Despite facing immediate opposition from various Republicans in both the House and Senate, with the latter even announcing that there will be no vote on the matter, bipartisan negotiators are working tirelessly to sell this package as a last-ditch effort to secure necessary funding for Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression.

This deal presents a prime opportunity for Congress to finally make significant changes to the flawed US immigration system, as highlighted by the additional provisions for military aid to Israel, funding for allies in the Asia-Pacific region, and humanitarian assistance for refugees escaping Gaza. While President Joe Biden has played a crucial role in securing this deal by collaborating with leaders from both sides of the aisle in the Senate, its passage through Congress remains a challenging task, if not an impossible one. This sentiment is echoed by many Republican Senators, who have expressed concerns about the border policies not going far enough and have questioned the allocation of additional aid to Ukraine. In fact, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida went as far as to categorize this deal as ‘an easy NO.’

The package has also drawn strong opposition from former President Donald Trump, who is the likely Republican nominee for the upcoming presidential election. It is worth noting that there may also be some opposition from Democratic Senators, as Senator Alex Padilla of California has publicly stated his disapproval of the changes that this deal would bring to the asylum process, stating that it ‘misses the mark.’

Despite these challenges, here is what we know about the package so far: it includes $60 billion for Ukraine and $14 billion for Israel, as well as investments in domestic defense manufacturing, aid for humanitarian efforts, and measures to control the influx of migrants at the US-Mexico border. Additionally, $10 billion will be allocated to humanitarian efforts in other regions, including Ukraine, Israel, and Gaza. Lastly, $20 billion will be set aside for immigration enforcement measures.

The proposed package includes a provision to allocate $20 billion towards strengthening immigration enforcement, which would result in a significant increase in the hiring of officers to handle and assess asylum claims. It would also see a substantial boost in the number of Border Patrol agents and initiatives implemented to combat the illegal import of fentanyl. Of particular note is the proposed changes to the asylum process, which would involve stricter standards and prompter enforcement measures. The purpose of the asylum system is to provide protection to individuals who are fleeing persecution based on factors such as race, religion, political affiliation, or membership in a marginalized group.

While this is an essential part of international law and serves to safeguard human rights, the system has become overwhelmed in recent years due to a surge in the number of people seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border. Under the new plan, individuals would be required to demonstrate a strong likelihood of being granted asylum during initial screenings. Additionally, those with a criminal history, who have already been resettled in another country, or who could have found safety by resettling in their home country would not be eligible to make an asylum claim.

Furthermore, if migrants cross the border illegally between ports of entry, they would be detained and undergo a screening within a maximum of 15 days. If they pass the screening, they would receive a work permit, be placed in a supervision program, and have their asylum case decided within three months. For those who seek asylum in between ports of entry, detention would be mandatory while they await the initial screening for their claim. To accommodate this, there would be a significant expansion in detention facilities. The proposal also involves a substantial expansion of an existing program under the Biden administration, which monitors families who arrive at the border and awaits screening for their asylum claim.

This program was developed as an alternative to detention for families and its expansion would provide another avenue to handle the increasing numbers of families seeking asylum.

Immigration advocates are voicing their concerns and opposition to the proposed changes to the asylum policy, citing various reasons for their opposition. One of the main concerns is that the current standard for granting asylum is intentionally set low, as most migrants seeking asylum are in extremely dire situations, lack proper legal representation, and are still recovering from the traumatic experiences of their journeys. The proposed changes also aim to restrict the ability of migrants to apply for asylum at all, if the number of illegal border crossings reaches a specific threshold. This echoes a policy implemented by former President Donald Trump, known as Title 42, which justified the swift expulsion of migrants in the name of curbing the spread of COVID-19.

Under the new proposal, if Customs and Border Protection encounters 4,000 migrants per day over a five-day average, the government would have the authority to immediately expel them. Once the number of encounters reaches 5,000, automatic expulsions would take place. This is especially concerning as there were days in December where border encounters topped 10,000 – the highest on record for illegal crossings. However, the proposal does still allow migrants to apply for asylum at designated ports of entry. Additionally, if the number of illegal crossings decreases by 75%, the administration would have a two-week window to terminate the use of this emergency power.

Supporters of Title 42 argue that it was a necessary tool in expelling migrants quickly, freeing up resources for patrolling and protecting the border. However, critics question the effectiveness of this policy, as it is difficult to determine accurate numbers when migrants repeatedly attempt to cross the border after being expelled under Title 42. Critics also point out that this policy has enabled criminal organizations to exploit and prey on the buildup of migrants in the southern border region.

The proposal does make allowances for migrants who express concerns about being persecuted if they are returned to Mexico, allowing them to still apply for asylum in that specific scenario. Furthermore, the proposed legislation aims to set limits on the President’s immigration authority by placing restrictions on the use of emergency powers in situations like this. Overall, there are many concerns and debates around the proposed changes to the asylum policy and the potential consequences it may have on migrants and border security.

The proposed legislation would greatly impact the way presidential administrations handle immigration at the U.S. border. Specifically, it would place strict limitations on the use of ‘parole’ to allow migrants into the country. This would mean eliminating the current practice of granting parole to those who have crossed the border illegally or presented themselves at ports of entry, and instead implementing a new system for evaluating asylum claims. While the Biden administration would still have the authority to schedule screenings of asylum claims through an app, the use of humanitarian parole – which allows individuals fleeing unrest or war to enter the country – would be preserved but subject to negotiation.

Of concern for progressive and Hispanic Democrats is the potential harm to migrants seeking asylum under this new legislation. However, the bill does include measures aimed at assisting migrants already in the U.S. and the cities and states where they have settled. This includes providing $1.4 billion to local programs, such as shelters, that have seen an influx of migrants, as well as expediting work permits for those awaiting an asylum claim.

In addition to these provisions, the legislation addresses other pressing issues related to immigration, such as the trafficking of fentanyl into the U.S. It would authorize sanctions and anti-money laundering tools to combat this criminal activity. Furthermore, the bill would also create a yearly visa allocation of 50,000 for employment and family-based immigration over the next five years.

However, it should be noted that the legislation does not address broader immigration reforms or deportation protections for individuals living in the U.S. without authorization – key elements of previous Senate deals. Still, the bill does offer a pathway to residency for Afghans who worked alongside U.S. soldiers during America’s longest war. This is in response to the nearly 76,000 Afghans who have arrived in the U.S. on military planes after the withdrawal of American troops in August 2021. All in all, the proposed legislation seeks to make significant changes to the way presidential administrations handle immigration, while also addressing specific issues and providing support to those directly affected by the immigration process.

The newly proposed provision aims to create a pathway for qualified Afghans to not only apply for, but also obtain, U.S. citizenship. This would not only give deserving individuals the opportunity to become permanent members of American society, but also provide them with a sense of security and stability in the aftermath of their evacuation. To ensure the safety of both the applicants and the country, thorough vetting and screening procedures will be put in place before granting lawful permanent resident status to eligible evacuees. This will not only maintain the integrity of the U.S. immigration process, but also prioritize the safety and well-being of all individuals involved. Ultimately, this provision seeks to recognize and honor the sacrifices made by these brave Afghans and grant them the opportunity to build a brighter future for themselves and their families in the United States.

The post What’s In The Bipartisan Senate Package To Aid Ukraine And Israel, Secure U.S. Border appeared first on Jewish Directory.

The post US Tracking Of Virus Variants Has Improved After Slow Start appeared first on Jewish Directory.

The convictions for Greg McMichael, son Travis McMichael and neighbor William “Roddie” Bryan came after jurors deliberated for about 10 hours. The men face minimum sentences of life in prison. It is up to the judge to decide whether that comes with or without the possibility of parole.

The McMichaels grabbed guns and jumped in a pickup truck to pursue the 25-year-old Black man after seeing him running in their neighborhood outside the Georgia port city of Brunswick in February 2020. Bryan joined the pursuit in his own pickup and recorded cellphone video of Travis McMichael fatally shooting Arbery.

Arbery’s killing after the graphic video leaked online two months later. Though prosecutors did not argue that racism motivated the killing, federal authorities have charged them with hate crimes, alleging that they chased and killed Arbery because he was Black. That case is scheduled to go to trial in February.

The jury sent a note to Superior Court Judge Timothy Walmsley soon after returning to court Wednesday morning asking to view two versions of the shooting video — the original and one that investigators enhanced to reduce shadows — three times apiece.

Jurors returned to the courtroom to see the videos and listen again the 911 call one of the defendants made from the bed of a pickup truck about 30 seconds before the shooting.

The disproportionately white jury received the case around midday Tuesday and spent about six hours deliberating before adjourning without a verdict.

The McMichaels told police they suspected Arbery was a fleeing burglar when they armed themselves and jumped in a pickup truck to chase him. Bryan joined the pursuit when they passed his house and recorded cellphone video of Travis McMichael blasting Arbery at close range with a shotgun as Arbery threw punches and grabbed for the weapon.

On the 911 call the jury reviewed, Greg McMichael tells an operator: “I’m out here in Satilla Shores. There’s a Black male running down the street.”

He then starts shouting, apparently as Arbery is running toward the McMichael’s idling truck with Bryan’s truck coming up behind him: “Stop right there! Damn it, stop! Travis!” Gunshots can be heard a few second later.

The graphic video death leaked online two months later, and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation took over the case, quickly arresting the three men. Each of them is charged with murder and other crimes.

Defense attorneys contend the McMichaels were attempting a legal citizen’s arrest when they set off after Arbery, seeking to detain and question him as a suspected burglar after he was seen running from a nearby home under construction.

Travis McMichael testified that he shot Arbery in self-defense, saying the running man turned and attacked with his fists while running past the idling truck where Travis McMichael stood with his shotgun.

Prosecutors said there was no evidence Arbery had committed crimes in the defendants’ neighborhood. He had enrolled at a technical college and was preparing at the time to study to become an electrician like his uncles.

The post 3 White Men Charged in Ahmaud Arbery Case Found Guilty of Murder appeared first on Jewish Directory.

Notorious Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib found herself backtracking in a recent interview on her own policy stances after being called out for supporting a bill that would have abolished all prisons within 10 years.

Asked by Axios reporter Jonathan Swan about her support for the BREATHE Act, which calls for the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services to create a roadmap for the “full decarceration of federal detention facilities within 10 years” and “a moratorium on all new federal prison, jail, immigrant and youth detention construction,” Tlaib found herself in an unenviable position.

The post Video: Rep. Rashida Tlaib defends her bill to empty out federal prisons of all inmates appeared first on Jewish Directory.

Mary Lemanski resigned as social media director of the Democratic Party of DuPage County, Illinois, after making the comments on social media.

“It was probably just self-defense,” Lemanski wrote on Twitter after the deadly Waukesha incident, including the hashtags #Wisconsin and #KyleRittenhouse.”

“Living in Wisconsin, he probably felt threatened,” she wrote in another post. “I’m sure he didn’t want to hurt anyone. He came to help people,” a reference to the defense’s argument in the Rittenhouse case.

“The blood of Kyle Rittenhouse’s victims is on the hands of Wisconsin citizens, even the children,” she shockingly wrote.

The post Democrat Who Called Waukesha Deaths ‘Payback’ for Rittenhouse Resigns appeared first on Jewish Directory.

“American consumers are feeling the impact of elevated gas prices at the pump and in their home heating bills, and American businesses are, too, because oil supply has not kept up with demand as the global economy emerges from the pandemic,” the White House said in a statement. “That’s why President Biden is using every tool available to him to work to lower prices and address the lack of supply.”

The White House said the release had been coordinated with at least five other major energy-consuming nations — China, India, Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom — and followed “weeks of consultations.”

Out of the 50 million barrels, 32 million will be released in the next few months and will return to the reserve in the years ahead, the administration said. The other 18 million will be released as part of an acceleration of an oil sale already authorized by Congress.

 Americans used an average of 20.7 million barrels a day during September, according to the Energy Information Administration, meaning that Tuesday’s release equals about two-and-a-half days of additional supply.

“The President stands ready to take additional action, if needed, and is prepared to use his full authorities working in coordination with the rest of the world to maintain adequate supply as we exit the pandemic,” the White House said.

The announcement comes one week after Biden asked the Federal Trade Commission to look into whether oil and gas companies were involved in “illegal conduct” in order to keep prices up, noting “mounting evidence of anti-consumer behavior”.

“The bottom line is this: gasoline prices at the pump remain high, even though oil and gas companies’ costs are declining,” Biden wrote in a letter to FTC Chair Lina Khan. “The Federal Trade Commission has authority to consider whether illegal conduct is costing families at the pump. I believe you should do so immediately.”

The post Biden approves release of 50 million barrels of oil amid rising gas prices appeared first on Jewish Directory.

In their closing arguments, a defense attorney for the man who fired the fatal gunshots said the 25-year-old Arbery was killed as he violently resisted a legal effort to detain him to answer questions about burglaries in a neighborhood just outside the port city of Brunswick, Georgia.

“It is absolutely, horrifically tragic that this has happened,” attorney Jason Sheffield said. “This is where the law is intertwined with heartache and tragedy. You are allowed to defend yourself.”

The attorneys made their appeals to the disproportionately white jury after 10 days of testimony that concluded last week. Closing arguments were to resume Tuesday. Prosecutors will get the final word because they carry the burden of proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Arbery’s killing became part of a larger national reckoning on racial injustice after a graphic video of his death leaked online two months later. Though prosecutors did not argue that racism motivated the killing, federal authorities have charged all three men with hate crimes, alleging that they chased and killed Arbery because he was Black.

Father and son Greg and Travis McMichael grabbed guns and pursued Arbery in a pickup truck after spotting him running through their subdivision on Feb. 23, 2020. A neighbor, William “Roddie” Bryan, joined the chase and recorded the video of Travis McMichael opening fire as Arbery threw punches and grabbed for his shotgun.

No one was charged in the killing until Bryan’s video leaked and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation took over the case from local police. All three men are charged with murder and other offenses.

Prosecutor Linda Dunikoski told the jury the defendants had no evidence Arbery committed crimes but instead acted on assumptions based on neighborhood gossip and speculative social media posts.

“They made the decision to attack Ahmaud Arbery in their driveways because he was a Black man running down the street,” Dunikoski said. She added: “They shot and killed him. Not because he was a threat to them but because he wouldn’t stop and talk to them.”

Defense attorneys say the men suspected Arbery had burglarized a house under construction and intended to hold him until police arrived. Security cameras recorded Arbery inside the house five times, but none of the videos showed him stealing or damaging anything.

Dunikoski said the McMichaels and Bryan chased Arbery for five minutes, using their trucks to cut him off, run him off the road and otherwise prevent him from fleeing. She repeated Greg Michael’s words to local police after the shooting that Arbery was “trapped like a rat.”

Bryan recorded Travis McMichael standing with a shotgun outside the driver’s side door of his idling truck when Arbery approched on foot, then ran around the passenger side. They met in front of the truck, which blocked the camera’s view, when Travis McMichael fired the first of three shotgun blasts. The video shows Arbery punching him and grabbing for the gun as two more shots are fired, then Arbery turns to try to run again before falling facedown in the street.

“He chose to fight,” said Laura Hogue, an attorney for Greg McMichael. She said Arbery decided “without any sense of reason to run at a man wielding a shotgun, leaving him with no other alternative but to be placed in a position to kill him.”

Referring to a smiling photo of Arbery the jury had been show at the trial, Hogue told panel: “A beautiful teenager with a broad smile in a crooked baseball cap can go astray … And years later he can end up creeping into a home that’s not his own, and run away instead of facing the consequences.”

Bryan’s attorney, Kevin Gough, suggested Arbery should have cried for help if he was being chased unjustly.

“Why isn’t he calling out, `Hey, somebody call 911! There’s crazy people after me,’” Gough said. “Maybe that’s because Mr. Arbery doesn’t want help.”

Gough said Bryan did not know the McMichaels’ had guns until moments before the shooting. He suggested a higher power guided Bryan to join the pursuit so he could record the shooting on his phone.

“You you can call it karma. You can call it fate. I would call it divine providence,” Gough said. “Somebody is guiding Mr. Bryan, whether it’s a conscious thought process or not. Something is guiding Mr. Bryan down this street to document what’s going on.”

Sheffield, who represents Travis McMichael, said his client never wanted to shoot Arbery but was forced to make a life-or-death decision when Arbery charged at him in front of the truck.

He said residents of Satilla Shores were already nervous amid reports of thefts and suspicious people in the neighborhood. He said Arbery’s frequent visits to the unfinished home made it reasonable to suspect he had stolen items from a boat the home’s owner kept in the doorless garage a short time before he installed the cameras.

Dunikoski noted that Arbery never threatened the McMichaels during the chase, and he carried no weapons.

“You can’t bring a gun to a fistfight. It’s unfair, right?” the prosecutor said.

She said it was Travis McMichael who attacked Arbery — first with his truck, then by pointing a shotgun at him as Arbery ran toward him.

“They can’t claim self-defense under the law because they were the initial, unjustified aggressors,” Dunikoski said, “and they started this.”

Arbery had enrolled at a technical college and was preparing to study to become an electrician like his uncles when he was killed.

The post Attorneys Make Final Case To Jurors In Ahmaud Arbery’s Death appeared first on Jewish Directory.

Separately on Monday, NYU Langone Health, a medical center affiliated with New York University, said it has received a $166 million gift from Bezos and his family.

For its part, the Obama foundation said in a statement that the gift from Bezos is intended “to help expand the scope of programming that reaches emerging leaders” in the United States and around the world.

The donation, it said, was also given in honor of John Lewis, the congressman and civil rights icon who died last year. As part of the gift, the foundation said Bezos has asked for the plaza at the Obama Presidential Center, under construction in Chicago’s South Side, to be named after Lewis. Valerie Jarrett, a former senior adviser to Obama who serves as the foundation’s CEO, said in a statement that the foundation was “thrilled” by that idea.

Construction on Obama’s legacy project is expected to cost about $830 million and to be completed by 2025. In the meantime, the foundation said it’s giving donors the opportunity to “honor and the names of those who have fought for a more just and equitable world” by naming public spaces in the future presidential center.

“Freedom fighters deserve a special place in the pantheon of heroes, and I can’t think of a more fitting person to honor with this gift than John Lewis, a great American leader and a man of extraordinary decency and courage,” Jeff Bezos said in the statement released by the foundation. “I’m thrilled to support President and Mrs. Obama and their Foundation in its mission to train and inspire tomorrow’s leaders.”

Since stepping down as CEO of Amazon this year, Bezos has begun to focus more of his attention on philanthropy. NYU Langone, which received the other Bezos gift announced Monday, said in a statement the donation will be used to aid “with the health and wellness of diverse populations” across NYU Langone Hospital—Brooklyn community, one of the school’s teaching hospitals and trauma centers in Brooklyn.

Last year, Bezos committed to spend $10 billion by 2030 to enhance climate change efforts through his Bezos Earth Fund. In recent months, he has released some details on how he plans to spend that money.

Bezos, whose personal wealth is estimated by Forbes at roughly $212 billion, had long been questioned about the relatively modest level of his charitable giving and reluctance to sign The Giving Pledge. The pledge, developed by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, is intended to persuade the world’s wealthiest to donate more than half their worth to philanthropic organizations.

MacKenzie Scott, Bezos’ former wife, whose fortune is estimated at $61 billion, has signed the pledge. Scott has made a splash in the philanthropy world over the past 17 months by donating $8.7 billion — without any strings attached — to numerous nonprofits across the country.

The post Bezos Makes $100 Million Gift To Obama Foundation And NYU Medical Center appeared first on Jewish Directory.

A smiling Cohen emerged from Manhattan federal court after signing documents and speaking with authorities about his upcoming three-year term of supervised release.

“I feel great today. It’s been long overdue,” Cohen said to a collection of camera crews alerted to his presence by a tweet he had sent Sunday.

Cohen was sentenced to prison in December 2018 after pleading guilty to campaign finance charges and lying to Congress, among other crimes. In all, he spent about 13 1/2 months behind prison walls and a year and a half in home confinement. His time was further reduced through good behavior.

The campaign finance charges came after he helped arrange payouts during the 2016 presidential race to keep the porn actor Stormy Daniels and model Karen McDougal from making public claims of extramarital affairs with Trump. Trump has denied the affairs.

He implicated Trump at the time in the campaign finance charges, as he did again on Monday when he said that his release from home confinement “in no way negates the actions I took at the direction of and for the benefit of Donald J. Trump.”

He said he was “cognizant of my responsibilities” and “will not cease my commitment to law enforcement.”

“I will continue to provide information, testimony, documents and my full cooperation on all ongoing investigations to ensure that others are held responsible for their dirty deeds and that no one is ever believed to be above the law,” Cohen said.

Before his sentencing, Cohen tried to win leniency, saying he had cooperated fully with prosecutors, including with the probe by special counsel Robert Mueller into possible foreign influence in the 2016 election.

One of Mueller’s prosecutors, Jeannie Rhee, said in court that Cohen has “provided consistent and credible information about core Russia-related issues under investigation.” But Manhattan federal prosecutors said he never fully committed to cooperating with them and did not earn a substantial sentence reduction.

Cohen, who reported to prison in May 2019, was released to home confinement after about a year as authorities released low-security-risk inmates during a coronavirus outbreak in federal prisons.

He was returned to prison weeks later before a judge ordered him returned to home confinement, saying that returning him to prison was clearly meant to punish him for his plan to publish his book, titled, “Disloyal: The True Story of Michael Cohen, Former Personal Attorney to President Donald J. Trump.”

“How can I take any other inference than that it’s retaliatory?” Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein said. Prosecutors had insisted that Probation Department officers did not know about the book when they wrote a provision of home confinement that severely restricted Cohen’s public communications.

The post Michael Cohen Ends Prison Term After Trump-related Crimes appeared first on Jewish Directory.

NEW YORK (AP) — Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted on charges stemming from killing two men and wounding another during the unrest that followed the shooting of a Black man by a white police officer, says in a new interview that he’s “not a racist person” and supports the Black Lives Matter movement.

“This case has nothing to do with race. It never had anything to do with race. It had to do with the right to self-defense,” the 18-year-old tells Fox News host Tucker Carlson in an interview set to air Monday night. Rittenhouse is white, as were the men he shot.

Rittenhouse was 17 last year when he traveled 20 miles (32 kilometers) from his home in Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, which had been racked with protests in the wake of the Aug. 23 shooting of Jacob Blake. That shooting and the response in Kenosha — protests that turned destructive — became part of the national reckoning over police use of force against Black people following George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis the previous May at the hands of police.

Rittenhouse, armed with an AR-style semiautomatic rifle, joined others who said they were intent on protecting private property from potential damage on Aug. 25. During his trial, prosecutors argued that the teenager as a “wannabe soldier” who went looking for trouble that night. Rittenhouse countered that he fired in self-defense after he was attacked and in fear for his life.

The shootings quickly made Rittenhouse a rallying cry for supporters of Second Amendment rights and those angered by the sometimes violent protests seen in some American cities after Floyd’s death.

Rittenhouse was photographed in a bar before the trial with apparent members of the far-right Proud Boys. Rittenhouse’s attorneys have said he is not a white supremacist.

A jury last Friday found Rittenhouse not guilty on charges of homicide, attempted homicide and reckless endangering in the deaths of Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and the wounding of Gaige Grosskreutz, now 28.

The post VIDEO: Rittenhouse Tells Fox News ‘Not A Racist Person,’ Backs BLM appeared first on Jewish Directory.