id
stringlengths 6
7
| context_id
stringlengths 4
4
| question_id
stringclasses 29
values | domain
stringclasses 4
values | metadata
dict | context
stringlengths 1.45k
2.44k
| question
stringlengths 3
185
| question_type
stringclasses 9
values | answers
list | correct_answer_id
int32 0
3
| constituency_depth
int64 3
22
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n044_0
|
n044
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
Why did GoDaddy shutdown altright.com?
|
Causality
|
[
"not enough information",
"because they carried content that advocated violence",
"because they promoted non-violence",
"because they played rap music in the background"
] | 1 | 6 |
n044_1
|
n044
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
What is probably true about GoDaddy?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"they never shutdown any site because they need the money",
"they shutdown hate speech as soon as it's noticied",
"not enough information",
"they allow online hate speech and only shutdown sites after major complaints"
] | 3 | 8 |
n044_2
|
n044
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
What organization filed a complaint with GoDaddy last month?
|
Factual
|
[
"not enough information",
"altright.com",
"The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law",
"NAACP"
] | 2 | 7 |
n044_3
|
n044
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
After the end of this story, GoDaddy is:
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"waiting until more hate sites cross the line",
"is going out of business",
"not shutting down any more hate sits",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 7 |
n044_4
|
n044
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
How long has the hate crime crisis lasted:
|
Event_duration
|
[
"not enough information",
"years now",
"centuries now",
"decades now"
] | 1 | 6 |
n044_5
|
n044
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
When was altright.com shut down?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"before a mass demonstration",
"last year",
"After the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 6 |
n044_6
|
n044
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
The narrator probably believes that:
|
Belief_states
|
[
"freedom ofA speech should allow hate speech",
"freedom of speech should not allow hate speech",
"not enough information",
"free speech is a constitutional right"
] | 1 | 5 |
n044_7
|
n044
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
How long has altright.com been spreading hate?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"not enough information",
"about 3 years",
"about a day",
"about a week"
] | 1 | 7 |
n044_8
|
n044
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
Who is GoDaddy
|
Factual
|
[
"a company that registers websites",
"not enough information",
"a company that curbs violence",
"a company that pulls down websites"
] | 0 | 5 |
n044_9
|
n044
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
What does GoDaddy probably believe?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"not enough information",
"online sites should be popular",
"altright.com is spreading sexism",
"shutting down Online Hate Sites will reduce violence"
] | 3 | 5 |
n044_10
|
n044
|
10
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
Who will take action:
|
Character_identity
|
[
"The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law",
"not enough information",
"GoDaddy",
"Under the Right rally"
] | 2 | 6 |
n044_11
|
n044
|
11
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
who shut altright.com down
|
Character_identity
|
[
"not enough information",
"Trump",
"the government",
"GoDaddy"
] | 3 | 6 |
n044_12
|
n044
|
12
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
why was GoDaddy shut down?
|
Causality
|
[
"it was spreading violence",
"it was using amoral language",
"not enough information",
"it was against the government"
] | 0 | 6 |
n044_13
|
n044
|
13
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
When did GoDaddy shut altright.com?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"not enough information",
"after complaints that they promoted violence and after Unite the Right rally",
"before complaints that they promoted violence and before Unite the Right rall",
"when Unite the Right rally happened in Charlottesville, Va."
] | 1 | 6 |
n044_14
|
n044
|
14
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
How powerful is the hate crime crisis online?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"comes and goes",
"not powerful at all",
"very powerful",
"not enough information"
] | 3 | 6 |
n044_15
|
n044
|
15
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
what does Kristen Clarke think of GoDaddy ?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"It is strict on its mandate",
"It is a fair company",
"not enough information",
"It is doing its job"
] | 2 | 7 |
n044_16
|
n044
|
16
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
what is probably true about Kristen Clarke?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"He loves peace",
"he is young",
"not enough information",
"he is a president"
] | 0 | 8 |
n044_17
|
n044
|
17
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Can Shutting Down Online Hate Sites Curb Violence?",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/can-shutting-down-online-hate-sites-curb-violence/4385174.html"
}
|
GoDaddy has pulled the plug on another online peddler of violence.
The popular internet registration service last week shut down altright.com, a website created by white nationalist leader Richard Spencer and popular with many in the so-called alt-right movement.
The takedown is the latest example of how companies like GoDaddy are increasingly responding to growing public pressure to clamp down on violent sites in the wake of the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.
GoDaddy, which registers domains for more than 75 million websites around the world, said it generally does not delist sites that promote hate, racism and bigotry on the ground that such content is protected as free speech.
But it said altright.com had "crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner."
"In instances where a site goes beyond the mere exercise of these freedoms, however, and crosses over to promoting, encouraging or otherwise engaging in specific acts of violence against any person, we will take action," GoDaddy said in a statement emailed to VOA.
The company would not say whether it canceled altright.com's domain registration in response to pressure but it stressed that "we take all complaints about content on websites very seriously, and have a team dedicated to investigate each complaint."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a Washington-based civil rights organization, said it filed such a complaint with GoDaddy last month, citing several instances in which altright.com carried content that advocated violence.
In one example, a January 26, 2018, article encouraged "use of live ammunition at the border, in order to create a substantial chance that they [immigrants crossing the border] lose their life in the process," according to the organization's complaint.
Kristen Clarke, the group's president and executive director, said the shutdown of altright.com was part of her organization's campaign to combat a recent "hate crime crisis" in the United States.
"We know that so much hate that we see today originates online," Clarke said. "It originates in dangerous platforms and online hubs that provide a space to people to essentially coordinate violence and incite people to violence."
|
after shutting down altright.com, what does GoDaddy believe?
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"that people will be happy",
"not enough information",
"that it will open again",
"that violence will go down"
] | 3 | 7 |
n045_0
|
n045
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
the investigation will last for:
|
Event_duration
|
[
"all weekend",
"2 or 3 months",
"not enough information",
"a few hours"
] | 1 | 6 |
n045_1
|
n045
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
How does Muller feel about the investigation
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"it should be widened",
"it has been rewarding",
"it has been long and frustrating",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 7 |
n045_2
|
n045
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
What is probably true about trump?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"not enough information",
"he is tired of the controversy",
"he is dodging the issue",
"he believes he is right"
] | 1 | 8 |
n045_3
|
n045
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Why were the questions compiled?
|
Causality
|
[
"not enough information",
"to find what to focus on",
"to appease special counsel",
"to ask the President during investigation"
] | 3 | 5 |
n045_4
|
n045
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
After the end of the story the president:
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"is relieved it is over",
"not enough information",
"will fire more people",
"will still be under suspicion"
] | 0 | 7 |
n045_5
|
n045
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Who will ask pointed questions?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"Robert Mueller",
"Spiro Harrison",
"Paul Rozenzwieg",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 6 |
n045_6
|
n045
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
What did Pres Trump think about collusion allegations?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"the democrats are trying to discredit him",
"they are baloney",
"not enough information",
"The democrats are trying to prevent him from accomplishing anything"
] | 2 | 7 |
n045_7
|
n045
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Eric Jasso believes that:
|
Belief_states
|
[
"the questions are not sharp enough",
"not enough information",
"the case is already decided",
"the questions are not pertinent"
] | 0 | 5 |
n045_8
|
n045
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
After the end of the story, Pres Trump is probably
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"being re-elected",
"still in office",
"still being investigated",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 7 |
n045_9
|
n045
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Who thinks the list of questions for trump are a joke?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"mueller",
"legal experts",
"the democrats",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 12 |
n045_10
|
n045
|
10
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
What did Jaso think of the questions?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"they are rudimentary",
"they are deep and probing",
"they need to focus on other areas",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 7 |
n045_11
|
n045
|
11
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
How long was Comey in FBI director?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"four years",
"not enough information",
"two years",
"six years"
] | 0 | 6 |
n045_12
|
n045
|
12
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
When will the questions be asked of Trump?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"at the R Street Institute",
"during the election investigation",
"at the whitewater hearings",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 8 |
n045_13
|
n045
|
13
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Why was the special counsel asking questions?
|
Causality
|
[
"to determine if Comey was lying",
"to determine if collusion occurred",
"not enough information",
"to determine if Flynn was lying"
] | 1 | 7 |
n045_14
|
n045
|
14
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
Why is Trump in so much Trouble?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"he thinks he makes the laws",
"not enough information",
"he thinks he is invincible",
"he doesnt watch his actions"
] | 1 | 7 |
n045_15
|
n045
|
15
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
When did Pres Trump fire Flynn and Comey?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"before the article was written",
"after the article was written",
"not enough information",
"while the article was being written"
] | 0 | 6 |
n045_16
|
n045
|
16
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
What type of questions did the special counsel propose to answer?
|
Factual
|
[
"specific questions",
"not enough information",
"pointed questions",
"general questions"
] | 3 | 8 |
n045_17
|
n045
|
17
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Experts Say Mueller's Real Questions Will be Tougher, More Focused",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/analysts-cast-doubt-leak-purported-special-counsel-questions/4373532.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions.
The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators.
The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.
While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller — or any prosecutor for that matter — would ask an interview subject.
"It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton.
The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query.
"If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said.
Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law and a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, said that each query on the list is likely to spark a litany of follow-up questions.
|
What will each question tend to entail?
|
Factual
|
[
"more questions",
"Russian interference",
"doubt",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 8 |
n046_0
|
n046
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
After passing the Senate Judiciary Committee, the legislation probably
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"will be vetoed by Trump",
"is unlikely to become law",
"will pass the full Senate",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 7 |
n046_1
|
n046
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Why did Pres Trump want the probe dismissed?
|
Causality
|
[
"it was a witch hunt",
"it was dragging on for too long",
"not enough information",
"it was unneeded"
] | 0 | 7 |
n046_2
|
n046
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
How does Pres Trump feel about the FBI's invasion of his attorney's home?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"like he and the attorney are being persecuted",
"not enough information",
"like it was premature",
"sympathetic to the FBI"
] | 0 | 10 |
n046_3
|
n046
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
What does Pres Trump think of Mueller?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"not enough information",
"he is competent and honorable",
"he has no respect for him",
"he is a crook"
] | 0 | 7 |
n046_4
|
n046
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Why does Paul Ryan oppose the legislation?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"not enough information",
"He receives money from the Russians",
"He is afraid of being blackmailed",
"He believes Trump is innocent"
] | 0 | 6 |
n046_5
|
n046
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
What is probably true about those supporting the bill?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"They believe in freedom of speech",
"They are not mostly prejudiced",
"not enough information",
"They are mostly prejudiced against the Pres based on political beliefs"
] | 3 | 10 |
n046_6
|
n046
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
After the story, Mueller is probably?
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"deputy attorney general",
"promoted to attorney general",
"still special counsel",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 5 |
n046_7
|
n046
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
What happened before Pres Trump was on Fox and Friends?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"legislation was enacted to prevent dismissal of the special council without reason",
"Mueller was under attack",
"not enough information",
"the judiciary committee met"
] | 0 | 10 |
n046_8
|
n046
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Why was Trump critical of the FBI?
|
Causality
|
[
"McConnell's opposition to the legislation",
"not enough information",
"An FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home",
"Republicans"
] | 2 | 7 |
n046_9
|
n046
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
When was the legislation introduced?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"Thursday",
"Earlier this month",
"This week",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 5 |
n046_10
|
n046
|
10
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
What would the legislation do?
|
Factual
|
[
"not enough information",
"Protect the special counsel",
"Ensure executive privlege",
"Stop the investigation"
] | 1 | 5 |
n046_11
|
n046
|
11
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
How long did it take to enact the bill protecting the SC from arbitrary dismissal?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"three days",
"a week",
"Part of a day",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 12 |
n046_12
|
n046
|
12
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Why is Trump likely critical of the raid on his personal lawyer's office?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"not enough information",
"He is worried about due process",
"He is worried about what information may be disclosed",
"He is worried about his lawyer's well being"
] | 2 | 10 |
n046_13
|
n046
|
13
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
The Mueller investigation probably began:
|
Event_duration
|
[
"not enough information",
"about a month ago",
"about the time of the 2016 election",
"about a day after FBI Director Comey was fired"
] | 3 | 4 |
n046_14
|
n046
|
14
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Who was the lawyer that had his home raided?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"Trumps personal lawyer",
"Rosenstein's personal lawyer",
"Muellers personal lawyer",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 10 |
n046_15
|
n046
|
15
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Who is conducting the investigation of Russian interference?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"McConnell",
"Mueller",
"not enough information",
"Rosenstein"
] | 1 | 8 |
n046_16
|
n046
|
16
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
What do the Democratic senators most likely think?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"That Trump is hiding information",
"That Trump may fire Mueller",
"That Trump is impatient",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 5 |
n046_17
|
n046
|
17
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "US Senate Panel Votes to Protect Special Counsel from Dismissal",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/senate-panel-votes-to-protect-special-counsel-from-arbitrary-dismissal/4366126.html"
}
|
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that would protect from arbitrary dismissal the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
The measure, backed by 10 Democrats and four Republicans, would codify Justice Department regulations that the special counsel can only be fired by the attorney general or a designee for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause."
The proposal would give the special counsel 10 days to challenge a dismissal in court. If a court determines the firing was not for "good cause," the special counsel would be reinstated. The measure would also require the Justice Department to notify Congress when a special counsel is appointed and to report the findings of an investigation.
While marking a strong show of support for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is under frequent attack by President Donald Trump and some Republicans, the bill is unlikely to become law in the face of Republican opposition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week that Trump will not fire Mueller and that there was no need to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also opposed the idea.
The legislation was introduced by four Senators earlier this month after Trump's sharp criticism of an FBI raid on his personal lawyer's home and office rekindled fears that Trump may fire Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who supervises Mueller.
Mueller is heading the federal investigation into Russia's electoral interference and possible collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. Trump has said there was no collusion and repeatedly denounced the probe as a "witch hunt."
Despite his harsh criticism of the Special Counsel and the Justice Department, Trump has dismissed reports that he's privately talked about firing Mueller. He told the cable show Fox and Friends on Thursday that he'll "try and stay away" from the Justice Department, but "at some point, I won't."
Supporters of the Special Counsel bill hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and said it would send a message that the president doesn't have unfettered authority.
|
Who is Mueller?
|
Factual
|
[
"attorney general",
"deputy attorney general",
"special counsel",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 5 |
n047_0
|
n047
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
what is probably true about anti-government groups?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"they sincerely believe everything they say",
"not enough information",
"they will align with Antifa",
"they are racist"
] | 3 | 9 |
n047_1
|
n047
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
why have militia members turned their anger towards Muslims and immigrants?
|
Causality
|
[
"the election of Barack Obama",
"the election of Bill Clinton",
"the election of Donald Trump",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 7 |
n047_2
|
n047
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
What lifestyle do the people know as survivalists take on?
|
Factual
|
[
"not enough information",
"They learn to live off of natural resources in case there is ever a disaster",
"they can cultivate farm land",
"they can hunt"
] | 1 | 9 |
n047_3
|
n047
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
what are survivalists?
|
Factual
|
[
"not enough information",
"people who learn how to live off the land",
"people opposed to paying taxes",
"people who stockpile water and food for civil unrest"
] | 1 | 6 |
n047_4
|
n047
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
For how long has the modern militia movement been on the rise?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"not enough information",
"under ten years",
"about 29 years",
"about 15 years"
] | 2 | 8 |
n047_5
|
n047
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
Preppers probably believe that:
|
Belief_states
|
[
"not enough information",
"big government will not take care of their basic needs",
"a major disaster will occur so they need to be prepared",
"big government is the enemy"
] | 2 | 5 |
n047_6
|
n047
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
Why did the modern militia movement begin to surge in the 1990s?
|
Causality
|
[
"not enough information",
"because anti government groups were starting to band together",
"because militias no longer trusted big government",
"because of the FBI attack on Waco"
] | 3 | 10 |
n047_7
|
n047
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
What is probably true about Mark Pitcavage?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"He is fearful of militia men",
"He is less afraid of preppers than sovereign citizens",
"He knows a lot about anti-government extremism",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 8 |
n047_8
|
n047
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
after the election of donald trump, how will anti-government groups react?
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"not enough information",
"they won't do anything",
"they will gain more members",
"their numbers will peak"
] | 2 | 7 |
n047_9
|
n047
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
when did the modern militia movement gain traction?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"after an FBI attack on the Branch Davidian compound",
"not enough information",
"after the election of Barack Obama",
"after the election of Donald Trump"
] | 0 | 6 |
n047_10
|
n047
|
10
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
After the end of the story, anti government groups probably are:
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"still convinced that their weapons and rights will be taken away",
"not enough information",
"still fearful of a major disaster",
"more empowered than ever since Trump has been in office"
] | 3 | 7 |
n047_11
|
n047
|
11
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
When did the number of anti government groups in the US reach its peak?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"after President Clinton was elected",
"after President Bush was elected",
"after President Obama was elected",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 9 |
n047_12
|
n047
|
12
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
how many more attacks on immigrants in the US will there be over the next 4 years?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"3",
"4",
"5",
"not enough information"
] | 3 | 8 |
n047_13
|
n047
|
13
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
how do militia groups feel about Donald Trump?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"they despise him",
"not enough information",
"they hate him",
"they support him"
] | 3 | 7 |
n047_14
|
n047
|
14
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
Which anti government group does not believe in paying taxes and that they should be able to decide which laws to follow?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"survivalists",
"sovereign citizens",
"preppers",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 15 |
n047_15
|
n047
|
15
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
how long have anti-government groups been increasing?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"not enough information",
"since the election of Trump",
"since the election of Barack Obama",
"since 1992"
] | 3 | 6 |
n047_16
|
n047
|
16
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
Who's plan was foiled?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"Three Kansas militiamen who planned to blow up an apartment complex.",
"Donald Trump's",
"The anti-government movement",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 7 |
n047_17
|
n047
|
17
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Muslims, Immigrants on US Militias' New Enemies List",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/kansas-militia-group/4362244.html"
}
|
WASHINGTON — They called themselves "crusaders" for a reason.
The three Kansas militiamen planned to blow up an apartment complex housing Somali refugees during the 2016 presidential election, unleashing what one of them called "Crusades 2.0."
But their plan was foiled after their arrest just weeks before the election, highlighting the changing enemy list of a movement founded on the back of anti-government activism a generation ago.
And with the election of a president whose policies many militia members support, the urge to confront the government appears to have lost some of its urgency. Instead of railing at the government, they have in recent years turned their venom against new-found foes: Muslims, immigrants, the Antifa.
"Some of the militia groups have been refocusing their attention on secondary enemies for the movement," said Mark Pitcavage, who researches extremism at the Anti-Defamation League civil rights group.
Often lumped together with other right-wing groups, the anti-government movement comes in different forms.
There are the "preppers," so called because they stockpile water, food and other essentials in preparation for civil unrest.
There are the "survivalists," people who learn skills to “live off the land” in case of a disaster.
There are “sovereign citizens” such as the suspect in the recent shooting at a Waffle House in Tennessee who are opposed to paying taxes and believe they should decide which laws to follow.
And then there are the militiamen who conduct regular military-style training to resist a government they see as engaged in a global plot to take away their guns and constitutional rights.
The modern militia movement dates back to a series of events in the early 1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Among them: the 1992 election of Democratic President Bill Clinton and an FBI attack the following year on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, an event seen as "evidence of an out of control government willing to attack citizens."
Under Clinton, the number of anti-government groups soared but it fell during President George W. Bush's two terms before peaking at 1,360 under President Barack Obama.
|
What does Trump think of the modern militia movement?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"not enough information",
"He will neither condemn nor condone them",
"He has no comment on the matter",
"He changes the subject when he doesn't want to discuss an uncomfortable topic"
] | 0 | 7 |
n048_0
|
n048
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
How does Hannity feel about his relationship with Cohen being exposed?
|
Belief_states
|
[
"he is hopeful",
"He is upset",
"he is happy",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 11 |
n048_1
|
n048
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Why did Sean Hannity say he spoke to Cohen?
|
Causality
|
[
"to ask legal questions",
"to get advice on how to become a lawyer",
"not enough information",
"to find out more about Trump"
] | 0 | 10 |
n048_2
|
n048
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Who was the first client of Michael Cohen
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"Donald Trump",
"Sean Hannity",
"not enough information",
"Elliott Broidy"
] | 2 | 8 |
n048_3
|
n048
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Where does Hannity represent the media?
|
Factual
|
[
"on CNN",
"not enough information",
"On Fox News",
"on ABC"
] | 2 | 6 |
n048_4
|
n048
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
After the end of the story Hannity probably does what?
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"Makes sure he gets a new lawyer",
"discusses lawyers with Trump",
"Keeps Hannity as a laywer",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 7 |
n048_5
|
n048
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Who is President Trump's longtime lawyer?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"not enough information",
"Elliot Broidy",
"Kimba Wood",
"Michael Cohen"
] | 3 | 6 |
n048_6
|
n048
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Will this revelation change Fox News viewers' opinion of Sean Hannity
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"not enough information",
"Yes",
"Some",
"No"
] | 3 | 7 |
n048_7
|
n048
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
How long has Cohen represented Trump?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"one year",
"two years",
"at least a decade",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 6 |
n048_8
|
n048
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Why was the disclosure about Hannity revealed?
|
Causality
|
[
"Because Michael Cohen revealed it",
"Because Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public",
"Because it was broadcast on Fox News",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 7 |
n048_9
|
n048
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
What is probably true about Cohen?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"not enough information",
"He makes a lot of money representing Trump",
"he is not doing so well financially",
"he is going to represent over 100 clients next year"
] | 1 | 8 |
n048_10
|
n048
|
10
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
When did FBI agents seize documents from Cohen?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"before he graduated law school",
"not enough information",
"during last week",
"before last year"
] | 2 | 7 |
n048_11
|
n048
|
11
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Where did the court hearing occur?
|
Factual
|
[
"New York",
"On Hannity's show",
"On Fox News",
"not enough information"
] | 0 | 5 |
n048_12
|
n048
|
12
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
What did Trump think about Fox News?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"he doesn't support them at all",
"not enough information",
"he is more supportive to CNN",
"he supports the media outlet more than other stations"
] | 1 | 7 |
n048_13
|
n048
|
13
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
How does Hannity feel about the revelation of his relationship with Cohen
|
Belief_states
|
[
"Excited",
"Worried",
"not enough information",
"Indifferent"
] | 1 | 11 |
n048_14
|
n048
|
14
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
What is probably true of Sean Hannity?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"He voted for Donald Trump",
"He is a Democrat",
"not enough information",
"He enjoyed having this information revealed"
] | 0 | 8 |
n048_15
|
n048
|
15
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
How long was the meeting between Fox News and Hannity?
|
Event_duration
|
[
"About a day",
"Under an hour",
"not enough information",
"About a week"
] | 1 | 8 |
n048_16
|
n048
|
16
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
When did Fox News become aware of Sean Hannity's relationship with Michael Cohen?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"In the past year",
"From Sean Hannity's statement",
"During a court hearing on Monday",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 10 |
n048_17
|
n048
|
17
|
news
|
{
"author": "Masood Farivar",
"title": "Trump Lawyer Secretly Represented Conservative TV Host",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/donald-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-talk-show-host-sean-hannity/4350816.html"
}
|
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters.
The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege.
U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors.
The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump.
In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public.
In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer.
“Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective."
“I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said.
Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday (Monday), we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support," the network said.
|
Who is under investigation for his business dealings?
|
Character_identity
|
[
"not enough information",
"Donald Trump",
"Sean Hannity",
"Michael Cohen"
] | 3 | 7 |
n049_0
|
n049
|
0
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
Elijah Cummings probably believes
|
Belief_states
|
[
"The child internment policy is bad",
"We should keep families apart",
"not enough information",
"Trumps policies are good"
] | 0 | 4 |
n049_1
|
n049
|
1
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
Who is likely to win most seats at the midterm congressional elections in November?
|
Unanswerable
|
[
"The Center for Immigration Studies",
"The Republicans",
"not enough information",
"The Democrats"
] | 2 | 11 |
n049_2
|
n049
|
2
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
What state does the Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings represent?
|
Factual
|
[
"Pennsylvania",
"Massachusetts",
"Maryland",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 6 |
n049_3
|
n049
|
3
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
What is probably true of the enthusiastic crowd in Duluth after Trump's speech?
|
Subsequent_state
|
[
"not enough information",
"They are among the protesters in Texas",
"They are mostly supporters of Trump",
"They are mostly Democrats"
] | 2 | 11 |
n049_4
|
n049
|
4
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
Where is Elijah Cummings a Congressman from?
|
Factual
|
[
"Texas",
"Pennsylvania",
"Maryland",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 5 |
n049_5
|
n049
|
5
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
What is probably true about the crowds who attend Trump's rallies
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"They hate Trump",
"They hate Trump's policies",
"They love Trump",
"not enough information"
] | 2 | 13 |
n049_6
|
n049
|
6
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
When did Trump reverse a policy of separating families?
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"After the midterm elections",
"Before the midterm elections",
"not enough information",
"After his rally in Duluth"
] | 1 | 10 |
n049_7
|
n049
|
7
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
What is probably true about Laura Bush?
|
Entity_properties
|
[
"not enough information",
"She agrees with Trump's separation policy",
"She disagrees with Trump's separation policy",
"She agrees with Art Arthur"
] | 2 | 8 |
n049_8
|
n049
|
8
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
Trump's rally probably lasted
|
Event_duration
|
[
"Days",
"Months",
"not enough information",
"A couple hours"
] | 3 | 5 |
n049_9
|
n049
|
9
|
news
|
{
"author": "Jim Malone",
"title": "Trump’s Immigration Actions Could Shape Midterm Election",
"url": "https://www.voanews.com//a/trump-immigration-midterm-elections/4449895.html"
}
|
This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November.
President Donald Trump’s decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November.
Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign.
“If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders,” Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, “Build the wall!”
Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House.
“We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together,” he said.
Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica.
The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats.
“We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view,” said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. “What country is that? This is the United States of America!”
Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings.
|
When did the president reverse his policy of separating children from their parents
|
Temporal_order
|
[
"After an upsurge in border crossings",
"Before the rally in Duluth",
"After the rally in Duluth",
"not enough information"
] | 1 | 11 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.