Senate Republicans and Solicitor General Elena Kagan are facing off over whether her objection to the military's ban on openly gay soldiers and her decision to restrict recruiters at Harvard Law School disqualify her from serving on the Supreme Court.
Just minutes into Kagan's confirmation hearing Monday, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions charged she had "kicked the military out of the recruiting office" at Harvard, "in violation of federal law."
"Her actions punished the military and demeaned our soldiers as they were courageously fighting two wars overseas," Sessions said. "I can't take this issue lightly."
The recruitment matter is one of the few points on her resume that Republicans have been able to use against her. Her policies and writings on the issue call up broader themes of patriotism and equal rights, both emotional topics at a time when the nation is at war and both parties are gearing up for the midterm elections. In some measure, the November balloting will be a referendum on her patron, President Barack Obama.
At the very heart of Kagan's decision at Harvard is an even more sensitive topic — her opposition to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on openly gay soldiers.
Republicans contend that Harvard was the wrong venue for Kagan's "personal political grievance" and that briefly restricting the recruiters on campus broke the law. They conclude with questions about whether Kagan is anti-military and unfit to make impartial decisions on the high court.
Baby bumps never go out of style among the celebrity set -- and the stars don't let being pregnant slow them down one bit!
Alicia Keys and her fiance, producer Swizz Beatz, are expecting! In March, Keys told U.K. newspaper Daily Record that she is 'very interested in starting a family.'
'It is one of the most beautiful experiences to have in this life and I am looking forward to it when it is my time,' she said.
After months of anticipation, the 29-year-old singer finally showed off her growing bump while performing at the 2010 BET Awards on June 27, 2010. See who else is a parent-to-be.
A second Tampa, Florida, police officer shot during an early-morning traffic stop Tuesday has died, authorities said, as a massive manhunt was under way for two suspects.
"Doctors have pronounced Officer David Curtis deceased," Tampa police spokeswoman Laura McElroy said in a statement. "His family has chosen to harvest his organs so he will remain on life support for the next couple of hours while that takes place."
Officer Jeffrey Kocab was pronounced dead at a Tampa hospital after the incident about 2:15 a.m. ET Tuesday. Both officers were 31, according to the department.
Kocab's wife was due to give birth next week, while Curtis leaves behind his wife and four sons, ages 9, 6, 5 and 8 months.
Curtis had pulled over a vehicle and found its male passenger had an outstanding warrant for "minor violations," Tampa Police Chief Jane Castor told reporters Tuesday. Kocab responded to back Curtis up, and "as they put their hands on the suspect, the suspect spun around, pulled a firearm and shot both police officers," she said.
Curtis pulled the car over because it had no license plate, authorities said in a statement. "Officer Curtis determined the passenger was wanted on a worthless check warrant" out of Jacksonville, Florida, the statement said. He called for backup and Kocab arrived. Both officers approached the vehicle on the passenger side.
Officers responding to a 9-1-1 call from a witness found both officers on the ground and began cardiopulmonary resuscitation, police said. Both were taken to Tampa General Hospital. Kocab was pronounced dead shortly after arrival, while Curtis was put on life support and later pronounced dead.
Both Curtis and Kocab were shot in the upper body, Castor said. They were shot at close range, she told reporters, and body armor would not have helped them avoid injury.
Police dogs had tracked the suspect to a location, she said, and door-to-door searches were under way.
"We haven't positively Identified a suspect, but we have a very good suspect in this situation, and there's probably a great deal more to it than just that misdemeanor warrant," Castor said.
"This is an unbelievable tragedy for these families, and for the larger family of TPD, and for the larger family of the city of Tampa," Mayor Pam Iorio said. "Our hearts are just breaking."
Kocab had been with Tampa police for 14 months, police said, and moved through the TPD's training program at an accelerated pace "because of his outstanding police skills."
Castor said he previously was with the Plant City, Florida, police. Curtis has been with the department for three years and eight months, according to McElroy. He previously was a jail deputy with the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office.
Castor described both men as "solid police officers and outstanding individuals" who both worked the midnight shift. Kocab, she said, was "looking forward to being a father," and Curtis was devoted to his wife and sons.
Police were searching for a red 1994 Toyota Camry connected to the shooting and an African-American male and female, McElroy said. The male was described as being in his mid- to late 20s, about 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighing about 150 to 170 pounds. He is thought to be wearing brown shorts, a white T-shirt, a black vest and white sneakers, police said. No detailed description was available on the woman.
The officers' deaths come nearly a year after Tampa police Cpl. Mike Roberts was killed in the line of duty last August, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said in a statement.
"The safety of Tampa residents was the first priority for Officers Kocab and Curtis, and today they selflessly made the ultimate sacrifice to protect their city," the attorney general said. "They will certainly be missed not only by their loved ones, but also by the city they worked to keep safe."
Authorities set up a perimeter around the shooting scene and were conducting "an extensive search for evidence," police said. "The search for the suspects extends statewide. The suspects are considered armed and very dangerous."
Police were asking to be contacted by anyone who witnessed the incident, has information on the suspects or spots the vehicle.
Michael Vick was interviewed by a detective Monday about a shooting that took place outside a nightclub where he celebrated his birthday, a Virginia Beach Police spokesman said.
The spokesman, Adam Bernstein, said the Philadelphia Eagles quarterback is not a suspect and no arrest has been made in Friday's early morning shooting. One man was wounded.
Vick was accompanied on the police interview by his lawyer, Larry Woodward.
"He said he wasn't involved, he was gone before the shooting took place and he doesn't know who did the shooting,'' Woodward said in a telephone interview.
Police have not identified the shooting victim, but several news outlets identified him as Quanis Phillips, one of the co-defendants in the dogfighting case that landed Vick in federal prison for 18 months. A hospital spokesman confirmed that Phillips was admitted to the hospital Friday morning and discharged that afternoon but refused to disclose his injuries, citing privacy laws.
Woodward said Vick did not invite Phillips to the party and had no contact with him there. Vick remains on three years' probation and is not allowed to associate with anyone convicted of a felony unless granted permission to do so by his probation officer.
An NFL spokesman said Monday the league is looking into the shooting and had no further comment. Commissioner Roger Goodell reinstated Vick after being suspended for two years last July, and said at the time that Vick's margin for error would be "extremely limited.''
Woodward said Vick left the club Guadalajara at Town Center shopping center at least 10 minutes and perhaps as much as 20 minutes before the shooting, which occurred just after 2 a.m. The shooting victim and witnesses at first were uncooperative, according to police, but Bernstein said detectives have now interviewed several people.
Police have said witnesses described the shooter as a black man wearing a white tank top and driving a white Cadillac Escalade.
The Thursday night party was hyped on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter as "Michael Vick's ALL WHITE 30th Birthday Bash.'' Tickets cost $50.
Vick, who is from nearby Newport News, was in the area conducting a football camp at Hampton University.
A Charlotte-Mecklenburg countywide audit of water meters has found at least 1.4 percent of accounts had a possible problem in recording water usage, which suggests there could be more than 3,000 customers with bills that are currently too high or too low.
In response to customer complaints about high water bills and rude customer service, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities launched an audit this spring of 9,000 of the county's 250,000 meters. The audit is continuing, but early findings show that the utility has a significant problem in how it bills customers.
The audit so far has found 78 residential accounts where there was a mismatch of more than 1 CCF (100 cubic feet) of water usage. The mismatch was between the mechanical water meter, which is considered reliable, and the more error-prone electronic transmitters that send water usage data to the utility.
Some of the mismatches suggested that the customer was billed too much, while others showed the customer was billed too little.
"Some (of the accounts) were for only a few dollars, said Barry Gullet, CMU director. "Some were several hundred dollars."
Gullet was recently named CMU's director. He had been serving on an interim basis since February, when previous director Doug Bean retired after customers complained about unusually high bills and the media detailed problems with CMU's billing.
When faulty equipment has been found, CMU has replaced it, Gullet said. Customers who paid too much have been refunded, he said.
CMU said Monday night that the mismatch rate of 1 percent wasn't unexpected and was within industry norms. The problem for the utility, however, is that a 1 percent error rate means there would be hundreds of customers with erroneous bills.
It's also unclear if some of the meters and transmitters that worked for the audit could malfunction in the future.
CMU is still trying to determine what causes the electronic transmitters to send erroneous information. Gullet said Monday night he thinks humidity could be a culprit.
In the audit so far, CMU's consultant, Kentucky-based Vanguard, has visited 5,726 homes.
There were 78 mismatches and 813 accounts that need further investigation. In those accounts, the consultant couldn't get a reading. In some cases, the transmitter wasn't sending data or the consultant couldn't get to the mechanical meter.
Gullet said some people cover their meters with plants.
"We were reluctant to tear up people's flowers," he said.
It's possible some of those 813 accounts could have mismatches.
The 78 accounts with mismatches didn't necessarily result in incorrect bills, Gullet said. It's possible the mechanical meter and the transmitter could be showing different amounts, but if they are moving in sync, the customer would receive a correct bill.
He also said that CMU's internal computer system is designed to catch unusually high water bills before they are sent to customers. The Observer found this year that the utility declined to investigate a number of unusually high bills - even after the utility's own computers flagged them as being suspect.
Since then, CMU has added additional staff to review and investigate bills that its computers have flagged. It has also tried to be more helpful when customers call and complain about high water bills.
Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx said the preliminary findings were "a breath of fresh air to have an acknowledgment there is a problem."
Seventy-seven percent were working just fine, 22 percent need more checking and one percent were off at least 750 gallons from the transmitter reading. That one percent could mean that 3,000 customers are not billed accurately.
CMU says the Hidden Valley neighborhood and the Peninsula in Cornelius have more meters that need further review than others. But CMU can't explain why.
Mayor Anthony Foxx said he was glad CMU realizes there is a problem.
“It is a breath of fresh air to have some acknowledgement that there is a problem and a sense about what to do about how to move forward with it,” Foxx said.
CMU’s final report will be out in September. By then a third party auditor will have looked at 9,000 meters.
The radio-frequency identification devices can be scanned by collection crews when the bins are left curbside, according to Adria Collis, a spokesperson with the Charlotte's Solid Waste Services.
Data will help determine which neighborhoods recycle, allowing the city to focus educational efforts on communities which are not using the containers, Collis said.
Crews can also keep an inventory of the containers, which cost taxpayers nearly $40 each, she said.
Beginning in July, the collection of recyclables will occur every two weeks, instead of weekly. The savings from the less frequent collections will take the equivalent of 22 trucks off the road and will more than offset the cost of the containers, officials have said.
More than 200,000 homes are scheduled to receive the 96-gallon bins by the end of next month.
The larger cans, are the same size as city-issued trash receptacles, replace the 18-gallon bins which have been used by Charlotte for about 16 years.
Several homeowners contacted by NewsChannel 36 said they were not aware the new containers were equipped with the electronic transmitter.
"It’s information that indicates how you live your life, including something as simple as garbage disposal," said homeowner Scott Broyles. "I think at the very least you ought to be informed of that ahead of time."
Other viewers have e-mailed NewsChannel 36 with similar concerns.
"“It sounds like Big Brother will be watching," wrote one viewer. "I am already a recycler and do not need the city government to look over my shoulder.”
"It feels like an invasion of privacy,” said another viewer.
Collis said the transmitters cannot monitor the type of materials which are placed in the recycling bin and none of the data collected by the city will be made public.
The recycling record of individual homes will not be tracked by Solid Waste Services, Collis said.
Nancy Carter, vice-chairman of city council's environmental committee, said residents should not be concerned about data collected by Solid Waste Services.
City-issued trash containers have serial numbers which are linked to an address, Carter said, and that information has not been compromised.
"We have not spread it," she said. "We have not broadcast it. We have not used it illegally. We have not informed anyone of your patterns."
Sen. Robert Byrd’s death Monday cast serious doubt on whether Senate Democrats can pass the Wall Street reform bill this week.
The combination of Byrd’s passing and early negative reactions to the conference report by at least one key Republican, Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, signals Democrats face the real possibility of falling several votes shy as they try to finish the bill.
"It is a tougher road, believe me," Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Monday. "A 58-vote majority is not as good as a 59-vote majority."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) spent Monday trying to line up votes, and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) was planning to sit down Monday evening with one of the Republican holdouts, Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine.
But at least one Democrat, Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, who previously opposed the bill has told Reid that he was still not supportive. Reid asked him to help Democrats at least break a Republican filibuster, but that was “not really” something he would consider, Feingold said.
"They'd like me to vote for cloture," Feingold told POLITICO, adding that he hears from leadership "all the time."
"I'm not going to enable something that doesn't do the job to be passed so that people can pretend it does the job," he continued. "It does not do the job. The American people deserve a bill that prevents the kind of collapse that occurred a couple years ago and I don't think this bill does it."
Reid could attempt to bring up the bill this week and force Republicans to vote against it, or he could wait until West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, appoints a replacement for Byrd’s seat, which may not come until after the July 4 recess, according a senior Senate Democratic aide.
"It's hard to see how we do it this week, unless one of our members is willing to change his mind or if Scott Brown stops his retreat," the aide said. "But overall, people remain confident it will pass sooner rather than later."
The House could vote as early as Tuesday, but action could get pushed to Wednesday, said a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
Even before Byrd’s death Monday, the prospects for the financial regulatory overhaul appeared cloudy in the Senate.
Two Democrats, Feingold and Maria Cantwell of Washington, opposed the bill last month, and they have no given no indication to Democratic leaders that they will switch their votes. Without their backing, Democrats would need to hold the support of at least three of the four Republicans who have voted for the bill — Brown, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Susan Collins of Maine and Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Without Byrd, Democrats would need all four Republicans.
But the late addition of a 10-year, $19 billion tax on banks came as a surprise to Republicans, who have typically used new taxes as reason enough not to support a bill. Democrats added the tax to ensure the bill was deficit-neutral and satisfied pay-go rules in the House.
A conference report cannot be amended, so Democrats will be unable to promise any changes in order to mollify Brown or win other votes.
“There is much to like in the bill, but I do not like the new $19 billon tax that was slipped in at the wee hours of the morning,” Collins told reporters Monday. “I'm looking at how that works and what my options are.
There is much in the bill that I think will strengthen oversight of financial institutions. I'm very pleased my capital standards amendment was included and that auto dealers and other small businesses were not swept up in the bill. So I have to weigh all those factors."
Snowe said Monday that she needed to study the bill before making a decision.
"It's regrettable that in the course of business, in this case in the House-Senate conference, that different initiatives emerged that clearly should not have," Snowe said, adding that Dodd had given her no advance warning about the provision.
But Snowe suggested the bank tax might not be a deal-breaker for her vote. When asked whether the tax was "more palatable" because it calls for a fee against banks with more than $50 billion in assets, and hedge funds and hedge funds with more than $10 million, Snowe said "absolutely."
"I think that is certainly preferable that it's on the larger banks where the legislation is appropriately designed and for including private equity and hedge funds. Absolutely," Snowe said. "I mean, if you have to draw the line some place, that's where to draw it.”
Durbin said Democrats, including Dodd, were surprised to see Brown's statement Friday. Brown said he was "surprised and extremely disappointed" with a $19 billion bank tax added to the conference report and signaled he might switch his vote from yes to no.
"Senator Dodd went the extra mile to try to address his concerns in the bill, so I hope he reconsiders," Durbin said.
Brown was one of the driving forces behind a change in the bill to temper the Volcker Rule, winning an amendment that allows banks to make modest investments in hedge funds and private-equity funds with their own money. Massachusetts banks including State Street would be helped by the change, as would others nationwide.
Dodd defended the $19 billion bank tax when it was first debated by the conference committee about 3 a.m. Friday. He said the amount of the tax could effectively be paid for if Wall Street executives were willing to forgo their bonuses.
Those executive’s firms “are alive because the American taxpayer wrote a check,” Dodd said early Friday morning, referring to the $700 billion bank bailout plan. “To ask them to forego their bonuses ... ought not to be a lot to ask.”
Brown, at least, didn’t sound persuaded.
“While I'm still reviewing the bill's details, these provisions were not in the Senate version of the bill which I previously supported,” Brown said. “My fear is that these costs would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher bank, ATM and credit card fees and put a strain on lending at the worst possible time for our economy. I’ve said repeatedly that I cannot support any bill that raises taxes.”
If Democrats are able to persuade Cantwell to support the bill — and hold Collins, Snowe and Grassley — they would have a path to 60 votes.
But the likelihood of that scenario remained unclear Monday.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said the opposition from Feingold and Cantwell was empowering Republicans.
"No one has shown me a strategy by which my friends on the left can get a better bill," Frank said. "So I mean, if they vote against cloture, what they do is they increase the leverage of people who want to weaken it. So I don’t understand how, if you start out in the position that you want a stronger bill, you take an action which can only have the effect of weakening the bill."
It's been nearly two years since Academy Award winner Jennifer Hudson's family members were tragically murdered in her hometown of Chicago on October 24, 2008.
Last night, the former 'American Idol' finalist finally shared her thoughts on suffering the great loss on VH1's critically acclaimed 'Behind the Music.'
The documentary-styled show included intimate interview with Hudson's sister, Julia Hudson, and several family friends, as well as some of Hudson's big-name Hollywood friends like 'The Secret Life of Bees' co-star Queen Latifah, 'American Idol' judge Randy Jackson, record company titan Clive Davis, R&B singer/producer Ne-Yo, iconic entertainer Whitney Houston and her 'Dreamgirls' co-star Jamie Foxx.
But, the most poignant testimony on the horrific murders (of her mom, brother and nephew) came from Hudson, herself.
"It was surreal," the Grammy Award winning vocal powerhouse shared. "It was like I was outside of myself."
"I would pray when I got up in the morning and when I laid down at night," she continued. "It was just two weeks straight with family and friends going in and out, and of course it was like 'Where's Jennifer?'
"I was pretty much secluded," the Arista Records singer said. "I didn't watch any TV. I remember being asked to do a film and I said 'I don't know who I am right now. I can't be another character if I don't know who I am."
Then, she had a breakthrough.
"I can't do this anymore and I knew if I sit down and dwell on it it will be harder," the 'Dreamgirls' star revealed.
The new Weight Watchers spokesperson said that her 2009 Grammy Awards performance of her single 'You Brought Me Through' was another moment which allowed her to get out and get back to her old self.
"I was definitely thinking of my family when I sung that song [and] I could hear my brother in my head like, 'You better kill this.'"
These days, as seen in the opening moments of the show, Hudson is happily raising her toddler son, David, Jr. and gearing up to marry the father of her child, David, Daniel Otunga, Jr., a Harvard-educated attorney who previously appeared on the VH1 reality show 'I Love New York.'
And every day she gets a little stronger.
"In a way my brother drives me in my music, my son reminds me of my nephew and being a mother reminds me of my mother and in so many ways I channel her because she was such a great mom," Hudson said.
In another dramatic victory for firearm owners, the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional Chicago, Illinois', 28-year-old strict ban on handgun ownership, a potentially far-reaching case over the ability of state and local governments to enforce limits on weapons.
A 5-4 conservative majority of justices on Monday reiterated its 2-year-old conclusion that the Constitution gives individuals equal or greater power than states on the issue of possession of certain firearms for self-protection.
"It cannot be doubted that the right to bear arms was regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as states legislated in an evenhanded manner," wrote Justice Samuel Alito.
The court grounded that right in the due process section of the 14th Amendment. The justices, however, said local jurisdictions still retain the flexibility to preserve some "reasonable" gun-control measures currently in place nationwide.
In dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer predicated far-reaching implications. "Incorporating the right," he wrote, "may change the law in many of the 50 states. Read in the majority's favor, the historical evidence" for the decision "is at most ambiguous."
He was supported by Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.
At issue was whether the constitutional "right of the people to keep and bear arms" applies to local gun control ordinances, or only to federal restrictions. The basic question had remained unanswered for decades, and gave the conservative majority on the high court another chance to allow Americans expanded weapon ownership rights.
A key question was how far the court would apply competing parts of the 14th Amendment to preserve some "reasonable" gun control measures currently in place nationwide.
The appeal was filed by a community activist in Chicago who sought a handgun for protection from gangs. Otis McDonald told CNN outside his South Side home that he wants a handgun to protect himself and his family from the violence in his neighborhood. "That's all I want, is just a fighting chance," he said. "Give me the opportunity to at least make somebody think about something before they come in my house on me."
His application for a handgun permit was denied in a city with perhaps the toughest private weapons restrictions in the nation.
The justices two years ago affirmed an individual's right to possess such weapons, tossing out restrictive laws in the federal enclave of the District of Columbia.
The larger issue is one that has polarized judges, politicians and the public for decades: Do the Second Amendment's 27 words bestow gun ownership as an individual right or as a collective one -- aimed at the civic responsibilities of state militias and therefore subject, perhaps, to strict government regulation? And is that regulation limited to federal laws, or can it be applied to local communities?
The amendment states: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Gun rights groups applauded the decision.
"Today marks a great moment in American history," said Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association. "It is a vindication for the great majority of American citizens who have always believed the Second Amendment was an individual right and freedom worth defending."
Some gun control advocates tried to put a positive spin on the opinion.
"There is nothing in today's decision that should prevent any state or local government from successfully defending, maintaining, or passing, sensible, strong gun laws," said Paul Helmke, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
The court majority refused to limit its 2008 District of Columbia ruling. That decision offered at least partial constitutional validation to citizens seeking the right to possess one of the most common types of firearms in their homes. The Chicago ruling now extends that right significantly.
The Justice Department estimates that as many as 275 million guns are in the United States. In 2005, three-quarters of the 10,100 homicides by firearms nationwide were committed with handguns.
Underpinning the legal basis for the court's jurisdiction in this appeal is a complex reading of the 14th Amendment, passed after the Civil War to ensure that all citizens -- including newly freed slaves -- were protected from state laws that might restrict their fundamental rights.
One part ensures that states cannot deprive people of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." That has been commonly applied by federal courts when it comes to disputes over basic rights, so-called "ordered liberty" cases. Such cases include affirming the right to abortion, and to homosexual sex.
But another rarely used provision also prevents states from depriving the "privileges or immunities" of all citizens. The specific question for the high court in the Chicago case was whether the "immunities and privileges" clause should be used to overturn the handgun ban. An 1873 ruling limited use of that provision when considering a variety of state laws.
McDonald's lawyer, Alan Gura, promoted a new reading of the clause, in his lead role representing gun owners.
The constitutional theories are dense, but some legal scholars had said that if the high court embraced this "privileges and immunities" clause, it could open up to fresh review a huge range of issues, like property rights and gay marriage.
Courts have generally upheld other cities' restrictions on semiautomatic weapons and sawed-off shotguns. The conservative high court majority has in recent years upheld a California ban on assault rifles, similar to a federal ban that expired in 2004.
Forty-four state constitutions protect their residents' right to keep weapons, according to a brief filed by 32 state attorneys general in support of the individual weapons owners in the current appeals.
Some constitutional experts have noted the Bill of Rights had traditionally been applied by courts only to the federal government, not to local entities. It was not until the past half-century that the justices have viewed free speech, assembly, and the press -- among other rights -- as individual in nature, and fundamental to liberty, superseding in many cases the power of states.
There have been limits. The high court has repeatedly refused to extend to states the 5th Amendment requirement that persons can be charged with serious crimes only by "indictment of a grand jury."
The current case was McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521).
Less than a week after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited the United States, the Justice Department announced Monday that 10 people were arrested on charges of being Russian agents involved in a long-term mission in the country. Another suspect was still being sought.
Five of the arrested suspects appeared in a New York courtroom Monday. Four of the five, including a longtime U.S.-based columnist for the Spanish-language "El Diario" newspaper, were advised of their rights and ordered held due to flight risk, with their next hearing scheduled for July 1.
The other defendant, identified in a court document as Anna Chapman, was denied bail, and her next hearing was scheduled for July 27.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Farbiarz said search warrants in the case were being executed "across the country." He called the initial criminal complaint "the tip of the iceberg."
"These people are trained together," Farbiarz said of the defendants. "At the core of this is deception."
Separate hearings for the other detained suspects were expected later Monday in other states.
A Russian Embassy spokesman said Monday that he was unaware of the reports of the arrests, and said he is seeking more information from Russian officials.
The suspects were "trained Russian intelligence operatives," a Justice Department spokesman said, and information from court documents alleged they were part of a mission to plant "deep-cover" agents in the United States.
The Justice Department said the 10 people arrested and another person not yet in custody were supposed to recruit intelligence agents, but were not directly involved in obtaining U.S. secrets themselves. All were charged with acting as agents of a foreign government, and nine also were charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The charges include conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government without notifying the U.S. attorney general, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, the Justice Department said. Conspiracy to commit money laundering has a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.
The case resulted from a "multiyear investigation" conducted by the FBI, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and the Justice Department's National Security Division, according to a Justice Department statement. The 11 suspects were charged in two separate criminal complaints.
Last week, President Barack Obama and Medvedev spoke of strengthened ties between the former Cold War foes after their meeting at the White House. However, court documents and Justice Department officials described a Russian intelligence operation straight out of a 1950s spy novel.
According to the court documents, some of the suspects adopted phony identities, including those of dead Americans, and posed as married couples. The suspects engaged in secret communications including exchanges of bags, money drops and use of invisible ink, as well as more modern touches such as private wireless computer networks between specific laptops, the documents said.
A decrypted message from Moscow to two of the suspects said they were sent to the United States for "long-term service," one of the documents said.
"Your education, bank accounts, car, house, etc. -- all these serve one goal: fulfill your main mission, i.e., to search and develop ties in policymaking circles in U.S. and send intels (intelligence reports)," the document said.
The Russian operation was believed to date back to the 1990s, the court document said. It added that the FBI conducted extensive electronic surveillance of the suspects for years, including secretly recording and videotaping them and surreptitiously entering residences to take photographs and copy documents.
One of the suspects is Vicky Pelaez, a columnist for "El Diario" for more than 20 years covering politics, immigration and other issues, her lawyer confirmed. Pelaez is married to Juan Lazaro, another of the suspects arrested Monday, and the couple resided in Yonkers, a New York suburb.
Pelaez, Lazaro, Chapman and two other suspects -- identified as Richard Murphy and Cynthia Murphy -- appeared in the New York courtroom. The other suspects were identified in court documents as Donald Howard Heathfield, Tracey Lee Ann Foley, Michael Zottoli, Patricia Mills and Mikhail Semenko. Another suspect, Christopher R. Metsos, was still being sought.
Semenko and Chapman allegedly conducted the private wireless computer links to communicate with a Russian government official, one court document alleged. In one instance, Chapman was in a bookshop and the Russian government official drove by in a van to make the wireless connection, the document said.
Another document described alleged efforts to secretly get money to the suspects to fund their clandestine activities, including money drops involving exchanged bags in public places and other subterfuge.
In one incident, Metsos, the suspect still at large, received money from a Russian agent and buried it in a park in northern Virginia, the document said. Mills and Zottoli later showed up at the park to dig up the money, the document said.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, removed last week as the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, has told the Army he will retire, Army spokesman Gary Tallman said Monday.
No date was set for the retirement of McChrystal, a four-star general who assumed command of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan last year.
McChrystal was replaced on Wednesday by President Obama after disclosure of a magazine article in which the general and top aides disparaged top administration officials including Vice President Joe Biden and National Security Adviser Jim Jones.
Obama praised McChrystal's service record but said the general exhibited poor judgment. Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. Central Command commander, was named to replace McChrystal in Afghanistan.
Sunday night, R&B star Chris Brown, who has been keeping a low profile since pleading guilty last year in the assault case involving his former girlfriend Rihanna, broke down while performing a surprise tribute to Michael Jackson at the BET Awards.
The BET Awards audience was very much on Brown's side, helping him sing the lyrics to "Man in the Mirror" when he was overcome with emotion. But if reaction from pop culture observers and commenters is any indicator, he still has a ways to go.
"Blubbering Chris Brown steals show at BET Awards," sneered PopEater.com in its headline.
The Los Angeles Times ran a survey on its Goldderby awards website, headlining the story, "Was Chris Brown faking it at the BET Awards?"
Though close to 40 percent believed he was completely sincere, about 21 percent said he was faking -- and another 12 percent believed he was overdoing his emotion and overwhelmed by it at the same time. (A similar question is being asked by HLN's "Showbiz Tonight.")
Kirthana Ramisetti, managing editor of the pop culture site Predicto.com, says that Brown may have pushed things too far with the "Man in the Mirror" performance, which followed a series of dance routines to other Jackson songs.
"I think people felt, in terms of the dance tribute he did, I think people enjoyed that and were reminded that in spite of his past behavior and actions that he's a talented person," she says. "But when he started crying, you get a mixed reaction as to what's motivating that."
The theories about a calculating Brown don't surprise Janee Bolden, senior editor of the African-American celebrity gossip site Bossip.com
"Everybody's been very critical of every move he's made since the incident before the Grammys," she says.
But, she says, there was plenty of support for Brown at the awards show, and she believes it's a "great first step" in reviving his career.
"It was one of the best performances of the night," she says. "Everybody stopped what they were doing and watched, and you kept hearing over and over again [from his fellow performers] 'Chris Brown is back' and 'Let's give him a chance.' "
It's been a challenging year for Brown, to say the least. The Rihanna assault, which took place the night before the Grammy Awards, made the singer a pariah to many of the fans who had helped put him on top of the charts.
Last August, six months after the Rihanna incident, he was sentenced to serve five years probation and to spend more than 1,400 hours in "labor-oriented service" for the assault conviction. He worked 32 days of hard labor in Richmond, Virginia, according to that city's police chief.
A restraining order requiring Brown to stay 50 yards away from Rihanna, 10 yards if the two are at the same industry event, remains in place until 2014.
His career has yet to reach its former heights. In December, he released his latest album, "Graffiti." Reviews were, at times, merciless -- the Chicago Sun-Times Jim DeRogatis called it "thoroughly mediocre and at times just garbage" -- and to date, it has sold fewer than 500,000 copies, poor even in a time of diminished album sales. None of its singles have hit the Billboard Top 10.
Authorities haven't been much kinder. In early June, British officials barred him from entering the United Kingdom to perform, a decision based on the Rihanna case.
Brown, who turned 21 at the beginning of May, often hasn't helped his case. He's been a frequent social network user, often using services to either apologize or vent -- that is, when he wasn't leaving them entirely. (He quit Twitter late last year, only to rejoin in March.)
He apologized again at the BET Awards, telling the crowd, "I let you down before but I won't do it again, I promise."
"I think Chris Brown needs to stop being on the defensive, and just let his talent speak for itself," says Ramisetti. After all, she notes, any number of celebrities have made mistakes, but the public is generally forgiving -- if you give them time to forgive.
Bolden, whose site has made much of every Brown misstep, adds that he should take things slowly and more quietly.
"He's just a kid, and that's what people have to remember," she says. "You really don't want to do anything, if you're in his position, that reminds people of what happened. ... Only time will tell. Hopefully he can mature a little bit. There needs to be somebody in his camp guiding him to be a little more careful."
Perhaps Gucci, a commenter on the Bossip site, put it best:
"I think he's been forgiven a while ago. ... He just hasn't forgiven himself," and "that's why he won't act like he has damn sense," the commenter wrote.
"Stop with the [Twitter] rants, the pointless interviews, and the [whining] and just dance!"
The radio-frequency identification devices can be scanned by collection crews when the bins are left curbside, according to Adria Collis, a spokesperson with the Charlotte's Solid Waste Services.
Data will help determine which neighborhoods recycle, allowing the city to focus educational efforts on communities which are not using the containers, Collis said.
Crews can also keep an inventory of the containers, which cost taxpayers nearly $40 each, she said.
Beginning in July, the collection of recyclables will occur every two weeks, instead of weekly. The savings from the less frequent collections will take the equivalent of 22 trucks off the road and will more than offset the cost of the containers, officials have said.
More than 200,000 homes are scheduled to receive the 96-gallon bins by the end of next month.
The larger cans, are the same size as city-issued trash receptacles, replace the 18-gallon bins which have been used by Charlotte for about 16 years.
Several homeowners contacted by NewsChannel 36 said they were not aware the new containers were equipped with the electronic transmitter.
"It’s information that indicates how you live your life, including something as simple as garbage disposal," said homeowner Scott Broyles. "I think at the very least you ought to be informed of that ahead of time."
Other viewers have e-mailed NewsChannel 36 with similar concerns.
"“It sounds like big brother will be watching," wrote one viewer. "I am already a recycler and do not need the city government to look over my shoulder.”
"It feels like an invasion of privacy,” said another viewer.
Collis said the transmitters cannot monitor the type of materials which are placed in the recycling bin and none of the data collected by the city will be made public.
The recycling record of individual homes will not be tracked by Solid Waste Services, Collis said.
Nancy Carter, vice-chairman of city council's environmental committee, said residents should not be concerned about data collected by Solid Waste Services.
City-issued trash containers have serial numbers which are linked to an address, Carter said, and that information has not been compromised.
"We have not spread it," she said. "We have not broadcast it. We have not used it illegally. We have not informed anyone of your patterns."
U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday that justices on the nation's highest court should be even-handed and impartial in order to promise "nothing less than a fair shake for every American."
In her opening statement to her confirmation hearing, Kagan sought to address Republican concerns that her background as an academic and policy specialist in the Clinton administration would bring a liberal bias in her court rulings.
The role of the Supreme Court is "to safeguard the rule of law, through a commitment to even-handedness, principle, and restraint," Kagan said.
"I will make no pledges this week other than this one -- that if confirmed, I will remember and abide by all these lessons," she said after describing her experiences as a Supreme Court clerk, law school professor and U.S. solicitor general. "I will listen hard, to every party before the court and to each of my colleagues. I will work hard. And I will do my best to consider every case impartially, modestly, with commitment to principle, and in accordance with law."
If confirmed by the 19-member committee and then the full Senate, Kagan would be the 112th Supreme Court justice and the fourth woman to sit on the nation's highest court.
While her confirmation is considered likely, Republican senators on the panel questioned Monday whether Kagan can be an impartial justice, displaying a partisan divide over President Barack Obama's second Supreme Court nomination since he took office in January 2009. The Senate confirmed Obama's first candidate, Sonia Sotomayor, last year.
The committee's seven Republicans used their opening statements to challenge Kagan's judicial experience and her ability to put aside personal politics, and the 12 Democratic members praised Kagan's qualifications and welcomed her possible presence on a court they criticized for what they called conservative activism.
Kagan sat impassively in the packed room, sometimes taking a sip of water, as the senators outlined the questioning she will face in coming days.
Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, said Kagan would be an independent Supreme Court justice, and that he advised her to be open in expressing her judicial philosophy at her confirmation hearing.
Citing her record as the first woman to be dean of Harvard Law School and the first woman solicitor general of the United States, Leahy said America is "a better country for the fact that the path of excellence Elena Kagan has taken in her career is one now open to both men and women."
However, the ranking Republican on the panel, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, said Kagan lacks judicial experience and has a record of supporting liberal political causes.
"While academia certainly has value, there is no substitute, I think, for being in the harness of the law, handling real cases," Sessions said.
Other Republicans said Kagan's experience as a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall indicated she would seek to push society toward desired ideological or political ends, rather than apply existing law.
"Will the Constitution control her, or will she try to control the Constitution?" asked Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Does she believe that judges may control the Constitution by changing its meaning?"
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California accused Republicans of casting a "drift net" for any disqualifying fact in Kagan's record, saying the GOP effort failed.
"I believe you are eminently confirmable," Feinstein said, turning the tables on Republican concerns about Kagan's lack of judicial experience by saying: "Frankly, I find this refreshing."
Other Democrats harshly criticized the current Supreme Court for what they characterized as rulings based on conservative activism. They cited the Citizens United ruling in January, in which the high court voted 5-4 to give big businesses, unions and nonprofits more power to spend freely in federal elections, which they said threatens a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, called the Supreme Court's shift to the right under Chief Justice John Roberts "palpable."
"In decision after decision, this court bends the law to suit" a conservative political ideology, Schumer said, calling Kagan "a terrific antidote to the lack of practical real-world understanding of the court."
However, Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona said Kagan's record is full of "warning signs" that she may be what he called a "results-oriented" justice -- which is conservative code language for liberal activism.
Citing her record as clerk for Marshall, Kyl said many of her memos then "appeared to be based largely on her own liberal political views."
"This kind of naked political judgment appears frequently throughout Kagan's work as a Supreme Court clerk," Kyl said.
Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois responded that America is a better nation due to Marshall's personal empathy in ruling on influential civil rights cases.
"Our Supreme Court is badly in need of a person of your skill and knowledge and background," Durbin said.
Hi,
My name is Laurel.
I Am A Grassroots Activist, Blogger, Pro-Life, Intelligent, Registered Independent Voter, Wife, Mother, Daughter, Sister, Loyal Friend.
My native hometown is Brooklyn, NY. (Bed-Stuy)
I care deeply about the well being of Children.
I'm blood-related to a well-known Charlotte Politician. (He's currently serving in Public Office.)
My Blog "Black Political Buzz" (Non-Spam site), is a Fair Political Commentary and Global News Portal published from an Independent Voter's Perspective.
You may not agree but I'm highly opposed to Straight Ticket Voting.
I'm a Nice person but don't get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Thanks for checking out my site.
Also tune in to my Infrequently Recorded Blog Talk Radio program & tell me what you think.
R.I.P. Dad (Mr. Peter Kelly)
Since you've chosen to visit and read the content of this Blog by personal choice, please don't ask me to compensate you for expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech. No Intentional Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character will be published and I'll credit all sources. To the Associated Press I know, I know "Links Only"., however I'm also citing the Fair Use Doctrine(Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission. For tips or corrections you can contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com/ By the way Thanksfor stopping by.
(Note:
Links and Posts published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel's Employer nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Comments, Links and Posts published on Black Political Buzz's Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are independently owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel's Employer.)
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
