 31,000 votes, a result he successfully contested. His defeat on Sunday by a far larger margin, observers said, may suggest European voters’ unease with the comparisons of their politicians to Trump. It also seemed to rob the momentum from far-right leaders in France and the Netherlands who have called Trump’s victory part of a new “world order” that they were hoping to join in elections next year.
Following Hofer’s concession, he and Van der Bellen exchanged a long handshake for photographers in the Vienna studios of Austrian state broadcaster ORF. Van der Bellen credited his victory to a “broad movement” backing “freedom, equality and solidarity.” His campaign manager, Lothar Lockl, saw the margin as evidence of a push against the nationalist tide by moderates.
“A movement could be evolving here, which is not only for Austria, but can also bring about a change of attitude in the whole of Europe,” he said.
The race for the ceremonial role as president held  high stakes. The position is constitutionally ambiguous, yet Hofer, who has decried Muslim immigration and free trade, had vowed to beef it up — setting up a clash with the center-left government and the European Union. Freedom Party supporters on Sunday had hoped for a “Trump bump” — but it bumped the wrong way.
“The Trump bump could always go either way,” said Reinhard Heinisch, a political scientist at the University of Salzburg. “The fact is, Trump is not very popular in Austria.”
Hofer’s campaign in Austria seemed to echo Trump’s, with far-right outlets spreading damaging fake news and Hofer and his surrogates taking aim at red herrings such as his opponent’s health. There were more allegations of dirty tricks on election day.
On Sunday, Austria’s domestic intelligence service launched an investigation into a mass text message that stated that only Hofer voters should show up because polling stations were overcrowded. Van der Bellen supporters, the text said, should instead vote on Monday — although polls would be closed by then, according to the Austrian daily Der Standard.
The race was perhaps more important as a bellwether of post-Trump voter trends in Europe, where nationalists are poised to stage potent 2017 campaigns in France, Germany and the Netherlands. A Hofer victory would have potentially signaled the new electability of the far right. Indeed, the Freedom Party sought to leverage Hofer’s guy-next-door demeanor that seemed to take the bite out of his harshest condemnations, such as that “Islam is not part of Austria.”
Still, while portraying himself as the face of a reformed far-right, he persisted in courting a more extreme base. For instance, he wore a cornflower lapel pin — a symbol of German nationalism also used by the Nazis. Hofer on Sunday called for national unity following his defeat. Yet within his party, the attacks were already flying. The Freedom Party’s powerful chairman, Heinz-Christian Strache, accused Hofer’s opponents of running a “massive fear campaign,” saying Green Party supporters of Van der Bellen had painted Hofer as “a Nazi.”
Faiola eported from Berlin. Stefano Pitrelli in Rome and Stephanie Kirchner in Berlin contributed to this report.

Saturday, December 3, 2016

from billmoyers.com







Good Job Bill  and Paul,, out of the park !




Friday, December 2, 2016

Mandate issued, deadlines start counting dates 12-2-16

ca9_ecfnoticing@ca9.uscourts.gov

12:54 PM (3 hours ago)
to me

***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Notice of Docket Activity

The following transaction was entered on 12/02/2016 at 12:53:56 PM PST and filed on 12/02/2016
Case Name:In re: Gary Ozenne, et al v. Chase Manhattan Bank, et al
Case Number:  11-60039 (need pacer account) 
Document(s):Mandate Issued 

Docket Text:

MANDATE ISSUED. Parties shall bear their own costs for the appeal. (SRT, AK, SPG, MMM, RAP, MSB, CMC, NRS, PJW, JBO and MTF) [10218770] (RR)

Notice will be electronically mailed to:

Mr. Jeffrey S. Allison, Attorney
Mr. Eric D. Houser, Attorney
Samuel Maizel
Mr. Gary Lawrence Ozenne
Professor John Anthony Edwards Pottow
U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, 9th Circuit, Clerk of Court

Thomas R. Phinney, Attorney (daily summary)

The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:
Document Description: Mandate Order
Original Filename: /opt/ACECF/live/forms/RhondaRoberts_1160039_10218770_v2Order-Mandate_216.pdf
Electronic Document Stamp:
[STAMP acecfStamp_ID=1106763461 [Date=12/02/2016] [FileNumber=10218770-0] [43280bd6d73dcda881108ba5642971636b778fd9ad8518aa3ac227c3148be4ee257c5bea33bbfa153954cf009f9fd36f7f2e3c5740ebbbdcfcad546ba9cebda7]]
Recipients:
The document is here, appeals timeframe begins from this date timeclock starts

Jury Deadlocked in Videotaped S.C. Officer’s Killing of Walter Scott, Shot in the Back

from ktla.com


POSTED 12:41 PM, DECEMBER 2, 2016, BY , UPDATED AT 03:50PM, DECEMBER 2, 2016


Breaking news update, published at 3:08 p.m. PT
Michael Thomas Slager is shown in a booking photo from the Charleston County Sheriff's Office on April 7, 2015.
Michael Thomas Slager is shown in a booking photo from the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office on April 7, 2015.
Deliberations will resume Monday morning after the jury in the murder trial of former North Charleston, South Carolina, police Officer Michael Slager told a judge Friday that it remains unable to reach a unanimous decision. Earlier, Judge Clifton Newman twice instructed the 12 jurors to keep deliberating. The jurors deliberated until about 6 p.m. Friday before Newman sent them home. Slager shot and killed Walter Scott, an unarmed black man, after a 2015 traffic stop.
Previous story, published at 2:02 p.m. PT
The judge in the trial of former South Carolina police Officer Michael Slager told jurors to keep deliberating Friday afternoon after they told him they don’t believe they can reach a consensus.
Slager is charged with murder in the April 2015 shooting death of Walter Scott, an unarmed black man, after a traffic stop in North Charleston.
“You have a duty to make every reasonable effort to reach a unanimous verdict,” Judge Clifton Newman told the jury in a Charleston courtroom.
The jurors, who began deliberating Wednesday, had caused momentary confusion when they sent the judge two notes in quick succession Friday.
The first note asked the judge whether the jurors could receive a transcript of a witness’ testimony. The second, sent 12 minutes later, informed the judge they didn’t believe they could come to a unanimous decision in the case.
Newman, wanting to know which note took precedence, called the jurors into the courtroom and asked whether they still wanted to receive the testimony, which he said was available not by transcript, but by audio. When they indicated they no longer wanted it, Newman told them they’d have to deliberate more.
“The majority should consider the minority’s position, and the minority should consider the majority,” he said.
This still, released by the family of Walter Scott, appears to show North Charleston, South Carolina police officer Michael Slager shooting Scott in the back as he ran away from the officer. (Credit: Scott Family)
This still, released by the family of Walter Scott, appears to show North Charleston, South Carolina police officer Michael Slager shooting Scott in the back as he ran away from the officer. (Credit: Scott Family)
The case
A jury of 11 white jurors and one African-American is considering the testimony of 55 witnesses given over the span of five weeks.
On the stand, Slager argued self-defense, telling jurors he shot Scott as he ran away because Scott posed a threat and could have turned around and charged him.
One of the key pieces of evidence in the trial was a cell-phone video of the altercation. In the video, Slager is seen chasing Scott, then shooting him in the back. Prosecutors said the two were 18 feet apart when Slager opened fire.
If convicted of murder, Slager faces 30 years to life in prison.
Newman allowed the jury to consider the lesser offense of manslaughter, which carries a potential sentence of up to 30 years in prison.
Slager, who is white, also is scheduled to go on trial early next year on federal charges, including civil rights offenses, related to the shooting.