#Concerning my abilities. Appearance or intelligence is a shaky road

[mrfoox]

For someone whos the most embarrassed person around, I sure say SO MUCH SHIT

[hockeylvr59]

Birthday Baby || Paul Bissonnette

Requested: [x] yes [ ] no

Authors Note: So the original request was for “bend over I’m going to put a baby in you” and “tilt your hips up after I cum” with Elias Pettersson but I can’t write smut for him. This request came in after that suggesting that I do those for Biz. I have another request for the first part with a different player so I only used the second one here but hopefully you enjoy. As always when writing about Biz I got a little bit carried away and this turned out much bigger than a blurb. 

Warnings: smut, maybe some cursing. 

Word Count: 1,875

~~~~~~

Dating Paul was easy. It wasn’t that there weren’t challenges, it was that Paul was always willing to listen to you and work through whatever problems arose until you found an outcome that could make both of you happy. He was willing to think outside the box and it was something that made you fall hard for him. 

But there was one subject you knew would be difficult to conquer and though you needed to if you were going to have a future together, it worried you. 

You wanted kids. 

Paul was on the fence about it. 

But since that was a problem for down the road you put off talking about it. 

Then six months became a year and you realized that you couldn’t keep putting time and effort into something if there was no chance of having all of your needs filled in the future. 

So you’d told Paul that the two of you needed to talk and immediately he was concerned. But he’d listened as you expressed your feelings directly, confirming things that he’d insisted he’d known since you started dating. In return, he expressed his fears about having kids. How he was worried he’d make a horrible father, how he was worried his past injuries would negatively impact his ability to provide stability and raise children. 

By the end of the conversation he’d admitted he’d been thinking about having kids more frequently recently, that being with you made him honestly consider having kids for the first time. For now, it was enough. It was more than you had expected and it was enough to assure you that your efforts in this relationship were worth it. So you let those thoughts slip to the back of your mind for a while, focusing on enjoying time with Paul and growing stronger as a couple. 

In the days leading up to your birthday it seemed like there was something on Paul’s mind that he wouldn’t talk about. You were concerned but he’d never not confided in you eventually in the entire time you’d been together so you didn’t let yourself worry too much. 

The morning of your birthday you woke up to a vase of flowers on your dresser and your favorite muffin left for you on the kitchen counter. You’d insisted that you didn’t need to do anything for your birthday but when you arrived home from work you could smell dinner. Paul wasn’t the best chef but he was trying and the effort was what was appreciated. After sitting down to a warm meal and a glass of wine, you’d curled up on the couch next to Paul and you could feel his heart racing in his chest as he handed you your present. 

As you tore the paper off of the box you couldn’t tell if he was anxious because he was worried you wouldn’t like the present or if there was something else. Tucked inside the box was a pearl bracelet and you smiled tilting your face up to kiss him in thanks. It was beautiful and pearls were one of your favorite gemstones so it was perfect. Paul still looked nervous though and motioned that there was something else in the box. Tucked up under another layer of tissue paper was a blue and purple box, clearly from the drugstore and you lost your breath as you read the label. Ovulation Test. Not wanting to get ahead of yourself you looked back up at your boyfriend seeking answers. 

“Paul…” You murmured, moisture gathering in your throat as you watched him. 

“If you want…” He mumbled back, his free hand rubbing at the back of his neck. 

“Paul.” You repeated. “Are you serious?” His brown eyes were warm as he gazed down at you and after clearing his throat he nodded. 

“I know technically I should at least propose first but bear with me on that. But yeah...I’m serious. I think a mini you running around would be pretty cute.” 

There was so much more that needed to be discussed about this but right now just didn’t feel like the right time. Hashing out all of the details could happen when it wasn’t your birthday and since you were still on the pill you pulled Paul to bed without hesitation knowing that any baby-making wouldn’t be happening tonight anyway. 

____

Within a few days of your birthday you’d had all the necessary conversations, made sure that this was something that Paul actually wanted. But once that was settled you tossed your pills. Now it was just a matter of waiting and trying. 

And honestly, you had no idea that trying could be so much fun. 

It wasn’t that sex with Paul wasn’t great before but now, now it was even better. Now everything was heightened just that much more. Now Paul was a man on an even greater mission and it showed. 

Paul held your hips in his hands as he thrust up into you, forcing you even deeper onto his cock as you rode him. 

“God baby you’re so sexy like this.” He grunted. “Bet you’ll be even sexier carrying our baby.” A chill ran up and down your spine at the thought and you whined out about how close you were. You’d already cum once on his tongue and once with him inside of you and a third orgasm was ready to crash down on you. 

Flipping the two of you over, Paul slowed things down a bit, kissing you as he moved in and out connecting your bodies. Even with the slower pace it wasn’t long before you were right at the edge of your orgasm again. And this time it was clear that Paul was right there with you. 

“That’s it beautiful. You gonna cum for me again? Are you going to milk me as I cum, pull my seed deep inside of you so we get you nice and pregnant?” Only sounds of pleasure were spilling from your throat, no intelligible words forming in your brain. Your body was so desperate for him that it was reacting on its own accord, pulling him closer and deeper, aching to feel him spill inside of you. 

Though usually Paul always made sure that you came before he did, this time his orgasm crashed over him just a moment before yours and the sticky wet heat filling you caused you to cum with a shout, an intense orgasm leaving you boneless and sated. 

By the time your brain regained function, Paul was pulling a spare pillow from beside your head and working it under your hips. 

“Gotta tilt your hips up after I cum sweetheart, make sure all of it stays right there inside of you so that we can knock you up.” He reminded, a prideful smirk on his face. He kissed you for a few minutes, rambling about how incredible it was getting to experience this with you before he finally pulled out, doing his best to leave as much of his semen still inside of you as he could. 

____

This time it was his birthday and because it was Biz and you’d finally gotten the news you’d been waiting for you knew that you needed to go big in your reveal to him. The Yotes were playing at home which meant that he had to work on his birthday but you’d managed to fly his parents down to surprise him, snatching his season tickets for the game. 

You knew he was doing pregame and the second intermission on tv so with the help of a few people you had your surprise planned for after his second appearance. Pulling Cam and Yole up to the tv deck as soon as the second period of play ended, you watched as Paul chatted with Jody about the goaltending so far. Soon they wrapped up and just before going off the air Jody spoke. 

“Also I think I heard there was going to be a birthday message for you on the jumbotron, you should probably check that out before heading back to radio.” 

Right on cue, as Paul turned his head to look at the big screen you watched as a series of players and his coworkers wished him a happy birthday. Then your face appeared on the screen with the message you’d recorded for him earlier. 

“Hey there Coyotes fans. You probably know me by now as Biz’s better half. I’d like you to join me in wishing him a very happy birthday because this is a special one. In fact...there’s one more person who wants to say happy birthday but for another year or so I’ll have to do it for them…” Now in addition to speaking to the camera, you were holding up a tiny Bissonnette jersey. “Baby Biz told me to tell you he or she says ‘Happy Birthday Daddy.’” 

Rather than watching yourself on the big screen, you watched Paul’s expressions as he took in the video. How his expression turned soft at the general outpouring of well wishes and then how shock appeared on his face when your video played and finally how tears formed in his eyes as he realized the weight of the information that was just revealed. 

Beside you, you could hear Yole crying and a peek at her and Cam revealed big smiles on their faces. 

Paul cursed and looked at his phone, and you knew in the back of his mind he was desperate to call you but worried about making it back to radio in time. Shaking your head to yourself, you nodded at the crew as you snuck your way over to him. 

“Happy Birthday Babe.” You said, attempting to draw his attention. When he realized you were standing there his eyes went wide and his arms wrapped around you as he buried his head against your neck. “You’ve got a few more minutes. They’ve got you covered in radio so don’t stress.” You assured him. 

“What the fuck was that?” He eventually questioned, though his tone revealed only that he was still processing. 

“I mean go big or go home right?” You teased, scraping your fingernails against his scalp. He let out a shaky breath against you before pulling back. 

“We’re having a baby?” He whispered, awe filling his voice. 

“We’re having a baby.” You confirmed, kissing him softly as you drew his hands to your still flat stomach. “And I’m not sure whether you or your mom are freaking out more.” You motioned to where his parents were standing and Paul let out a gruff emotional chuckle. 

“You flew my parents here.” He mused shaking his head. “You’re something else...you know that right?” He added. 

“Well, it is your birthday. And you becoming a dad is kinda a big deal.” You smirked, laughing as he picked you up and spun you around, joy taking over his expression as it all finally started to settle in. 

“Yeah...becoming a dad is kinda a big deal.” He agreed, kissing you gently before pulling you over to his parents. 

You honestly weren’t sure how you both were going to top this year’s birthdays next year but you couldn’t wait to find out. 

[meditativeyoga]

Learn to Listen to Your Inner Voice

Through the technique of yoga exercise, we could learn how to listen to -- and comply with-- our internal guidance.

Jill met her ex-husband at an organisation lunch in 1998. They linked promptly, the means old close friends do, as well as invested the remainder of the mid-day in intimate discussion. Later, as Jill walked back to her workplace, a thought emerged: 'If you're not cautious, you're going to end up weding this individual, and also that would certainly be a significant blunder.'

Much later on, she marveled at the incisiveness of her internal voice. 'I do not consider myself as instinctive,' she told me, 'but then, I noticed that this was info I should take note of. Then my normal shroud dropped. My feelings took over. I fell for him, we obtained wed, defended five years, and also finally got divorced. Just what I can not get over is that I knew all along as well as couldn't hear myself!'

I comprehended just what she was speaking around. With the 20/20 vision of hindsight, I can recall lots of celebrations when I 'knew' something and also neglected it, due to the fact that some social factor to consider, need, uncertainty, or anxiety talked louder compared to my own internal knowledge. But I've likewise uncovered that the much more I have the ability to pay attention to that inner recognizing, the much deeper my feeling of individual credibility becomes.

So I asked Jill, 'Have you ever before exercised adjusting in to on your own, simply on a regular day, and asking on your own,' Exactly what's my deepest wish now? ' or ' What does my psyche actually want for me?' You understand, seeing if you can enter a partnership with your inner knowledge so you can hear what it's telling you?' Jill drank her head. I suggested that she spend a few mins a day doing that as well as see just what happened.

As somebody that has needed to learn by hand to pay attention to internal wisdom, I could assure you that (1) credible assistance is actually there as well as (2) noticing it is not that hard. Like every little thing important in life, it's about taking note. If we reduce a bit and check in with our body and sensations, we soon see that helpful inner messages involve all of us the time -- through physical feelings, flashes of insight, intuitive feelings, and also from that state of cleared up intelligence the Yoga Sutra calls rtambhara prajna, or 'truth-bearing wisdom.' We could use this information to readjust our program, song our inner state, and connect with the environment.

' I have actually discovered how to take notice of a certain sensation of emotional discomfort,' David, an economic expert that meditates regularly, told me. 'When I feel it, I stop as well as examine myself out internally. Almost always, I'm embeded some unfavorable psychological loophole. So the unpleasant feelings signify me when it's time to alter the way I'm assuming in a circumstance.'

Lacey's relationship with internal advice started one day in a yoga class. Feeling shaky in a present, she began to explore her body, trying to find a location of security. Spontaneously, an idea showed up: 'Press down through the balls of the feet and also expand your stance.' Lacey did simply that and certainly, she really felt a lot more grounded.

Both of these individuals have actually found their natural knowledge -- in David's situation, it comes as feelings or emotions, while Lacey seems to access hers through the body. Both are circumstances of exactly what I would certainly call typical or personal-level inner support -- the kind that assists us find our bearings and also instructions in day-to-day life. This sort of advice materializes itself in different ways -- as the physical 'knowing' that makes us aware that we remain in threat, as the subtler spatial feeling that shows a ballplayer where to propose a catch, as the capacity to 'get' whether it's the ideal moment to push your close friend to discuss his sensations or whether it's far better to let him be. All of us have our very own all-natural, individual methods of adjusting into this internal wisdom -- whether we feel it in the gut, in the heart, or as some other kind of internal sensation. We just have to discover how to acknowledge it as well as make it conscious.

Extraordinary Guidance

Then there's what we might call remarkable, or extranormal guidance, messages that really emerge in critical, life-changing minutes to guide us in making major choices, advise us about prospective risk, or help us take the next action in our spiritual journey. Jill's internal finding out about the man she wed resembled that. As it provided for her, this kind of message could arise as an assumed in the mind. Or it can, and often does, come as an image, a dream, or a sense of being drawn in a certain direction -- as in those famous tales regarding spiritual numbers that hear a call from God or a traveler who feels a strong internal pull to go down a certain road, where he comes across a guy who's been injured and also requires aid or an attractive female who becomes his better half. That kind of inner advice can feel radical, greatly at probabilities with the voices of standard knowledge, culture, and our suggestions of that we are and also what we want.

It could likewise be rather significant. A male I recognize as soon as gotten up in the middle of the evening after dreaming of a paper guillotine resting by his child's bed. He went to the kid's room and saw a sheet of paper resting on top of the bedside lamp. The light bulb had actually melted via the paper, which was simply bursting right into fires. He is encouraged that acting upon the dream saved his child's life.

This is the kind of inner advice that has the tendency to get our interest. We offer it different names -- the voice of God or our higher Self, the enlightened voice within us. Yet it is just a much deeper, subtler level of the standard support that we are constantly making it through the body and also feelings. If you approve that every little thing is constructed from one substance, one intelligent awareness, it makes good sense that the guidance that appears spiritual and the kind that seems ordinary in fact come from the same source, and that both should have to be honored.

The Real Thing

Whether internal advice materializes itself through the body as digestive tract reactions, with the heart as feelings, or via the mind as cleared up knowledge, instinct, a vision, a voice, or a dream, it is wise -- most likely smarter, in specific circumstances, compared to the cognitive mind. That's because it comes from a degree closer to the significance, the deep Self, or what is often called the wisdom mind. Listening to inner support is among the ideal ways to access the informed sage or visionary artist that lives inside us. When we follow our true internal instincts, we are receiving assistance from a master.

Of training course, there is a tough facet to all this. Exactly how can we tell just what is 'genuine' inner assistance and what is just a stray impulse or covered up need, or also some type of mental fixed? Actually, when there's a great deal going on in the mind, it can be tough to locate the inner voice. (This is one need to frequently peaceful the discursive mind through reflection.) The majority of us uncovered early that our own second-nature feeling of points was commonly at chances with the ideas communicated by our moms and dads and caretakers. As we discovered to adjust to others' desires -- a needed part of human socialization -- we additionally learned to override our instinct and also to substitute the voices of our moms and dads, society, TV, ad campaigns, the information, and our peers for the advice that arises from within.

In fact, we could obtain so far out of touch with our internal wisdom that we really question its presence. Before we could hear the much deeper wisdom, we might initially have to accept that it is there to be heard. We have to discover out how to removal past, or still, the completing social voices that obtain in the way. Lastly, we require to learn the best ways to differentiate between the actual assistance of the deep Self and also the voices of our concerns, needs, and delusions.

Getting to Know Yourself

It helps to have some understanding regarding your own propensities. Perhaps you have a judgmental internal moms and dad that appears as a vital internal voice or a sensation that things will certainly turn out badly. If you recognize the best ways to acknowledge that voice, you won't error it for the voice of reality. Maybe you have a bent toward dream or wishful reasoning. If you could acknowledge when the component of you that still wishes to count on Santa Claus is running, you can be cynical of any kind of messages to spend your last $70 on lotto game tickets. If you recognize you have a driving, perfectionistic streak, you could look askance when you're inwardly 'guided' to keeping up all evening to complete a task and instead understand your body's need for rejuvenation.

We all have elements of ourselves that are sensible, mature, and deeply credible. We also have parts that are untaught, susceptible to making decisions based upon childhood worries or fantasies of omnipotence. One factor to practice functioning with instinct is so we can discover how to discriminate in between an understanding that comes from the wisdom mind, the detoxified heart, or the deep body as well as one that comes from the component of us that may be called pre-rational -- the part of us that hasn't fairly surrendered to expanding up.

When you obtain a suspicion about something major, it's always great to ask on your own the difficult inquiries, like 'Is this inkling grounded in any way in truth? Is it conforming with my basic concepts as well as worths? Would certainly I encourage somebody else to act upon this inkling? Does it mirror the principles of the spiritual customs I recognize? Is it most likely to cause damage to myself or another person? Will following this inkling make me dispirited? Will it inflate my feeling of being special or' chosen'?'

Wisdom Mind

The extra you agree to analyze the understandings you obtain, the much more you'll find out how you can acknowledge the assistance that in fact comes from the knowledge mind. The transforming factor for me in discerning the sensation of clear inner guidance was available in a mundane as well as apparently unimportant way. I will fly house from India and had actually been packing promptly, discarding every little thing that really did not suit my travel suitcase. While the taxi waited at the door, I found I didn't have my airline company ticket.

Frantically, I transformed out my bag, the drawers, the trash can. Absolutely nothing. Finally, I shut my eyes, obtained silent, and asked my consciousness, 'Please discover my ticket. '

Seconds after I made the petition, an extremely faint series of words began to appear in my mind:' Look in the trash can once more. 'I did. My ticket, it ended up, was folded up between two other documents, concealed so well that I had not seen it.

I connect this tale for 2 factors. Initially, since the assistance was so certain and concrete that it was impossible to discount it as dream. Second, due to the fact that it offered me my initial clear feeling of how credible assistance appears to me. It can be found in trickles. I feel it appearing as if from a depth. It really feels little and also refined-- actually, for me, the' still little voice'-- though some people have informed me they receive pictures regularly compared to words. It is commonly so subtle that if I'm not looking, I will not discover it. When I do, there's a high quality to it that brings launch or convenience. And if I absolutely pay interest to it, it additionally feels unpreventable-- also if it is calling my focus on something that challenges my individual condition quo.

Testing Your Guidance

Although it happened accidentally, my experience with the ticket offered me a version for hearing and also dealing with inner support. When I want to comprehend something or decide, I ask for advice, then I try out following the guidance I get. There's a procedure I use that has truly made a distinction in my capacity to hear just what my further Self wants to tell me. Here's how you can attempt it yourself.

1. Invest a long time developing your inquiry, getting as clear as possible regarding it. Create it down.( This is necessary-- the act of writing concretizes your concern or issue.) You could begin by requesting help in settling a creative trouble, bothersome partnership, or living circumstance. You can ask for understanding concerning your method or regarding an internal tendency that interrupts you.

2. Sit comfortably with your back erect yet not stiff and your eyes closed. Hold the concern in your mind. Say it to on your own a couple of times as well as notice the sensations that arise when you do. Notification any kind of thoughts that show up, consisting of resistance to the process. Write them down if they seem vital or relevant.

3. Use the rhythm of the breath as a support. Maintain your interest on the breath until the mind unwinds and becomes quieter.

4. Sink your interest deeper. You could do this by focusing on the heart facility (in the center of the breast) or on the stubborn belly center( 3 inches below the navel, deep inside the body). Or you could use a visualization: Visualize on your own descending a stairs into a peaceful cave, moving step-by-step up until you locate yourself confined in quiet.

5. In this silent area, ask the sage within you, the individual of wisdom who resides in your inmost core, to be present. Or, if there is a specific divine being kind or educator or sage you appreciate, you could ask that being to be existing. Conversely, you could merely have the sensation that you are asking support from the universe, the Tao, the resource of all. Recognize that it suffices to ask that internal knowledge be existing, if you do, it will certainly be available.

6. Ask your question. After that wait quietly, without expectation or discouragement, to see what emerges. Keep in mind that insight does not always come in words. It may come as a feeling, an image, or something said by one more person. Also, it may not come the moment you ask for it. Instinct emerges in its very own time. When you have seeded the question, listen during the next 24 to Two Days, due to the fact that response to your concern will arise.

7. As insights come, compose them down. Hold each one in your mind as well as allow it percolate. See just what comes up and also note the feelings. You could be drawn to translating the insight, but it is also sufficient simply to hold it in your awareness. As you do, it will create shifts in awareness all by itself.

Note that if your insight feels judgmental, punishing, or blaming, it is probably not originating from your inmost source. In basic, the knowledge of your inner awareness is extensive, loving, as well as embracive. Your instinct could ask you to take obligation for a scenario, however it will certainly never ever inform you responsible yourself or a person else.

8. Ultimately, think about a step you could require to put your understanding into activity. Here is where the genuine experiment starts. The only way to discover how to follow your user-friendly guidance is to try it and be really aware of the results. It could be that the guidance you obtain unwinds a circumstance promptly. In some cases, if the situation you're inquiring about is knotty, you might need to take a series of tiny activities, to request for more advice, and to maintain observing the results. Occasionally the assistance you obtain is just for currently, and also the following actions could emerge in time.

As you do all this, you'll naturally develop an attunement to your very own deeper knowledge. You'll locate yourself removaling with life extra masterfully, more imaginatively, as well as with higher trust fund. In time, you may also recognize that you've generated the enlightened sage who lives inside you. All it takes is a readiness to transform back right into on your own just a few times a day as well as ask,' What does my much deeper Self desire for me currently? Exactly what would the sage in me carry out in this circumstance?' It's when you start to invoke as well as pay attention to your deep knowledge that your inner life begins to shine via every one of your activities and also you understand just how sensible you absolutely are, how intuitively caring, how deeply attuned to the rhythms of life itself.

Sally Kempton, also referred to as Durgananda, is a writer, a meditation educator, and also the owner of the Dharana Institute. For additional information, browse through www.sallykempton.com.

[bountyofbeads]

Out on a limb’: Inside the Republican reckoning over Trump’s possible impeachment

By Robert Costa and Philip Rucker | Published October 06 at 4:55 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:55 PM ET |

A torrent of impeachment developments has triggered a reckoning in the Republican Party, paralyzing many of its officeholders as they weigh their political futures, legacies and, ultimately, their allegiance to a president who has held them captive.

President Trump’s efforts to pressure a foreign power to target a domestic political rival have driven his party into a bunker, with lawmakers bracing for an extended battle led by a general whose orders are often confusing and contradictory.

Should the House impeach Trump, his trial would be in the Senate, where the Republican majority would decide his fate. While GOP senators have engaged in hushed conversations about constitutional and moral considerations, their calculations at this point are almost entirely political.

Even as polling shows an uptick in support nationally for Trump’s impeachment, his command over the Republican base is uncontested, representing a stark warning to any official who dares to cross him.

Across the country, most GOP lawmakers have responded to questions about Trump’s conduct with varying degrees of silence, shrugged shoulders or pained defenses. For now, their collective strategy is simply to survive and not make any sudden moves.

This account of the anxiety gripping the Republican Party is based on interviews with 21 lawmakers, aides and advisers, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly.

Trump has been defiant in his defense, insisting his conduct with foreign leaders has been “perfect” and claiming a broad conspiracy by the Democratic Party, the intelligence community and the national media to remove him from office. Yet few Republican lawmakers have been willing to fully parrot White House talking points because they believe they lack credibility or fret they could be contradicted by new discoveries.

“Everyone is getting a little shaky at this point,” said Brendan Buck, who was counselor to former House speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.). “Members have gotten out on a limb with this president many times only to have it be cut off by the president. They know he’s erratic, and this is a completely unsteady and developing situation.”

Republican officials feel acute pressure beyond Trump. The president’s allies on talk radio, Fox News Channel and elsewhere in conservative media have been abuzz with conspiratorial talk of a “deep state” coup attempt and accusations that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) and House Democrats are corrupting the impeachment process.

The GOP’s paralysis was on display this past week in Templeton, Iowa, where a voter confronted Sen. Joni Ernst (R) at a town hall meeting Thursday over her silence about Trump’s conduct.

“Where is the line?” Iowa resident Amy Haskins asked in frustration. “When are you guys going to say, ‘Enough,’ and stand up and say, ‘You know what? I’m not backing any of this.’ ”

“I can say, ‘Yea, nay, whatever,’ ” Ernst replied. “The president is going to say what the president is going to do.”

Trump’s extraordinary public request that China investigate 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden — adding to his previous pressure campaign on Ukraine — has sparked divergent reactions among other Republican senators, including over whether the president was being serious when he delivered his plea.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), the most outspoken of his colleagues, tweeted Friday: “By all appearances, the President’s brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.”

By contrast, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dismissed it as a joke. “I don’t know if that’s a real request or him just needling the press, knowing that you guys were going to get outraged by it,” Rubio told reporters.

On Saturday, Trump on Twitter swatted back at Romney by calling him “a pompous ‘ass’ who has been fighting me from the beginning” — a flashing signal to other Republicans that there would be consequences to speaking out against the president.

Colin Powell, who served as secretary of state under George W. Bush, said during a panel sponsored by the New Albany Community Foundation in Ohio that “the Republican Party has got to get a grip on itself. Republican leaders and members of the Congress . . . are holding back because they’re terrified of what will happen [to] any one of them if they speak out.”

Some House Republicans have tried to offer a more forceful defense than their Senate compatriots.

But House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s shaky appearance last weekend on CBS’s “60 Minutes” was widely panned, even among senior GOP aides, and raised questions about whether he was up to the task of protecting Trump. The California Republican falsely accused his interviewer, Scott Pelley, of misrepresenting a key phrase in the transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with the Ukrainian president.

But some Trump aides privately said the president likes the messages sent by surrogates such as McCarthy and White House policy adviser Stephen Miller, who are willing to sit for a grilling and disparage the media, according to two Republicans close to the president.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), an informal Trump adviser, insisted the president had done “nothing wrong” and denounced those who act “as if he’s guilty until he’s proven innocent.”

“For Republicans to get weak, well, they have a very short memory,” Meadows said, noting that his colleagues facing competitive primary races will need Trump’s support.

Former Republican senator Jeff Flake, a Trump antagonist, said his former colleagues believe the foreign leader interactions under investigation in the House represent “new territory” compared with past challenges, including the Russia investigation.

“There is a concern that he’ll get through it and he’ll exact revenge on those who didn’t stand with him,” Flake said. “There is no love for the president among Senate Republicans, and they aspire to do more than answer questions about his every tweet and issue. But they know this is the president’s party and the bargain’s been made.”

The responses from most Republicans have infuriated and distressed Democrats, who consider Trump’s conduct a brazen and unconstitutional abuse of power.

“My Republican colleagues’ silence seems unsustainable and inexcusable, given the threat to our national security as well as the integrity of our democratic institutions,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

The frenetic reactions underscore how Republicans are navigating this moment on their own, without direction from the White House or clear guidance from the congressional leadership.

Many Republicans also said in interviews last week that Trump’s ability to nominate and confirm dozens of conservative federal judicial nominees and pass an overhaul of the tax code makes it harder to argue to their voters that he is now a burden on the party’s policy agenda.

This is not the first such crossroads, of course. Republicans largely stood behind Trump in 2016 after the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape on which he bragged of sexual assault, as well as during the darkest days of the Russia investigation and in the wake of racist comments.

“It feels like we’ve been constantly moving the line,” said Tom Rath, a GOP fixture in New Hampshire. “We say, ‘Don’t cross this line.’ Okay, you crossed it. So, ‘Don’t cross this line.’ We’re finally at a point where patience is exhausted, reason is exhausted and, quite frankly, the voters are exhausted.”

A Republican strategist who is close with several senators and spoke on the condition of anonymity to share a candid assessment called the situation “a disaster.” This consultant has been advising clients to “say as little as possible” about impeachment developments to buy time.

Since last month’s whistleblower complaint sparked the impeachment inquiry, 48 percent of Americans support impeachment and 46 percent oppose it, according to an average of polls analyzed by The Washington Post. Among Republicans, however, 11 percent support impeachment and 86 percent oppose it, the analysis found.

“There just hasn’t been pushback, and in part it’s because of this perception that he’s like Rasputin with the base with magic powers,” said GOP consultant Mike Murphy, a Trump critic.

Fox News personality Tucker Carlson, who is admired by Trump and occasionally speaks with him, co-wrote an essay in the Daily Caller last week offering a road map for Republicans, writing that “there’s no way to spin” Trump’s request that a foreign leader investigate one of his domestic opponents as proper, but that it did not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

Veteran party figures said a true break with Trump is possible, but could take months, if not years. Senate Republicans are taking their cues from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a taciturn operator who has labored to maintain an uneasy but transactional relationship with Trump.

Though a loyal Republican, McConnell has a history of expressing public concern with an embattled president in his own party. In 1973, McConnell, then a budding Kentucky politician, called the Watergate affair “totally repugnant” and denounced the conduct of President Richard Nixon and some in his administration, as documented by McConnell biographer John David Dyche.

In a new campaign ad released over the weekend, McConnell remained firmly at Trump’s side, saying, “The way that impeachment stops is a Senate majority with me as majority leader.”

Other than Romney and Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who also has criticized Trump’s conduct with Ukrainian and Chinese counterparts, others who might break with the president include Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who is retiring next year, and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr of North Carolina, according to two top Republicans in close touch with senators.

Still, many more Republicans would have to join them to reach the two-thirds majority in the upper chamber required to convict the president and remove him from office.

“Nobody wants to be the zebra that strays from the pack and gets gobbled up by the lion,” a former senior administration official said in assessing the current consensus among Senate Republicans. “They have to hold hands and jump simultaneously … Then Trump is immediately no longer president and the power he can exert over them and the punishment he can inflict is, in the snap of a finger, almost completely erased.”

Yet with Washington as polarized as at any time in recent history, political winds may not blow strongly enough. As long as impeachment is a Democratic priority driven by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), it will be difficult — if not impossible — for Senate Republicans to get on board, argued Alex Castellanos, a longtime GOP strategist.

“The more passions swell in Pelosi’s world, the more McConnell will deflate them,” Castellanos said. Impeachment proceedings, he predicted, will be “an overhyped movie with an unsatisfying end.”

Rachael Bade and Emily Guskin contributed to this report.

Whistleblower’s attorney says team now representing ‘multiple’ officials as impeachment inquiry expands

By Felicia Sonmez and Toluse Olorunnipa | Published October 06, 2019 6:10 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:55 PM ET |

An attorney for the whistleblower who sounded the alarm about President Trump’s pressure on Ukraine said Sunday that “multiple” whistleblowers have come forward, deepening a political quagmire that has engulfed the president as well as several of his Cabinet members.

The news comes as House Democrats are accelerating their impeachment inquiry and subpoenaing documents related to Trump’s efforts to push foreign countries to investigate one of his political opponents, former vice president Joe Biden.

“I can confirm that my firm and my team represent multiple whistleblowers in connection to the underlying August 12, 2019, disclosure to the Intelligence Community Inspector General,” the whistleblower’s attorney, Andrew Bakaj, said in a tweet. “No further comment at this time.”

Mark Zaid, who also is a member of the original whistleblower’s legal team, confirmed to The Washington Post that the team is now representing a second whistleblower, someone who works in the intelligence community. The second individual has spoken to the inspector general of the intelligence community and has not filed a complaint.

“Doesn’t need to,” Zaid said in a text message, adding that the person has “first hand knowledge that supported the first whistleblower.”

News that the original whistleblower’s team is representing a second person was first reported Sunday by ABC News.

Trump seized on the latest development in a Sunday night tweet.

“Democrat lawyer is same for both Whistleblowers? All support Obama and Crooked Hillary. Witch Hunt!” he said.

The crisis, which began last month with media reports revealing the original whistleblower’s complaint, has quickly metastasized across the Trump administration, ensnaring senior officials such as Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who came under further scrutiny over the weekend.

Trump largely stayed out of public view, spending Saturday at his golf club in Sterling, Va., and Sunday at the White House. In tweets, he attacked Democrats and some Republican detractors, including Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, whose impeachment Trump demanded Saturday after Romney criticized him.

He also appeared to directly link the 2020 presidential race to his efforts to push Ukraine to investigate Biden, contrary to a tweet on Friday declaring, “This has NOTHING to do with politics or a political campaign against the Bidens.”

“And by the way, I would LOVE running against 1% Joe Biden — I just don’t think it’s going to happen,” Trump tweeted Sunday, arguing that Biden and his family were “PAID OFF, pure and simple!”

“Sleepy Joe won’t get to the starting gate, & based on all of the money he & his family probably ‘extorted,’ Joe should hang it up,” Trump added. “I wouldn’t want him dealing with China & [Ukraine]!”

Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates responded by calling it “puzzling” that Trump would claim to love the prospect of a matchup against Biden, “seeing as how he just sent his administration into a tailspin by trying to bully a foreign country into spreading a comprehensively debunked conspiracy theory about the vice president.”

Biden’s son Hunter served for nearly five years on the board of Burisma, Ukraine’s largest private gas company, whose owner came under scrutiny by Ukrainian prosecutors for possible abuse of power and unlawful enrichment. Hunter Biden was not accused of any wrongdoing in the investigation.

As vice president, Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, whom Biden and other Western officials, including Republicans, accused of not sufficiently pursuing corruption cases. At the time, the investigation into Burisma was dormant, according to former Ukrainian and U.S. officials.

On Saturday, Perry’s discussions with Ukrainian officials came to attention amid reports that Trump told Republicans on Friday that his July 25 call with the Ukrainian president, which is at the center of the original whistleblower’s complaint, was made at the request of Perry.

Asked about Trump’s comments, which were first reported by Axios, Energy Department spokeswoman Shaylyn Hynes said in an email that Perry encouraged Trump to speak with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss energy security.

Pompeo, who was scheduled to return to Washington on Sunday, is facing growing pressure from Democrats seeking Ukraine-related documents.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.) said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that Pompeo, who had spent much of the past week in Europe, missed a Friday deadline to comply with a subpoena for information about the State Department’s dealings with Ukraine. Pompeo asserts that a letter sent to the committee constitutes the department’s initial response.

The whistleblower complaint accused Trump of asking the Ukrainian government to help him with his reelection bid by launching an investigation into Biden. Democrats are also probing whether Trump’s decision to withhold nearly $400 million in military assistance from Ukraine was linked to his push for the government there to pursue political investigations that could bolster the president’s reelection bid.

Text messages between State Department officials, revealed by House Democrats last week, show that there was at least some concern that Trump was pursuing an improper quid pro quo.

“As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,” diplomat William B. Taylor wrote on Sept. 9 to Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.

Sondland, who has denied that Trump sought a quid pro quo, has agreed to meet privately on Tuesday with the three panels — Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and House Oversight — spearheading the probe, according to a committee aide.

On Friday, those three committees subpoenaed the White House for documents and wrote a letter to Vice President Pence demanding that he turn over documents related to his talks with Zelensky.

Speaking at a Republican event in Louisiana on Saturday, Pence blasted Democrats but gave no indication about whether he would comply with their document request.

“Do-Nothing Democrats launched a partisan impeachment inquiry in a blatant attempt to overturn the will of the American people in the last election,” he said.

On Sunday, Trump’s campaign announced that the president would be traveling to Lake Charles, La., to hold a rally on Friday. The president will also have a rally on Wednesday in Minneapolis.

No White House officials made appearances on the Sunday morning news shows, leaving it up to congressional Republicans and Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, to defend the president in heated interviews during which they offered at-times-contradictory explanations for the president’s actions.

In a combative exchange on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” host Chuck Todd pressed Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) to explain why he told the Wall Street Journal about his concern in the summer that Trump had sought to link Ukrainian military aid to an investigation of the Bidens.

Johnson repeatedly declined to answer, instead raising a conspiracy theory and criticizing the media before finally stating that Trump had “adamantly denied” any quid pro quo.

Johnson also at one point said he does not trust U.S. intelligence agencies. “Something pretty fishy happened during the 2016 campaign and in the transition, the early part of the Trump presidency, and we still don’t know,” he said.

“We do know the answer,” an exasperated Todd responded, adding: “You’re making a choice not to believe the investigations that have taken place.”

Giuliani issued a defiant defense of Trump in an interview on Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz” in which he argued that the president “has every right to ask countries to help us in a criminal investigation that should be undertaken.”

Giuliani was named in the whistleblower’s complaint and in a rough transcript of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky as being a key intermediary in back-channel efforts to pursue the allegations against Biden.

But other Republicans sought to play down Trump’s comments, including his exchange with reporters outside the White House on Thursday in which he urged China to investigate Biden.

In an interview on ABC News’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) echoed a suggestion on Friday by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) that Trump’s China statement was not “a real request.”

“George, you really think he was serious about thinking that China’s going to investigate the Biden family? . . . I think he’s getting the press all spun up about this,” Jordan said.

During the interview, Stephanopoulos repeatedly sought an answer from Jordan on whether he thinks it is appropriate for Trump to ask China and Ukraine to investigate Biden. Jordan dodged the question more than a dozen times.

Democrats on Sunday defended their party’s efforts to pursue an impeachment inquiry.

In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” Rep. Val Demings (Fla.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, supported House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s view that no vote by the full House is necessary for an impeachment inquiry to move forward.

She added that she thinks the House “will have to take a serious look at articles of impeachment” based on the evidence that has emerged.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), a key member of the House Democratic leadership, said on “This Week” that “the evidence of wrongdoing by Donald Trump is hiding in plain sight.”

“The administration, without justification, withheld $391 million in military aid from a vulnerable Ukraine,” he said. “The president then pressured a foreign leader to interfere in the 2020 elections and target an American citizen for political gain. That is textbook abuse of power.”

Ellen Nakashima, Abigail Hauslohner and Elise Viebeck contributed to this report.

It’s not news that Trump is corrupt. What’s new is how he is succeeding in corrupting our government.

By Fred Hiatt | Published October 06, 2019 5:44 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:55 PM ET |

It is no longer surprising to see President Trump wielding the government as an instrument purely for his personal benefit or vengeance.

What is both alarming and new is how government, increasingly, is giving way and giving in.

Three years into Trump’s term, we are witnessing the accelerating erosion of a bedrock American principle: that the awesome power of government will be wielded fairly, based on facts and evidence, and without regard to political fear or favor.

A normal government that cared about corruption in Ukraine, as officials in this administration sometimes pretend they do, would seek improvements in its judicial system. But Trump has no such concern, as you can tell from his July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s president. He never mentions corruption, but presses only for two specific investigations he hopes will benefit his domestic political fortunes.

A government committed to rescuing Americans from unfair detention abroad — as Trump likes to boast he is — would be committed to rescuing all Americans from unfair detention abroad.

But this administration picks and chooses, based on Trump’s whims and grudges. For a Christian cleric held in Turkey, Trump goes all out. For a New York Times reporter endangered in Egypt, the administration does not bestir itself, as Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger recently recounted.

Some officials have indulged these impulses almost from the start. That Times reporter barely escaped arrest two years ago. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s dishonest maneuverings to get a question about citizenship added to the 2020 Census took place in the spring of 2017. Last year, officials devised their policy to separate children from parents at the border, and then repeatedly lied about it.

But as time goes on, the government more and more is endorsing and amplifying policies that serve Trump’s political interest. Just recently:

●As soon as Trump decided to make political hay out of California’s homeless population, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew Wheeler accused the (Democratic) state of allowing human feces to pollute its waterways and demanded action. Around the country, 3,508 community water systems are out of compliance with standards; only California attracted the EPA’s attention.

●When the House Ways and Means Committee requested Trump’s tax returns, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig flatly refused — though the law says the returns “shall” be turned over if requested.

●When another House committee wanted former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to testify about Trump’s efforts to fire special investigator Robert S. Mueller III, White House counsel Pat Cipollone — who is supposed to represent the law, not the president’s personal well-being — happily asserted executive privilege on behalf of this tale of obstruction, though Lewandowski never actually worked in the White House.

●Indulging another Trump obsession, the State Department has intensified an investigation of Obama-era officials who sent emails to Hillary Clinton — including by retroactively classifying some of their messages, as The Post reported a few days ago.

●When the intelligence community’s inspector general ruled that the whistleblower complaint about Trump and Ukraine should be sent to Congress, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel conveniently offered a contrary opinion. No, the OLC said, “the appropriate action is to refer the matter to the Department of Justice.”

●Which was doubly convenient, in fact, because Justice, with great efficiency, determined that — although soliciting assistance from a foreign power on behalf of a political campaign is against the law — Trump had nothing to worry about, on the pretext that prosecutors were unable to assign a dollar value to the help he had solicited. Case closed. Case never even opened, in fact.

What’s going on? Senior officials who had the fortitude to defend the rule of law have gradually been replaced by those who put ambition over principle. A few who still try to do the right thing are kept in vulnerable “acting” positions and hemmed in by toadies and hacks in subordinate positions.

Meanwhile, honest civil servants leave or become demoralized. They watch first-class research agencies be deliberately disrupted and degraded. They see Trump firing (Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch) and threatening (the still anonymous whistleblower) honest professionals. Resistance to abuse of power naturally dwindles.

Yes, take this as a warning of what a second term would mean. Norms get eroded, a nonpartisan bureaucracy can be corrupted.

But remember also that the whistleblower and intelligence inspector general refused to bend. Thousands of public servants like them are continuing to fulfill their missions as best they can. We need to keep faith with them as they work, often under pressures we can’t imagine, to keep government fair and honest.

The new GOP strategy: Don’t believe the president

By James Downie | Published October 06, 2019 7:00 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:55 PM ET |

You knew there was never going to be just one whistleblower. A president who stands on the White House lawn and asks foreign countries to investigate his political opponents was never going to otherwise keep such schemes to a small circle of loyalists. And so it has come to pass. ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos revealed Sunday morning, “ABC News has learned that the legal team representing the first whistleblower is now representing a second whistleblower. Attorney Mark Zaid told me that this second whistleblower is a member of the intelligence community with firsthand information on some of the allegations at issue.”

Confronted with that new information on the various Sunday morning talk shows, Republican congressmen and senators largely opted for the same mix of misinformation and non-answers that they’ve been stuck with even as poll after poll shows support for an impeachment inquiry rising. In one area, though, a new talking point has emerged: Don’t believe the president.

This goes back to the president’s appearance on the South Lawn on Oct. 3, when Trump asked China to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter. There’s no way to defend a president publicly asking a geopolitical rival to investigate domestic political rivals, so Republicans have decided to pretend he didn’t do that. The first up was Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.): “I don’t think it’s a real request,” he told reporters Friday morning, “I think he did it to provoke you to ask me and others and get outraged by it.” Republicans on the Sunday shows followed suit. “I doubt if the China comment was serious, to tell you the truth,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) on CBS’s “Face the Nation." On ABC, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) feigned incredulity: “George, you really think he was serious about thinking that China’s going to investigate the Biden family?”

It isn’t the first time that Republicans, confronted with a controversial Trump quote, have said the president wasn’t being serious. Trump even told special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that his infamous request to Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s “missing” emails was a joke. That Capitol Hill Republicans would go back to this well is no surprise; it’s an easy dodge when, according to The Post’s Robert Costa and Philip Rucker, GOP lawmakers and aides say privately that their “collective strategy is simply to survive and not make any sudden moves.”

The difference this time is that the president himself isn’t claiming that he was joking, not in any of his numerous Twitter missives since that South Lawn appearance. Instead, he laid into criticism from Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) about his request to China. And Sunday afternoon he said on Twitter that he would “would LOVE running" against Biden.

Not only wasn’t Trump joking about asking China to investigate Biden, he isn’t pretending that he was. In other words, Republican politicians don’t want you to believe the president.

One reason Trump fit in so well with the GOP and especially its Fox News propaganda arm is that he and those around him have made livings telling people not to believe their own eyes. Years of “Trump’s a brilliant businessman, not a bumbling heir with multiple bankruptcies” easily transitioned to “Mexico will pay for the wall, not taxpayers.” But the narrative of “right good, left bad” was always bigger than one person, even one as influential as the president. Now, that narrative demands a new reality: “Don’t believe Trump even when he’s telling you to believe him.” The myth has swallowed Trump himself.

[hubblogfan-blog]

Kids Dance Classes Go Well With Other Physical Activities

Dancing is a wholesome, natural outlet for the feelings. It develops grace and poise, timing and balance. Men take satisfaction in their ability to lead their partners with assurance and poise. Women enjoy the ability to adhere to their companions smoothly, expertly and correctly. The capability to dance develops personality, and over all-it is fun. Another choice is to ask mother and dad or even your aunt from the other condition for a couple of hrs of tutorials. They may be flattered by this and it can all be a pleasant experience. It will also be easy on your wallet. Make sure that you only ask for family member with whom you easily get alongside with, this is simply because the procedure can be shaky and frustrating at first and if you are not in good books you are much more likely to finish grabbing every other's necks. Be certain to specific some gratitude following that, dinner would do.

Learn Dance In Amer Road Jaipur

Z: A great mindset is everything. If you're a intelligent, scorching, funny and wonderful dance partner. that's fantastic! But if you're a jerk to the waitress, you gained't get another day.

Unfortunately, numerous parents can no lengthier pay for to place their children in dance classes, sports activities classes, and so on. Ballet footwear are worn by trainee ballet dancers till their toes and toes are sturdy enough to allow them to stand 'en pointe' meaning on the suggestions of their toes. Fill teapots with lemonade (which your daughter can help make) and allow the women pour their own. It is barely possible to discover this kind of all round entertainment particularly designed for the occasion of hen night celebrations anyplace in London. Limited As well has a good selection of denim, khakis, brief, and capris that are ideal for college and perform. Z: I hate when people starve themselves. It just doesn't work. I guess that's not a trend, but I see it all the time. Then they eventually flip out and consume more crap. Extremely unproductive and not a enjoyable way to reside.

The DJ or band may help you on the dance floor by inviting other individuals to come and share the platform with you, but it is always useful to know a little little bit of wedding etiquette prior to the reception.

Bollywood Dance Classes Amer Road Jaipur

Cruising can be a lifestyle or 1 heck of a holiday. Either way you appear at it, you'll have a lot of choices to choose from creating this journey journey one of your very best. Happy Cruising! If you want to boost your joy, enhance your self-confidence and turn out to be more happy with life, you are in the right location. In this post I'll share with you 5 tips that will tremendously assist you increase your self-esteem and turn out to be a more confident person. Keep studying! Obesity is a make a difference of expanding concern in this nation. A lot of the kids who don't do any activities following school are commonly in frontal of the television or playing video games on their telephones or browsing the net. An after college action retains your child active. As soon as a kid has built buddies with these kids and joined their social circle, he's a lot more likely to get into trouble with them. 1 worry is that they might turn out to be concerned in unlawful actions. Out of every of these projects, you should be fairly worried concerning drug use in particular. Children seem to be experimenting with drugs at younger and more youthful ages. The quicker they begin, the extra time they have to damage their life prior to they even get started. The rocket was killed before it even had a risk to launch from the pad. Dance stops heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, and osteoporosis. How so? It improves blood movement, lowers blood pressure, tends to make our bones more powerful and joints more versatile. In general dancing has a good impact on hormonal stability which is a important to general great well being and nicely-being.

Take component in an athletic action that you like. dance classes are a fantastic way to work out, burn up calories and have enjoyable (all at the exact same time). Drinking water aerobics courses are also enjoyable. Climbing and rock climbing are also great. These are all exercise activities that assist you get fit while also allowing you to have a great deal of fun. You stand a much better chance of obtaining fit if you have enjoyable with your exercise schedule. You are much more most likely to skip out on a exercise if you don't like the routine that you are doing. How effective will that be? Why not have fun and get fit at the exact same time?

Amer Road Jaipur Learn Dance

Children who are still left on your own to contend with as well much totally free time invariably fall into the wrong company. After school applications hold them occupied. Kids appreciate themselves in a supervised action. Almost all of us don't consider more than our children becoming impacted in criminal tasks, at least not all the way following it has happened. The fact is that when tender individuals do take part in criminal offense, it regularly takes place following school whilst mothers and fathers are nonetheless at work. Children who have accessible to go and some thing to do following school have much less unsupervised time on their fingers, so they're much less likely to get involved with the wrong crowd. Even if you don't see them at your child's college, there are a lot of children getting into details they shouldn't.

Okay, let's see. Veil, double veil, enthusiast veil, double fan veil, enthusiast, double fan, wings, candles (handheld), shemadan (my fave!), cane, sword, tambourine, double tambourine, zills (I don't think about them a prop, but I guess some individuals do), goblets (not sure if that's actually a prop or not either). I might have missed a couple, but that's all I can think of correct now. It is easier for a person to achieve genuine bodily health and fitness--even if the concept of performing so appears intimidating. Obtaining match shouldn't be any difficulty at all if you are willing to apply some persistence and do a great deal of difficult work.

[anecdotaltruthbomb]

the weight of conscience

i would much rather mind my own business, do my own mistakes, learn from them in time. i am never done learning. i don’t know it all. i study every day. various subjects. and i do not promote my views heavily. i merely make them available. for instance this blog has only one subscriber on tumblr. but there may be more subscribers via feedly, etc. my youtube has only about 30 subscribers who came for this subject. i am not the type to talk to a mixed audience anyway. i can perhaps only be appealing to people who are very similar to me. but i have to share something with the world, that is of value. this is a burning desire of my heart. and what do i have to offer? while i used to think of myself as a psychology nerd with some unique perspectives on stuff like typology, none of that philosophical or psychological ‘crap’ held the promise of positive impact in other peoples life, mainly because there was no chance that other people would understand and adopt my thinking skills. but what i have learned about nutrition is applicable and saves lives and improves them too, considerably, measurably. so i find myself sharing the message, almost boldly, like the confident people do it. just because its not about me. i used to do low carb for a few years, before i learned more. this is a big part of why i am confident of knowing my shit. i don’t just parrot a fad that i came across. when i had come across the low carb fad, i believed in it, even lost 25kg or so, but still did not share it with boldness, because i had nothing special, no insight, no healing, just some caloric restriction, appetite suppression, no big deal. eating appeared to a a private choice. it seemed like anyone who wanted to loose weight could easily learn about low carb. no need to be a missionary about it. but what i have now is relevant to the destiny of humanity. a part of a large puzzle, but a most important one. its not just something of concern to some people, who have a problem, that they may or may not care to solve, such as that bit of weight gain, that everyone experiences later in life, just from eating high energy density foods and being more passive. it’s the knowledge of how capitalism, specifically life stock and pharma and other food industries, are conditioning their future customers from the day a baby is born. you can’t expect a school kid to read up about their concentration disorders, autoimmune issues, early onset dementia, obesity & man boobs. somebody has to speak up about it. paleo or low carb is a hot iron to toy around with. if you convince other people to eat more meat and less carbs, you simply cause more arteriosclerosis of their brains and all kinds of other suffering in the world of humans and animals.

it's irrelevant whether some exotic raw grass fed road kill diet prevents YOU personally from getting those diseases too. it’s your rough message, the allowance of cooked high fat, high protein diets, that sticks with people and kills everyone.

people who spread the paleo message are entirely unaware of this danger. the fact that everyone is eating animal products anyway makes them feel like their message is not a big deal anyway. that’s what i thought at the time. but the amount of animal products people eat IS a big deal.

if you spread the paleo message, you may feel that you are a minority of one and that you are being victimized, when i am being cold hearted about your appearance, you coming on stage with that message, but paleo is hardly an odd minority view anymore.

it may already be a relative majority. more importantly, most people who eat carbs culturally know of no strong arguments for doing so, so if you tell them, that their overweight or diabetes is caused by carbs, which is not true, they are extremely likely to believe it instantly and to just try that diet without much more research, because they find so much company right ahead.

organ damage from a highly acidic high fat and high protein diet (like diabetes or kidney disease) can come on very quickly in grown ups who have a conventional SAD past and it can be irreversible.

a three year experiment with this diet could get someone killed.

fruitarianism on the other hand is a more harmless sword to wield.

the concept of fruitarianism, in it's initial simplicity, is ideologically polarizing and that can potential cause some minor issues.

but contrary to what some live stock propaganda articles suggest, fruitarians don't have a track record of letting their babies starve, lol.

fruitarianism is not something that will be adopted casually and thoughtlessly. only extremely motivated people can go there, far away from social convention, exposing themselves to infinite amounts of ridicule. most who go there are doing proper research, to the best of their abilities.

the group of extremely motivated people includes very intelligent people but does also include some insane and bulimic people. such crazy is not caused by fruitarianism though.

anyhow, fruitarian people will probably loose all of their friends. and perhaps their jobs. unless they have insane amounts of charisma to make up for what points the loose in conformity.

on the other hand, most people who try it will quickly (after one or two detox crises perhaps) be healed from a plethora of minor or major health issues.

actually most will fail to comply completely and eat "raw till 4" instead.

and those don’t have to loose their friends either, because they can still go out and eat bread rolls or rice meals.

but those can not claim, that raw veganism did not work for them, because that would be a lie. they never gave it a chance or never made it work.

becoming fully raw is not only intellectually challenging but is one of the most psychologically challenging (and transforming) things anyone can do and most people are not smart or crazy enough to be that determined. for most people fruitarianism is more of a possibility to be explored, than something to be lived. the exploration of the implications of our frugivor and mammal bodies, optimized for tender leafy greens and fruits of mixed energy density.

there are many types of dementia and one of them, the omega 3 deficiency, can affect fruitarians too, if they are not careful about it. the other one, diabetes type III, does NOT affect fruitrians! some people may get a little bit tired, may run low on iodine, if they don't use algae products. iodine may be related to cognitive decline, but a deficiency is often noticed soon enough, via weakness.

usually deficiencies are not irreversible.

a b12 deficiency (nerve damage) can be irreversible but is hardly related to fruitarianism. all fruitarians know that b12 comes from soil and that it must be supplemented by most, but a few of them believe, that they get enough soil exposure from organic produce and they may be wrong about this.

the main risk with the fruitarian message is it’s anti-capitalist vibe. “supplements are a business, the food industry is a business, medicine is a business, all business is corrupted ... stay away.” i mean, anti-capitalism is a great chance for humanity. but a risk regarding b12 deficiency. if fruitarians believe that carbs can't make fat, which is not the message of fruitarianism and natural hygiene, but is spread by a hand full of usually lean n00bs on youtube, they may gain weight, but at least they don’t get it from toxic fats so that episode is quite reversible, in most cases (usually the individual had many fat cells to begin with, from previous episodes of being fat).  the biggest danger is see with my own individualized message is that, by mistake, i may have said something, that prolongs someones weight loss success somehow. that is mainly because the main key of weight loss is the ability to maintain weight loss and that is something i am still shaky in myself. mainly for psychological reasons. i find it hard to comply with my own understanding, given the circumstances of my life - complete social isolation and no good mission, often eating for my entertainment, not for nourishment. but that makes it difficult to guess whether something i did, like fasting, may have added subtle physiological difficulties to my certain psychological difficulties. only if i did not have the psychological issues around compliance, could i be confident, that my knowledge of physiology is already sufficient for maintenance.

[bountyofbeads]

‘Out on a limb’: Inside the Republican reckoning over Trump’s possible impeachment

By Robert Costa and Philip Rucker | Published October 06 at 8:00 AM ET |

Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:40 AM ET |

A torrent of impeachment developments has triggered a reckoning in the Republican Party, paralyzing many of its officeholders as they weigh their political futures, legacies and, ultimately, their allegiance to a president who has held them captive.

President Trump’s moves to pressure a foreign power to target a domestic political rival have driven his party into a bunker, with lawmakers bracing for an extended battle led by a general whose orders are often confusing and contradictory.

Should the House impeach Trump, his trial would be in the Senate, where the Republican majority would decide his fate. While GOP senators have engaged in hushed conversations about constitutional and moral considerations, their calculations at this point are almost entirely political.

Even as polling shows an uptick in support nationally for Trump’s impeachment, his command over the Republican base is uncontested, representing a stark warning to any official who dares to cross him.

Across the country, most GOP lawmakers have responded to questions about Trump’s conduct with varying degrees of silence, shrugged shoulders or pained defenses. For now, their collective strategy is simply to survive and not make any sudden moves.

This account of the anxiety gripping the Republicans Party is based on interviews with 21 lawmakers, aides and advisers, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly.

Trump has been defiant in his defense, insisting his conduct with foreign leaders has been “perfect” and claiming a broad conspiracy by the Democratic Party, the intelligence community and the national media to remove him from office. Yet few Republican lawmakers have been willing to fully parrot White House talking points because they believe they lack credibility or fret they could be contradicted by new discoveries.

“Everyone is getting a little shaky at this point,” said Brendan Buck, who was counselor to former House speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.). “Members have gotten out on a limb with this president many times only to have it be cut off by the president. They know he’s erratic, and this is a completely unsteady and developing situation.”

Republican officials feel acute pressure beyond Trump. The president’s allies on talk radio, Fox News Channel and elsewhere in conservative media have been abuzz with conspiratorial talk of a “deep state” coup attempt and accusations that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) and House Democrats are corrupting the impeachment process.

The GOP’s paralysis was on display this past week in Templeton, Iowa, where a voter confronted Sen. Joni Ernst (R) at a town hall meeting Thursday over her silence about Trump’s conduct.

“Where is the line?” Iowa resident Amy Haskins asked in frustration. “When are you guys going to say, ‘Enough,’ and stand up and say, ‘You know what? I’m not backing any of this.’ ”

“I can say, ‘Yea, nay, whatever,’ ” Ernst replied. “The president is going to say what the president is going to do.”

Trump’s extraordinary public request that China investigate 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden — adding to his previous pressure campaign on Ukraine — has sparked divergent reactions among other Republican senators, including over whether the president was being serious when he delivered his plea.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), the most outspoken of his colleagues, tweeted Friday: “By all appearances, the President’s brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.”

By contrast, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dismissed it as a joke. “I don’t know if that’s a real request or him just needling the press, knowing that you guys were going to get outraged by it,” Rubio told reporters.

On Saturday, Trump on Twitter swatted back at Romney by calling him “a pompous ‘ass’ who has been fighting me from the beginning” — a flashing signal to other Republicans that there would be consequences to speaking out against the president.

Some House Republicans have tried to offer a more forceful defense than their Senate compatriots.

But House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s shaky appearance last weekend on CBS’s “60 Minutes” was widely panned, even among senior GOP aides, and raised questions about whether he was up to the task of protecting Trump. The California Republican falsely accused his interviewer, Scott Pelley, of misrepresenting a key phrase in the transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian president.

But some Trump aides privately said the president likes the messages sent by surrogates such as McCarthy and White House policy adviser Stephen Miller, who are willing to sit for a grilling and disparage the media, according to two Republicans close to the president.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), an informal Trump adviser, insisted the president had done “nothing wrong” and denounced those who act “as if he’s guilty until he’s proven innocent.”

“For Republicans to get weak, well, they have a very short memory,” Meadows said, noting that his colleagues facing competitive primary races will need Trump’s support.

Former Republican senator Jeff Flake, a Trump antagonist, said his former colleagues believe the foreign leader interactions under investigation in the House represent “new territory” compared with past challenges, including the Russia investigation.

“There is a concern that he’ll get through it and he’ll exact revenge on those who didn’t stand with him,” Flake said. “There is no love for the president among Senate Republicans, and they aspire to do more than answer questions about his every tweet and issue. But they know this is the president’s party and the bargain’s been made.”

The responses from most Republicans have infuriated and distressed Democrats, who consider Trump’s conduct a brazen and unconstitutional abuse of power.

“My Republican colleagues’ silence seems unsustainable and inexcusable, given the threat to our national security as well as the integrity of our democratic institutions,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

The frenetic reactions underscore how Republicans are navigating this moment on their own, without direction from the White House or clear guidance from the congressional leadership.

Many Republicans also said in interviews last week that Trump’s ability to nominate and confirm dozens of conservative federal judicial nominees and pass an overhaul of the tax code makes it harder to argue to their voters that he is now a burden on the party’s policy agenda.

This is not the first such crossroads, of course. Republicans largely stood behind Trump in 2016 after the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape on which he bragged of sexual assault, as well as during the darkest days of the Russia investigation and in the wake of racist comments.

“It feels like we’ve been constantly moving the line,” said Tom Rath, a GOP fixture in New Hampshire. “We say, ‘Don’t cross this line.’ Okay, you crossed it. So, ‘Don’t cross this line.’ We’re finally at a point where patience is exhausted, reason is exhausted and, quite frankly, the voters are exhausted.”

A Republican strategist who is close with several senators and spoke on the condition of anonymity to share a candid assessment called the situation “a disaster.” This consultant has been advising clients to “say as little as possible” about impeachment developments to buy time.

Since last month’s whistleblower complaint sparked the impeachment inquiry, 48 percent of Americans support impeachment and 46 percent oppose it, according to an average of polls analyzed by The Washington Post. Among Republicans, however, 11 percent support impeachment and 86 percent oppose it, the analysis found.

“There just hasn’t been pushback, and in part it’s because of this perception that he’s like Rasputin with the base with magic powers,” said GOP consultant Mike Murphy, a Trump critic.

Fox News personality Tucker Carlson, who is admired by Trump and occasionally speaks with him, co-wrote an essay in the Daily Caller last week offering a road map for Republicans, writing that “there’s no way to spin” Trump’s request that a foreign leader investigate one of his domestic opponents as proper, but that it did not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

Veteran party figures said a true break with Trump is possible, but could take months, if not years. Senate Republicans are taking their cues from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a taciturn operator who has labored to maintain an uneasy but transactional relationship with Trump.

Though a loyal Republican, McConnell has a history of expressing public concern with an embattled president in his own party. In 1973, McConnell, then a budding Kentucky politician, called the Watergate affair “totally repugnant” and denounced the conduct of President Richard Nixon and some in his administration, as documented by McConnell biographer John David Dyche.

In a new campaign ad released over the weekend, McConnell remained firmly at Trump’s side, saying, “The way that impeachment stops is a Senate majority with me as majority leader.”

Other than Romney and Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who also has criticized Trump’s conduct with Ukrainian and Chinese counterparts, others who might break with the president include Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who is retiring next year, and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr of North Carolina, according to two top Republicans in close touch with senators.

Still, many more Republicans would have to join them to reach the two-thirds majority in the upper chamber required to convict the president and remove him from office.

“Nobody wants to be the zebra that strays from the pack and gets gobbled up by the lion,” a former senior administration official said in assessing the current consensus among Senate Republicans. “They have to hold hands and jump simultaneously … Then Trump is immediately no longer president and the power he can exert over them and the punishment he can inflict is, in the snap of a finger, almost completely erased.”

Yet with Washington as polarized as at any time in recent history, political winds may not blow strongly enough. As long as impeachment is a Democratic priority driven by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), it will be difficult — if not impossible — for Senate Republicans to get on board, argued Alex Castellanos, a longtime GOP strategist.

“The more passions swell in Pelosi’s world, the more McConnell will deflate them,” Castellanos said. Impeachment proceedings, he predicted, will be “an overhyped movie with an unsatisfying end.”

Rachael Bade and Emily Guskin contributed to this report.

Barr’s review of Russia investigation wins Trump’s favor. Those facing scrutiny suspect he’s chasing conspiracy theories.

By Matt Zapotosky, Josh Dawsey, Shane Harris and Rosalind S. Helderman | Published October 06 at 9:34 AM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:50 AM ET |

Attorney General William P. Barr has taken an interest in a mysterious European professor whose conversation with an adviser to President Trump’s 2016 campaign helped launch the FBI investigation into possible coordination with Russia — and who has since become the focal point of an unproven conservative theory that the entire inquiry was a setup, people familiar with the matter said.

Those involved in the FBI investigation said they are mystified by the attorney general’s activities and interest in the professor, Joseph Mifsud, and they suspect that Barr might be using Justice Department resources to validate conjecture that Mifsud was deployed against a Trump adviser by Western intelligence to manufacture a basis to investigate the campaign.

“It just seems like they’re doing everything they can to delegitimize the origins of that investigation,” said one person involved the Russia probe, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the politically sensitive matter that is still being reviewed. “I just don’t think there’s any real basis to disparage it.”

But Barr’s inquiry has heartened Trump and his conservative allies. Trump, who at times has inquired about the origins of the Russia investigation and the professor in particular, has bragged that Barr will get to the bottom of the case and is doing a good job as the country’s top law enforcement official, a White House official said.

Barr’s defenders assert that he is exploring what he views as possible problems.

“He’s not a conspiracy theorist. He’s a realist,” said George Terwilliger, a former deputy attorney general and longtime friend of Barr’s. “And I’m confident that if he has a concern that justifies his personal involvement, it’s based on fact, not conjecture.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

Unproven or vague allegations about impropriety in the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe have long been passed between Trump, his conservative allies on Capitol Hill and the conservative media ecosystem — with the country’s top law enforcement official and conservative lawmakers sometimes helping to fuel them.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) wrote in recent days to Australian, Italian and British officials, asking them to cooperate in Barr’s review of the Russia investigation and asserting that the attorney general was “simply doing his job.” Graham said in an interview that he expected Mifsud to be a significant part of the investigation.

“He’s a curious character in this whole deal, and we need to know more about him,” Graham said, adding that he had not talked to Barr about the matter.

“Whatever Barr finds is fine with me,” he said. “If there’s nothing there, there is nothing there. I trust him.”

Barr has never spoken specifically about his view on the theories surrounding Mifsud, though people familiar with his thinking say he is interested in the professor and the broader work of the U.S. intelligence community surrounding the Trump campaign. The Washington Post recently reported that Barr had been traveling abroad — to the United Kingdom and Italy, in particular — to ask his foreign counterparts to aid in the Justice Department’s review of the matter.

Barr has long harbored suspicions about the Russia probe, which began before the 2016 election and was later overtaken by then-special counsel Robert S. Mueller III after Trump fired FBI Director James B. Comey early in his tenure as president. Even before he was nominated, Barr had written a letter to Justice Department leaders asserting that the special counsel’s theory of how Trump might have obstructed justice in the Russia probe seemed “fatally misconceived.” At a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in April, Barr said he believed “spying did occur” on the Trump campaign ��� using a term some feel has a negative connotation, and one which FBI Director Christopher A. Wray later said he would not use.

In May, it was revealed that Barr had assigned U.S. Attorney John H. Durham to determine if the U.S. government’s “intelligence collection activities” related to the Trump campaign were “lawful and appropriate.” Barr told CBS News that month that some of the facts he had learned “don’t hang together with the official explanations of what happened,” but declined to be more specific.

“That’s all I really will say,” Barr said. “Things are just not jiving.”

The unproven theory about Mifsud is that the Maltese professor was working to set up the Trump campaign. Mifsud was undeniably critical to the FBI’s decision to open an investigation. He boasted to Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos about having “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails” — before Russia’s hacking of Democrats was publicly known. When the FBI learned of that conversation some months later, it opened a case.

Mueller’s team wrote that Mifsud “had connections to Russia,” and Comey has described him more bluntly as a “Russian agent.”

James Baker, who was the FBI’s general counsel when the bureau opened the counterintelligence probe, defended the investigation. “It’s critically important that the American people have confidence in the intelligence community,” he said. “I’m confident that there was no attempted coup and that nothing was done for political reasons.”

Baker said that after Durham was appointed, he reached out to the prosecutor and offered to cooperate with the review. Durham has yet to contact Baker, he said.

Mifsud was never accused of crimes and last surfaced two years ago for an interview with a reporter in Italy. That has fueled speculation, particularly from those who want to discredit the Russia probe, that he is not what the FBI says he is.

Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani told The Washington Post that he was interested in Mifsud because it “seems to me it was a counterintelligence setup . . . a rather typical CIA plot to create a basis for the investigation.”

Giuliani noted that he had not talked to Barr or Durham about the matter. A person familiar with Barr’s thinking said Barr has questioned the wisdom of Giuliani’s attempts to get foreign nations, especially Ukraine, to pursue investigations of interest to the president because Giuliani is operating outside normal government channels.

Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his interactions with Mifsud, has tweeted that Mifsud was “an Italian intelligence asset who the CIA weaponized.”

Caroline Polisi, a lawyer for Papadopoulos, declined to say whether he has been contacted by Durham or Barr as part of the Justice Department’s review.

Attempts to locate Mifsud were unsuccessful. Stephan Roh, a Swiss lawyer who purports to represent him, has called accusations that Mifsud was a Russian asset “defamatory.”

In Roh’s 2018 book, which postulates that Mifsud was working with Western intelligence, Roh indicated that he interviewed Mifsud about his interactions with Papadopoulos that same month.

Roh did not respond to questions about when he was last in contact with the professor or where he is located. In an email, he declined to comment on any interactions Mifsud has had with the Justice Department “or if there were any.”

According to a former Italian government official, Barr first met with Gennaro Vecchione, the head of Italy’s Security Intelligence Department, on Aug. 15, essentially to establish contact, and returned Sept. 27 for a second meeting with the heads of Italy’s domestic and foreign intelligence services.

Barr, the official said, “asked if Italian intelligence knew anything about Mifsud and if the Italians were aware of his role” in the Russia investigation “in terms of being involved in Italian intelligence itself or if he was politically tied with Italian political leaders allied with the Democrats.” The Italians, the official said, “explained that there is no involvement by the Italian intelligence services in this — and the fact that we don’t have any evidence of this plot.”

“They confirmed no connections, no activities, no interference,” the official said.

The Justice Department inspector general is also examining aspects of the FBI’s Russia probe, but some who have been questioned in it said that Mifsud has not seemed to be a key focus of investigators.

Barr’s critics say his efforts to investigate the investigators are meant to placate Trump — even if that means casting aspersions on U.S. law enforcement and intelligence.

Trump had virtually no relationship with Barr when he chose him to be attorney general in late 2018, and conservative and liberal lawyers alike hoped that Barr might restore independence to the Justice Department that they felt had been eroded in the first years of Trump’s presidency. Barr had been attorney general before, in the George H.W. Bush administration, and was widely respected in conservative legal circles.

Some analysts said Barr disappointed quickly. His characterization of the Mueller report, they noted, hewed closely to Trump’s favored talking point — no collusion, no obstruction — and Mueller felt it so misleading that he complained in a letter that the attorney general “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the special counsel’s work.

“Like most Republican lawyers or most lawyers in Washington, I expected that Bill Barr would be a very by-the-book sort of attorney general, especially since he had done it before and certainly knows the job,” said Greg Brower, a former U.S. attorney now in private practice at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck. “Unfortunately, many people in town now think he is playing politics, or he’s running the department in a way that he’s too political.”

Other analysts, though, noted that Barr had essentially telegraphed the type of attorney general he would be before he was nominated. In addition to writing a memo critical of Mueller, Barr had opined to a New York Times reporter in 2017 that the basis for investigating alleged wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation, as well as the controversial sale of a uranium company to Russia while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, was stronger than the basis for launching the Russia investigation.

“I have long believed that the predicate for investigating the uranium deal, as well as the [Clinton] Foundation, is far stronger than any basis for investigating so-called ‘collusion,’ ” Barr wrote.

Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman when Eric H. Holder Jr. was attorney general, said that when he first saw Barr’s comment, “I thought, this is someone who’s had his brain warped by a couple decades of Fox News, and that’s not the type of person that should be leading the Justice Department.”

“I think Trump basically got what he wanted at the Justice Department — which is someone that would define his job as protecting the president first and foremost,” said Miller, who is an analyst for MSNBC.

Terwilliger, the former deputy attorney general, disputed that assessment, saying Barr “remains as straight an arrow and middle of the road as he can be.”

“If he thinks that there was malfeasance in some aspect of the way the government operated in a way that was designed to hurt the presidency, I think he has every right — indeed, a responsibility — to uncover that,” Terwilliger said.

Barr’s critics and defenders alike note that he has long believed in a strong executive branch, and that is likely to inform some of his interest in protecting Trump and the office he holds.

“When you pair someone with that view of executive authority with this particular president,” said Matt Axelrod, a Justice Department official when Loretta E. Lynch was attorney general, “it’s a recipe for disaster.”

Barr’s defenders, though, note that he has generally enjoyed a good reputation and — given this job might be his last — he is unlikely to want to ruin it over causes in which he doesn’t believe.

“Throughout his career, both in public life and in the corporate world, he’s always been viewed as an individual of tremendous integrity and honesty and always beyond reproach,” said Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the conservative Federalist Society legal organization. “I just don’t see him — at the twilight of his career, given everything he’s done, and given his faith-based and spiritual life — coming off the rails at this point.”

Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report.

I helped classify calls for two presidents. The White House abuse of the system is alarming.

By Kelly Magsamen | Published

September 29, 2019 1:01 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 6, 2019 9:45 AM ET |

The whistleblower at the heart of the Ukraine controversy said White House officials ordered information about President Trump’s phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky to be removed from the classified server typically used to store such information and placed on a hyper-secure “code word” server. Such special protections are typically reserved for material of the gravest sensitivity: detailed information about covert operations, for example, where exposure can get people killed.

The move was highly suspicious, the whistleblower said several White House officials told him, because “the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.” On Friday, the White House confirmed that National Security Council lawyers directed that the call records be placed on that server.

I served under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and worked for four advisers on the National Security Council’s staff. I have staffed presidential meetings and phone calls with foreign leaders and spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours in the White House Situation Room. It is difficult to overstate just how abnormal and suspicious treating the call in that manner would be. It strongly suggests White House staff knew of serious wrongdoing by the president and attempted to bury it — a profound abuse of classified systems for political, and possibly criminal, purposes.

(The records of Trump’s conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi officials also were restricted to an unusually small group of officials, it now appears, though it’s unclear whether the memos were placed on the special server.)

In my almost six years on the NSC staff, I never personally saw or heard of the records of a presidential call being moved to the “code word” system. Such a move would be justified only if a president and foreign leader were discussing material so sensitive that intelligence officials with top-secret clearance had to be “read into” to access to it — an unlikely prospect, even with our closest allies. Presidents tend to discuss general foreign policy issues, not the fine details of covert actions.

Moving the memo to the code word server suggests Trump officials really did know the call was as bad as the president’s critics say it is. The argument some Trump officials are making — that they protected Trump’s conversations to avoid leaks — is scarcely less damning, if the point was to avoid leaks of conversations in which the president leveraged U.S. power for his own political advantage (or endorsed foreign interference in U.S. elections).

If the code word server was used to prevent leaks as a general matter — the most charitable interpretation — does that mean all of the president’s phone calls with foreign leaders are stored there? That, in itself, would represent a remarkable departure from the intended use of the classification system.

People outside national security circles might well wonder whether a president’s calls to foreign leaders are, by their nature, sensitive enough to be placed on the special server. They are not. To be sure, presidential calls are extraordinarily well-protected, befitting their importance. Those calls are the coin of the foreign policy realm. They are carefully prepared, well-staffed by professionals and (ordinarily) used only to advance America’s national interests. They focus on peace deals, trade agreements and matters of war and peace.

The memorandums of these conversations — like the one released to Congress last week — are generated by national security professionals in the Situation Room, including career employees of the intelligence agencies, the State Department and the military. These people produce rough transcripts, which are then reviewed for accuracy by relevant experts on the NSC staff who were listening to the call and finally by people in what is known as “the Suite” — the small West Wing offices that house the NSC chief of staff, the deputy national security adviser and the national security adviser.

Once such memos are produced, very few members of the NSC staff are privy to them — usually only those working directly on issues discussed on the call. Members of the Cabinet, especially the secretary of state, may receive copies. The memos can be classified at various levels, with the classification level varying paragraph by paragraph.

Most of these memos are classified as “secret,” by default. To reach “top secret” classification, they’d have to involve information the unauthorized disclosure of which would cause the United States “exceptionally grave” national security harm. “Code word” status is reserved for the absolutely most sensitive subset of information within the top-secret category. These classifications are made purely to protect national security, never for political reasons.

Material up to “top secret” is stored on a highly secure classified computer system used by NSC staff — not the code word server. I have classified many such documents myself. Based on my experience, the standard system is where the Ukraine memo should have ended up.

Nothing in Trump’s call with Zelensky rises even to the level of “top secret.” The two leaders exchanged compliments, and Trump stressed how important an ally the United States is to Ukraine. He dismissed the efforts of the European Union to help the country, lamented the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor and criticized a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

What stands out in the call, of course, is what caught the attention of the whistleblower and his sources — namely the request that Zelensky work with Attorney General William P. Barr and Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, to find negative information about former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. That is politically embarrassing, and potentially illegal and impeachable, but has nothing to do with state secrets.

If the president had only been asking Zelensky to root out corruption, as a general matter, as he has claimed, that would be standard fare for a presidential phone call, meriting a “secret” designation.

The apparent abuse of the classification system offers reason enough for congressional review of the Ukraine conversation and the events surrounding it. The questions at hand are straightforward: What national security reason was offered for moving the record of the July 25 conversation (and possibly others) to the code word system? Which NSC lawyers made that decision? Was the national security adviser involved?

One reason to pin down the decision-makers is to reestablish the public’s faith in the civil servants who work on intelligence matters. The NSC staff is made up mostly of patriotic and nonpolitical public servants who labor 18-hour days without glory or any interest in public attention. They walk through the gates of the White House every morning with one goal in mind: the protection of American national security. They deserve answers about what happened in this case. Most importantly, the American people deserve to have confidence in the integrity of a national security process that is designed to serve them.