By Kate Sullivan and Ryan Browne | CNN

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford said Monday that the US military will not be “involved in the actual mission of denying people entry to the United States.”

When asked about the border mission for active-duty troops, Dunford said the military will not be coming into contact with migrants traveling toward the border.

“There is no plan for US military forces to be involved in the actual mission of denying people entry to the United States,” Dunford said, speaking at an event at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. “There is no plan for soldiers to come in contact with immigrants or to reinforce Department of Homeland Security as they’re conducting their mission.

“We are providing enabling capabilities,” Dunford said, explaining they were tasked with supporting the DHS.

Just before the midterm elections, President Donald Trump ordered thousands of troops to the southern border to guard against what he has called an “invasion” by a group of migrants heading north through Mexico to the United States.

Despite Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that the group of Central American migrants includes “gang members and some very bad people,” most of the migrants reportedly plan to apply for asylum once they arrive at the border, following legal procedures.

Dunford said the DHS requested logistical support, “so you’ll see some soldiers down there right now that are putting up concertina wire and reinforcing the points of entry,” and that the military is providing “both trucks and helicopter support and then also some medical support.”

Pentagon spokesman Col. Rob Manning said Monday, “There are currently more than 4,800 personnel deployed in support of this mission. This continues to be a dynamic situation with more units and personnel deploying to the operating area, and we expect to reach 5,200 deployed personnel as early as today.“

“DoD anticipates more than 7,000 active-duty troops will be supporting DHS soon,” Manning said. The breakdown of personnel includes “1,100 in California, 1,100 in (Arizona) and 2,600 in Texas,” according to Manning.

In response to criticism of himself and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, who signed off on the request for assistance, Dunford said the President gave them a legal order and it is not his job to “assess the appropriateness of the mission.“

“The President gave us a legal order: Support the Department of Homeland Security,” Dunford said.

“It’s not my job to assess the appropriateness of the mission,” Dunford said. “It’s my job to accept the legality of the mission and, again, the capability of our forces to perform that mission. So others outside the ring can make a subjective assessment as to what … we’re doing but I’m not going to comment on that.”

As a military leader, Dunford said, the questions he asks are: Is the order legal, is the order unambiguous and do the troops have the capability to perform the task. “And the answer is yes in all three cases,” he said.

Trump’s decision to deploy active-duty US troops and the earlier deployment of National Guard forces to the southern border could cost between $200 million and $300 million, according to an independent analysis and Department of Defense figures on guard deployments.

Asked about criticism of the decision by his predecessor and other retired senior officers, Dunford said, “To be honest with you, I wish they wouldn’t do that, but they certainly can do that if they want to.”

Retired Gen. Martin Dempsey, who served as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2011 to 2015, tweeted Friday that “our men and women in uniform are better trained, better equipped, and better led so they meet any threat with confidence. A wasteful deployment of over-stretched soldiers and Marines would be made much worse if they use force disproportional to the threat they face. They won’t.”

By Stephen Collinson | CNN Newsource

With one day to go before the midterm elections, Americans face a choice that could shape the nation for years after a campaign that left it politically torn, at war with itself over race and mourning tragedy.

Voters must decide on Tuesday whether to constrain President Donald Trump and his compliant Republicans after the first two years of a demagogic presidency that widened national divides and unfolded in a torrent of scandal. Trump also tested constitutional norms and engineered a sharp shift in the country’s attitude toward the rest of the world.

But as they face their first chance to judge Trump’s performance, they could also register satisfaction with a historically primed economy and a President who has kept many of his election promises, however controversial and is running an undeniably consequential administration that has managed to engineer a generational conservative shift to the Supreme Court.

The first result would represent a rebuke to Trump’s entire political approach: His failure to tame his volatile instincts in the interests of national unity and his unwillingness to embrace the presidency itself as a national trust.

The second would convey acquiescence for the President’s scorched-earth tactics, indefatigable and domineering personality, fear-mongering warnings that the nation is under assault from an invading immigrant tide of dark-skinned criminals and approval of his creed of “America First” nationalism.

“You saw that barbed wire going up. That barbed wire — yes sir, we have barbed wire going up. Because you know what? We’re not letting these people invade our country,” Trump said at a rally in Georgia on Sunday, defending his decision to dispatch troops to the border in what critics have branded a political “stunt.”

While the campaign has seen intense skirmishes over health care, immigration, education and the best way to share the dividends of high growth, low unemployment and rising wages, Trump has, as he does all the time about everything else, made the campaign about himself.

In the most inflammatory closing argument of any campaign in modern memory, Trump seized on a group of migrants heading toward the southern US border from hundreds of miles away in Mexico as a metaphor for his hardline and racially insulting rhetoric on immigration.

His searing nationalist rhetoric and tearing of cultural fault lines drew criticism that he had crossed a dangerous line after a gunman killed 11 people in a synagogue massacre in Pittsburgh and a Trump supporter mailed bombs to the President’s top targets in politics and the media, including two former Presidents.

But it is a measure of the country’s volatile political climate and the lessons of Trump’s logic-defying win in 2016 that no one can say for sure how Tuesday night will unfold.

Trump v. Obama

At times on Sunday, it almost felt like Trump was running a campaign against the man whom he has defined himself against, his predecessor in the Oval Office, Barack Obama.

The 44th president is making the most direct assault on Trump yet attempted by any prominent Democrat.

Ten years to the day after he delivered his soaring victory speech in Grant Park, Chicago, Obama doubled down on hope, painting it as the antidote to what he said were the dark impulses exemplified by his successor, and warned America was at a crossroads.

“In the closing weeks of this election, we’ve seen repeated attempts to divide us with rhetoric, to try to turn us on one another,” Obama said in Gary, Indiana, revisiting, a city familiar from his 2008 campaign.”The good news is, Indiana, when you vote, you can reject that kind of politics,” he said. “When you vote you can be a check on bad behavior. When you vote you can choose hope over fear.”

Tuesday’s election represents another clash between Trump’s capacity to subvert political norms and the weight of history and electoral logic.

Omens look poor for Republicans, since Trump’s approval rating sits between 40% and 45% in most polls and history suggests that first-term presidents who are that unpopular typically lead their parties to heavy losses.
\Democrats are increasingly confident they can recapture the House of Representatives for the first time in eight years and are banking on a backlash against the President from voters who stayed home in 2016. Their path to power lies through more diverse, suburban and affluent districts where Trump’s cultural warfare plays poorly.

By CNN Staff

Roger Stone is telling anyone who will listen that Robert Mueller has it wrong. Stone is saying he did not coordinate with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign or try to pressure a friend into lying to the special counsel.

The Trump ally and veteran GOP dirty trickster made that case in a CNN interview the other day. He repeated it in what one friend described as “nervous energy” calls to friends and associates in recent days.

Stone believes the special counsel’s office will seek an indictment. CNN reporting details emails and other evidence that question whether Stone coordinated with WikiLeaks — and perhaps the Trump campaign — about Democratic emails hacked and released late in the 2016 campaign.

The new reporting on Stone raises a bigger issue that has some of the President’s friends and allies worried.

Mueller has been quiet for weeks. Justice Department guidelines urge prosecutors to be cautious in the 60 days or so before an election, so not to be seen as trying to influence voters.

But with the election Tuesday, Trump-related investigations could climb back into the news. That includes the work of the special counsel and separate federal investigations in New York.

The worry on Team Trump is negative headlines coming at a time that is already pressure-packed. Democrats could capture the House.

A wave of administration personnel turnover is about to unfold. And there are year-end pressures as Congress returns with big post-election spending issues and the President heads overseas.

Just the name “Mueller” makes the President angry, a Trump insider said in a weekend exchange. If the election goes poorly for the White House, this source suggested the President will be on edge, anyway. And if the investigations then roar back into the news, “I’m worried about a volcano.”

By NIARA SAVAGE | Nashville Voice

Click almost any link about the shooting of Daniel Hambrick, and you’ll read the same tragic story. A black man, fleeing from police following a traffic stop, is shot three times in the back.

According to an article by The Tennessean, “At some point that evening (Andrew) Delke attempted to perform a traffic stop on a car Hambrick was driving.”

However, the problem with this claim is that the Hambrick family’s attorney, Joy Kimbrough, has stated that there was no traffic stop before the shooting occurred.

We now know that Delke was in the process of pursuing a traffic stop on a similar looking vehicle, when he misidentified the vehicle associated with Mr. Hambrick, like the one he had previously pursued.

The Tennessean has since published a more recent article which corrects this error. However, from the time that the shooting occurred in July, up until late September, The Tennessean reported information we now know to be untrue.

This isn’t necessarily the fault of media organizations themselves. After all, a journalist can only publish information based on the content of their sources.

Unfortunately, these initial reports are typically based on law enforcement’s version of events. The Nashville Scene’s article demonstrates how the ‘official story’ can change over time following a shooting.

According to the article, Josh Devine of the TBI initially stated that the first vehicle Delke pursued was “traveling in an erratic pattern.”

We now know that the vehicle simply yielded at a stop sign, although it had the right-of-way, an action that is a far cry from what most would consider to be erratic driving.

In addition, Devine also stated, on behalf of law enforcement of course, that the second vehicle, which is associated with Daniel Hambrick, was the same as the one from the initial stop. This is another detail we now know to be untrue, as Officer Delke misidentified the second vehicle to be the same as the first.

The takeaway from this ‘mix up’ is not be distrustful of the intentions of mainstream media, but rather to be aware of, and think critically about the conflict of interest law enforcement faces when tasked with providing the initial version of events to the public, following an officer-involved shooting.

Body cams would encourage transparency, by enabling both third-party investigators, and the public to gain an objective perspective of events following an officer-civilian conflict.

However, the Metro Police Department doesn’t seem eager to equip all of its officers with these useful devices: Even though funding for police body cams was approved over a year ago, there was nobody cam footage of the shooting of Mr. Hambrick

An alternative to body cams comes in the form of Amendment 1, which Nashvillians will have the opportunity to vote on this Tuesday — election day.

This amendment would lead to the implementation of a Community Oversight Board, an independent body that would act as a check on police by investigating civilian complaints against officers.

More transparent practices and policies would provide media outlets with the opportunity to present a more objective, and accurate order of events, right from the start.

By Chris Cillizza | CNN Editor-at-large

President Donald Trump is closing the 2018 campaign in a familiar key: Making barely-veiled racial attacks in hopes of driving a portion of his base to vote.

Three instances from the weekend stand out:

1. In Indianapolis over the weekend, Trump, describing his presidential predecessor, said: “Barack,” then paused, then drew the letter “H” (for Obama’s middle name “Hussein”) in the air. Trump has talked about Obama lots and lots of times over the past two years, but it’s only the weekend before the election that he decides to note Obama’s middle name — or middle initial — in this way. Ask yourself why. And then give me one reason other than to remind voters that Obama’s middle name is “Hussein.” And then explain to me how reminding people that that is Obama’s middle name isn’t playing on racial animus?

2. On Saturday in Florida, Trump said that Andrew Gillum, the African-American Democratic nominee for governor, was “not equipped” to do the job. “It’s not for him,” added Trump. Gillum, who is the mayor of Tallahassee, spent more than a decade on that city’s commission prior to ascending to his current post in 2015. It’s also worth noting that less than a week ago, Trump, referred to Gillum as a “thief” without making clear what evidence he had to make such a charge. (The FBI is currently investigating the Tallahassee city government, although Gillum has not been named in any of the subpoenas.)

3. Trump has repeatedly insisted that Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who is black, is “not qualified” for the job which she is seeking. Trump didn’t elaborate, but it’s unclear what he objected to in Abrams’ resume; she is a graduate of Yale Law School and was minority leader of the Georgia state House prior to this bid.

In a vacuum, you could write off these three incidents to the arguments lots of Republicans make when asked about Trump: He’s an equal opportunity offender! He’s said plenty of nasty things about white people, too!

But we don’t live in a vacuum. And the truth of Trump’s life as a politician is that he has repeatedly shown a willingness to engage in the sort of racial dog-whistling — and, sometimes, outright whistling — that he knows motivates some portion of his base.

The Nashville Voice, your Urban on-line, magazine, proudly endorses Governor Phil Breadesen for U. S. Senate and Mayor Karl Dean for Governor of Tennessee.

These candidates strongly align with our values and we feel they will best serve the citizens of Tennessee.Bredesen will go to the US Senate and provide strong sober leadership on the matters critical to Tennesseans, Healthcare, Education, Economic Development, Technology and the Environment. Dean will insure that every Tennessean will have access to  high quality Heathcare and dignity and  respect for all Tennesseans. 

Your Voice is Your Vote and we encourage everyone to go vote. We believe this is the most important mid term election of our lifetime.

November 1st is the last day for Early Voting and November 6th is Election Day!

By Saeed Ahmed and Paul P. Murphy | CNN Newsource

As officials try to put together a picture of the alleged Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, one focus of the investigation is his social media postings, the FBI said. Here’s what we know so far about suspect Robert Bowers, 46:

He allegedly made anti-Semitic statements after his arrest

While in custody and receiving medical treatment, Bowers told a SWAT officer he wanted all Jews to die and also that “they (Jews) were committing genocide to his people,” according to the police criminal complaint.

The bloodshed took place on the same day as Saturday Shabbat services. At the time of the shooting, three different congregations were holding services at the Tree of Life.

He was in the synagogue for about 20 minutes

At a Saturday afternoon news conference, officials said the suspect was in the Squirrel Hill synagogue for about 20 minutes. After the attack and as he was leaving the building, Bowers encountered a law enforcement officer and the two exchanged gunfire, officials said.

The suspect went back inside to hide from SWAT officers. Bowers was in fair condition with multiple gunshot wounds, officials said. It’s believed he was shot by police.

He was not known to law enforcement

“At this point, we have no knowledge that Bowers was known to law enforcement before today,” said Bob Jones, FBI Pittsburgh special agent in charge. Jones said that while Bowers’ alleged motive is unknown, officials believed he acted alone.

He has an active license to carry firearms

Bowers has an active license and has made at least six known firearm purchases since 1996, a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation said. On September 29, Bowers posted photos of his handgun collection on his Gab.com account, which included multiple clips and sights.

A rifle and three handguns were found on the scene of the attack, the FBI said.

He blamed Jews for helping migrant caravans

On his Gab.com account, Bowers claimed Jews were helping transport members of the migrant caravans. He shared a video that another Gab.com user posted, purportedly of a Jewish refugee advocacy group HIAS on the US-Mexico border. Another post that Bowers commented on described HIAS’ overall efforts as “sugar-coated evil.”

Seventeen days before the attack, Bowers posted a web page from HIAS that listed a number of Shabbats that were being held on behalf of refugees, an official said. On that list was a Shabbat address that is less than a mile away from the Tree of Life Synagogue. (The chief executive officer of HIAS, Mark Hetfield, said Bowers is not known to the group.)

He called those in migrant caravans ‘invaders’

According to his posts, Bowers believed that those in the migrant caravans were violent because they were attempting to leave countries that had high levels of violence. And Bowers repeatedly called them “invaders” on his Gab posts.

“I have noticed a change in people saying ‘illegals’ that now say ‘invaders’,” read one post, six days before the shooting. “I like this.”A law enforcement source confirmed to CNN that investigators believe the social media postings belong to Bowers and that the language on his account matches the suspected motivation behind the shootings.

His most recent post was five minutes before police were alerted to the shooting

In that Gab post, Bowers said he “can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in.”

His Gab account has frequent anti-Semitic postings

He has reposted a number of posts on his social media accounts that tell Jews to get out or leave. Gab is a social media platform that advocates for free speech and puts nearly no restrictions on content.

(In a statement posted online, Gab says it “unequivocally disavows and condemns all acts of terrorism and violence…Gab’s mission is very simple: to defend free expression and individual liberty online for all people.” Gab said it was alerted to the suspect’s profile on their platform, backed up the data, suspended the account, and contacted the FBI.)

His posts included criticism of President Trump

Among the many anti-Semitic social media posts were comments suggesting that President Trump was surrounded by too many Jewish people.

“Trump is surrounded by k*”, “things will stay the course,” read one post on the Gab social media platform, which used a derogatory term to describe Jews.

Another post, apparently intended as an insult, read: “Trump is a globalist, not a nationalist,” Bowers said two days before the shooting. “There is no #MAGA as long as there is a k infestation.

He said he didn’t vote for Trump

Roughly four hours before the shooting, Bowers commented in a post that he did not vote for Trump.

He was involved in trucking

A law enforcement official familiar with the ongoing investigation tells CNN that Bowers has a commercial driver’s license and a history associated with the trucking industry.

He received a traffic citation in 2015

A CNN review of criminal records found a 2015 traffic citation against Bowers for allegedly driving without tags.

He’s been charged with hate crimes

Bowers faces 29 charges in all, including 11 counts of using a firearm to commit murder and multiple counts of two hate crimes: obstruction of exercise of religious beliefs resulting in death and obstruction of exercise of religious beliefs resulting in bodily injury to a public safety officer.

CNN’s Keith Allen, Steve Almasy, Josh Campbell, Matthew Hilk, Tammy Kupperman, Nadia Lancy, Shimon Prokupecz, Miguel Marquez, Evan Perez, AnneClaire Stapleton and Joe Sutton contributed to this report.