Read the newest geopolitical news? Russia pressed Mr. Trump to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin after the tense exchange of diplomatic expulsions last week. Mr. Trump had floated the idea of meeting with Mr. Putin at the White House in a March 20 phone call, a Russian official said. At the time, Mr. Trump had told reporters that he expected to “be seeing President Putin in the not-too-distant future.” But on Friday, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on seven of Russia’s richest men and 17 top government officials, penalties designed to punish Mr. Putin’s inner circle for Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and other global transgressions. It was another indication that as Congress and much of the administration pushes for increased pressure in response to Mr. Putin’s aggressions, Mr. Trump continues to advocate good relations with his Russian counterpart.
The irony is that Trump’s opponents are ready to accept this “very positive thing” despite warning against and objecting to the policies that contributed to it. Through his personal relationship with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump reaffirmed that there is “no daylight” between the United States and Israel after an eight-year caesura. He defied conventional wisdom when he moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, when he withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear deal, when he cut off aid to the Palestinians, when he recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and when he ordered the lethal strike against Qassem Soleimani. But the catastrophes that the foreign-policy establishment predicted would follow each of these measures never materialized. What emerged instead were the Abraham Accords and a growing alliance against Iran.
US Foreign politics and Brexit 2020 latest : The sticking point in the exit negotiations between the British and EU delegations was how to maintain an open border in Ireland once the U.K. had left the EU regulatory framework. Differing regulations and standards between the two countries could, without any physical border infrastructure, lead to rampant smuggling and undermine the internal integrity of the EU market. But all sides balked at the idea of putting up a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic given the violent history and still-volatile politics surrounding the constitutional question. Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Provisional IRA terrorist organization, made thinly veiled threats (as they are wont to do) that if such an option was considered, we could see a return to mass-murder on the streets of Belfast.
In every instance we adhered to the process explicitly laid out in the Constitution: The president has the constitutional duty to nominate; the Senate has the constitutional obligation to provide advice and consent. It is written plainly in the Constitution that both presidents and senators swear an oath to uphold and defend. Is Biden saying that McConnell should ignore his sacred constitutional duty? Biden knew then, as he knows now, that there’s no constitutional duty, nor is there any precedent, either prohibiting or requiring Republicans to fill a vacancy. Nor is there any prohibition (as nearly every Democrat has already argued) against “rushing” such a nomination. Three Supreme Court justices have been confirmed with less than 45 days — including Ginsburg, who was nominated by a Democrat and confirmed by a Democrat-majority Senate. As my colleague Dan McLaughlin points out in meticulous historical detail, every real norm points to the Republicans’ filling the vacancy. Find more details at this website.
