Alabama Thought It Had Seen Enough Scandal. Then Came Roy Moore.
November 18, 2017 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
“I don’t think it’s because Alabamians are more corrupt per capita,” said Jackson R. Sharman III, a criminal defense lawyer in Birmingham. “The broader culture is much more of a moral-based culture in the public square than it is in a lot of other places. When that’s the case, it may be that moral failings and missteps kind of come to the fore more quickly because they will stand out.”
Mr. Sharman should know: He led the Legislature’s investigation of Gov. Robert Bentley, a former Baptist deacon who quit in April as part of a plea agreement loosely connected to a sex scandal made famous by a surreptitiously recorded phone call. (Mr. Bentley’s departure in disgrace did not keep him from telling an Alabama television station months later that he was “the best governor Alabama’s ever had by far.” He could not be reached on Friday.)
To polish their state’s reputation of late, Alabamians sometimes note that Alabamians were the enforcers during the latest controversies. The ousted speaker, Michael G. Hubbard, was prosecuted in state court, not federal. A panel of state judges suspended Mr. Moore from the bench for violating judicial ethics. And the Legislature, as well as Alabama’s equivalent of a special prosecutor, helped to drive Mr. Bentley out of the governor’s office, where he used to display a picture of himself with Celine Dion and talk about how Bear Bryant, the legendary University of Alabama football coach, had been one of his dermatology patients.
Credit
William Widmer for The New York Times
“Alabamians are concerned about the appearance that we have to others,” said Alice H. Martin, a former United States attorney in Birmingham who is now a Republican candidate for state attorney general. “It’s unfortunate when you have a beautiful state, and the only time you hit the national news is a bad negative story. That concerns voters.”
Not everyone is convinced that voters are blameless.
“No one forced people to vote for this bunch of crooks,” Josh Moon, a columnist for the website Alabama Political Reporter, wrote this week. “This is who voters in Alabama chose to put in charge. Despite all evidence and facts and history, this is the sad group of politicians duly elected and seated. And if given the opportunity, voters in this state would very likely put these same men back in charge.”
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
The new allegations against Mr. Moore, who has denied any misconduct, are by far the gravest of any of Alabama’s recent scandals. And while Mr. Moore was never expected to glide into the Senate, the accusations have imperiled his campaign in the days since nine women came forward to describe misconduct or unwanted romantic overtures.
The Alabama Republican Party opted this week to stand behind the nomination of Mr. Moore, whose Democratic opponent, Mr. Jones, is a former federal prosecutor. But whether or not Mr. Moore wins the special election on Dec. 12, Democrats and Republicans believe it unlikely that his swirl of scandal will quickly reverberate into many other races, at least in Alabama.
Indeed, the state party stuck with Mr. Moore, in part, because Republicans feared losing the support of their own voters. So far, just one Republican organization in Alabama — the Greater Birmingham Young Republicans — has formally distanced itself from Mr. Moore, and typically talkative Republican officeholders have refused to respond to messages in recent days.
Credit
Jeff Haller for The New York Times
Now some of Mr. Moore’s supporters are wondering, and hoping, that the fusillade of criticism from beyond Alabama will strengthen his case before voters here who often declare their independence and insularity.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
“We today have a choice in Alabama: to stand behind righteousness and one that God by his providence has placed there, or to abandon him,” said the Rev. Jim Nelson, pastor of a church in North Alabama.
But the election is still weeks away. For now, Mr. Moore’s problems have exacerbated and intensified a broad longing here for a hiatus from the scandals that have transformed the corridors of Goat Hill and the sandwich line at Scott Street Deli into gossip parlors.
“When you get scandals that are this hot, you can’t talk about anything else in politics,” said Mr. Brewbaker, who has already announced his plans to leave the Alabama Senate. “And we’ve got a lot of issues that it’d be nice for people to be focusing on right now.”
Still, the state may get a respite from the clamor soon. Next Saturday, after all, is when Alabama plays Auburn.
Continue reading the main story
Share and Enjoy
Trump To Reconsider Move To Lift Ban On Imports Of Some Elephant Trophies
November 18, 2017 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lifted a ban on importing sport-hunted trophies of elephants from Zimbabwe and Zambia. But President Trump wants to review the decision.
Jekesai Njikizana/AFP/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Jekesai Njikizana/AFP/Getty Images
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lifted a ban on importing sport-hunted trophies of elephants from Zimbabwe and Zambia. But President Trump wants to review the decision.
Jekesai Njikizana/AFP/Getty Images
Updated on Friday, Nov. 17, at 8 p.m. ET
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced Thursday that it had lifted an Obama-era ban on importing sport-hunted trophies of elephants from Zimbabwe and Zambia. But Friday evening, President Trump seemed to say that decision was being reconsidered, saying he would review “all conservation facts” and issue an update “soon.”
The Washington Post has reported on big-game hunting by the president’s sons.
The service said it had found that allowing trophy imports would help the conservation of elephants in those countries, a finding that allows it to authorize the import of the African elephant under the terms of the Endangered Species Act, which lists the African elephant as threatened.
“Legal, well-regulated sport hunting as part of a sound management program can benefit certain species by providing incentives to local communities to conserve those species and by putting much-needed revenue back into conservation,” the service said in a statement to NPR. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the hunting and management programs for African elephants in Zimbabwe and Zambia will enhance the survival of the species in the wild.”
It’s not clear exactly what persuaded the service to make the change. In a document that was published in the Federal Register on Friday, the service says that Zimbabwe has “stepped up its anti-poaching efforts” and now has “a more systematic, scientific approach” to establishing limits on elephants that can be hunted. It said the Zimbabwean government was increasingly supporting local conservation efforts.
Nothing in the government’s documentation addresses Zambia. Asked by NPR for further information about the decision to allow trophy imports from that country, FWS spokesman Gavin Shire wrote that there was “[n]othing other than the finding itself.”
Safari Club International, a hunting advocacy group, was apparently the first to get news of the policy change, and it cheered the development in a blog post Tuesday. The group, along with the National Rifle Association, has been fighting the Zimbabwe ban in court ever since it was announced in 2014.
“These positive findings for Zimbabwe and Zambia demonstrate that the Fish and Wildlife Service recognizes that hunting is beneficial to wildlife and that these range countries know how to manage their elephant populations,” SCI President Paul Babaz said in a statement.
But others argue that Zimbabwe has not proved it has an effective elephant management plan. The Great Elephant Census found Zimbabwe’s elephant population had decreased 6 percent in recent years. In the country’s Sebungwe region, elephant populations were down 74 percent.
The study found that in Zambia, there were “substantial declines along the Zambezi River,” but the population was otherwise stable.
The Humane Society of the United States came out strongly against the policy change and said a number of problems remain with Zimbabwe’s elephant management plan, including poaching, corruption and a lack of government support.
“Let’s be clear: elephants are on the list of threatened species; the global community has rallied to stem the ivory trade; and now, the U.S. government is giving American trophy hunters the green light to kill them,” wrote Wayne Pacelle, the organization’s president and CEO.
“What kind of message does it send to say to the world that poor Africans who are struggling to survive cannot kill elephants in order to use or sell their parts to make a living, but that it’s just fine for rich Americans to slay the beasts for their tusks to keep as trophies?” he added.
The new policy applies to elephants hunted in Zimbabwe between Jan. 21, 2016, and Dec. 31, 2018, as well as elephants hunted in Zambia from 2016 to 2018.
Apparently some hunters have elephant trophies waiting for them in Zimbabwe and Zambia. “Individuals who have hunted or wish to hunt elephants during that period will need to apply for and obtain import permits from the FWS in order to bring their elephants home,” Safari Club International said in its post, adding that elephants from Zambia will require extra documentation.
The parts of the elephant that hunters choose to import as a trophy can vary.
“Generally, the tusks are,” SCI Director of Communications Steve Comus told NPR in an email. “In some occasions, the skull might be (could even be skull with tusks). And, there are other parts imported sometimes, as well. What happens is that all of the meat, etc. is consumed by local people there in Africa (typically a village close to where the elephant is harvested). So, most of the elephant not only remains in Africa, but in the stomachs of local Africans.”
The announcement comes amid major political changes in Zimbabwe. Earlier this week, President Robert Mugabe was pushed aside by his country’s military. He had been in power since the 1980s.