The NBA will have its first openly gay active player. Jason Collins, who came out in Sports Illustrated last April, signed a 10-day contract Sunday with the Brooklyn Nets. When Collins steps on to the court, it will be the first time an athlete who is widely known to be gay will have played in an NBA, NFL, NHL, or MLB game.

Collins announced he was gay when, after a slew of injuries, he wasn't on any team's roster and he remained unsigned until the Nets recently reached out to him. Collins will likely make his first appearance in the Nets' Sunday night game against the Los Angeles Lakers.

Collins' NBA return comes as former University of Missouri football player Michael Sam is working out at the NFL Combine and preparing for the league's May draft. Sam, who came out in February, is looking to be the first openly gay player in the NFL. John Amaechi became the first former NBA player to come out in 2007, though he did so after his five-season career was over. Glenn Burke, who played baseball for the Los Angeles Dodgers and Oakland Athletics from 1976 to 1979, may have been the first openly gay player in any major American professional sport—though reporters at the time kept Burke's sexuality under wraps and the Dodgers even tried paying him to take part in a sham marriage. (Burke refused.)

Collins received the public backing of many NBA stars when he came out last year. That support continued during the signing process, with new teammate Kevin Garnett telling reporters, "I think it's important that anybody who has the capabilities and skill level [gets] a chance to [do] something he's great at. I think it would be bias, and in a sense, racist, if you [were] to keep that opportunity from a person." Collins will wear jersey number 98 with the Nets in honor of Matthew Shepard, the University of Wyoming student whose brutal 1998 beating and death made him a gay rights martyr.

Boris Vergara/Xinhua/ZUMA

This post has been updated.

Student protesters have filled the streets of many Venezuelan cities for the last two weeks to express their dissatisfaction with the socialist government, the deteriorating economy, and the violence that plagues the country. In the past few days the situation has worsened, as crackdowns from the National Guard and attacks from paramilitary groups have left at least six people dead so far.

Who are the protesters? Venezuela's opposition party is unified by the desire to end the reign of "chavismo," the socialist system devised by Hugo Chávez, and continued, albeit less handily, by his successor, Nicolás Maduro. The emergent leader of the protests is Leopoldo López, a Harvard-educated descendent of Simón Bolívar, and the former mayor of a Caracas municipality. He turned himself over to government forces after Maduro publicly demanded his arrest; López has called for more protests from prison. Also prominent in the opposition is María Corina Machado, a congresswoman in the National Assembly.

The protests started in the western border city of San Cristóbal, where students took to the streets on February 2 to express discontent with rampant crime. The forceful reaction of the authorities prompted other students in other cities to protest in solidarity. The protesters are largely from the middle class.

Maduro's leadership has proved ineffective, and the economic policies he inherited from Chávez, including the nationalization of many industries, have wreaked havoc on the Venezuelan economy; these days, people are struggling to find the bare necessities. The scarcity index has reached an astonishing 28 percent, meaning that toilet paper, flour, and other basics simply might not be in stock. Maduro has threatened to raise gas prices, which were kept artificially low for 15 years because increasing them is politically disastrous. Inflation has more than doubled in the past year. Finally, the insanely high homicide rate, 39 deaths per 100,000 people in 2013, has many Venezuelans fed up with the status quo.

How is the government responding? Maduro, who narrowly beat opposition candidate Henrique Capriles in the election after Chávez's March 2013 death, has swiftly cracked down on broadcast media coverage of the protests. The Colombian channel NTN24, which was covering the violence in the streets, has been taken off the air. Maduro expelled the CNN team today by revoking their press credentials.

Reports of paramilitary groups (known as colectivos), riding around on motorcycles and terrorizing protesters and civilians "tend to be exaggerated," said David Smilde, a University of Georgia sociologist and senior fellow at the Washington Office on Latin America who returned from Venezuela yesterday. Though it is surely happening (with low quality video evidence to back it up), "that phenomenon appeals to the middle class's worst nightmare of having these armed poor people on motorcycles."

"The bigger problem," Smilde continued, "is actually the government troops. The National Guard is the one that is doing the most violence, shooting on protesters and buildings. They tend to be very unprofessional. They don't think in terms of civilian policing, so they will often fire on people who are fleeing. These are people who are 20 to 22 years old and oftentimes they end up being violent. I don't think it's necessarily state policy to repress voters. But the state could definitely make it clearer that there should be no violence."

In a dramatic video, armed men reportedly from SEBIN, the Venezuelan intelligence agency, stormed the opposition party HQ. Reports have also surfaced of detainees being beaten, and Human Rights Watch has called for the international community to condemn the violence against protesters and journalists.

How serious is the crisis? While some residents of Venezuela's biggest cities, like Caracas, San Cristóbal, Mérida, Valencia, and Maracaibo decry the "war zone" in the streets, for many in Venezuela, life continues as normal. "From the outside it always looks like the whole country's in flames, but of course life goes on and most things are up and running," Smilde said.

However, San Cristóbal appears to be headed toward more dramatic confrontation. The Andean college town of 650,000, situated near the border with Colombia, has been heavily barricaded by opposition protesters. The government has cut off internet service to the city. Government paratroopers are on the way. And the opposition isn't backing down, said Juan Nagel, editor of the blog Caracas Chronicles, during a phone interview with Mother Jones.

What's going to happen next? So far it seems like the protests have not achieved support from the poor, who long have identified as chavistas. As Capriles, still the opposition's biggest name, told The Economist, "For the protests to be effective, they must include the poor."

Capriles has urged protesters to gather tomorrow en masse, and march peacefully. From prison, López passed a note to his wife, calling for more protests, a message that rapidly spread through social networks. "Tomorrow will tell what the future's going to be," Smilde said. If the turnout is huge and violence breaks out, Venezuela may be headed for prolonged unrest. If not, he said, things may "fizzle out."

UPDATE, Saturday, February 22, 6:30 p.m. ET (Benjy Hansen-Bundy): Hundreds of thousands of protesters took to the streets today, some to protest Maduro's government, others to support it. The AFP reported at least 50,000 opposition protesters marching in the streets of the Sucre neighborhood of Caracas. A pro-government rally, also in the capital, marched "against fascism." Though today's protests were largely peaceful, Al Jazeera has reported at least eight deaths and more than 100 injuries since the protests began on February 2.

UPDATE 2, Sunday, February 23, 1:31 p.m. ET (Benjy Hansen-Bundy): One day after he rescinded a CNN reporting team's press credentials, President Maduro said on Friday that they can return to Venezuela. Also on Friday, during a late night news conference, Maduro invited Obama to begin negotiations and settle differences, though his language wasn't particularly amicable. Relations between the US and Venezuela have been frosty under Maduro and under Chávez before him (Chávez once called George W. Bush a "donkey"). Maduro's invitation for talks came just days after he kicked three American diplomats out of the country.

UPDATE 3, Monday, February 24, 1 p.m. ET (Benjy Hansen-Bundy): Protesters took to the streets again Monday morning, setting up roadblocks in major cities and banging on pots and pans. The death toll has reached as high as 12, Reuters reported; though the exact number, and who is to blame, are both disputed. Parts of several cities in the western Táchira state, including San Cristóbal, are heavily barricaded, inaccessible to government forces, and apparently under the control of the student demonstrators. Trash and branches burn in the streets of higher income neighborhoods, where the protests tend to be concentrated. The governor of Táchira, José Vielma, a member of the ruling Socialist Party, has criticized Maduro's management of the crisis. Criticism from within the party is irregular. In a radio interview, Vielma said that the students should have the right to protest peacefully, and that López should be freed. Capriles and Maduro are scheduled to meet today at a routine gathering of governors and mayors; some observers hope this will provide the opportunity to ease tension between the rival parties.

UPDATE 4, Thursday, March 6, 3 p.m. ET (Benjy Hansen-Bundy): The anniversary of Hugo Chávez's death yesterday was marked by disparate scenes: continued violence in the streets as hardcore student protesters and militant members of the opposition barricaded themselves against government forces, and large-scale pro-government rallies, with all the pomp and fanfare of state sponsorship. At least 20 people have died in the clashes. The US House of Representatives condemned the crackdown by Maduro's government in a nonbinding resolution endorsed by 393 votes, with just Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) in dissent. (The measure "deplores.…the inexcusable violence perpetrated against opposition leaders and protesters.")

Last week, Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) proposed sanctions against individuals in the Venezuelan government with assets in the United States. They made no suggestion of slowing oil imports from Venezuela, which provides the fourth-largest supply of foreign crude to the US. Despite continued violence, and comments by American celebrities, some observers insist that the situation in Venezuela is different from that in Ukraine, citing evidence that the protests have failed to gain broad-based support among the populous lower classes.

Demonstrators clash with the National Guard on March 6. Manaure Quintero/Xinhua/ZUMA
Maduro at the Chávez parade March 5 Boris Vergara/Xinhua/ZUMA
A protest in Caracas on March 4 Carlos Becerra/NurPhoto/ZUMA
The state-sponsored parade on March 5 Avn/Xinhua/ZUMA
Opposition protesters in Caracas on Friday, February 21 El Nacional/GDA/ZUMA
A barricade in San Cristóbal after Sunday's protest George Castro/Xinhua/ZUMA
Opposition leader Henrique Capriles addresses protesters Saturday El Nacional/GDA/ZUMA
Leopoldo López Miguel Gutierrez/EFE/ZUMA
Boris Vergara/Xinhua/ZUMA
Boris Vergara/Xinhua/ZUMA
Boris Vergara/Xinhua/ZUMA
Nicolás Maduro Venezuela's Presidency/Xinhua/ZUMA


Governor Scott Walker.

This week, the media got the chance to pore over more than 27,000 pages of previously unreleased emails and other documents gathered during a three-year secret investigation of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's staff when he was executive of Milwaukee County. That secret probe—what Wisconsin law enforcement calls a "John Doe" investigation—resulted in charges against three former aides to Walker, a major campaign donor, and a Walker appointee. The John Doe probe figured prominently in Democrats' attacks on Walker during his June 2012 recall election that the governor handily won. Walker himself never faced any charges.

The recently released emails shed new light on the activities of Walker and his aides. Walker had insisted that staffers in his county executive office had been prohibited from doing political work on county time, yet these records show the opposite was true. The future governor and his underlings set up a private WiFi network to communicate with staff on his 2010 gubernatorial campaign, and county staffers used private laptops so that their campaign-related work wouldn't appear on their county computers. The emails also show the degree to which Walker's staff (whose salaries were funded by taxpayers) worked to get him elected governor while on the county clock. As Mary Bottari of PRWatch notes, Kelly Rindfleisch, a former Walker aide who was convicted of campaigning on county time, sent and received a whopping 3,486 emails from representatives of Friends of Scott Walker, most during normal work hours. (Walker, through his spokesman, declined to comment about the emails.)

State and national Democrats want the public to see these emails as part of a Chris Christie-style scandal. But there's a big difference: This case is closed—and it has been since March 2013. So while the emails may result in some unflattering stories and uncomfortable questions for Walker, especially if he later runs for president, there's nothing serious (read: legal) to worry Walker. Christie, on the other hand, faces two active probes of Bridgegate and related matters—one mounted by a legislative committee, the other by a US attorney—that could drag on for months, if not years.

But there is an investigation that should keep Walker up at night: a second John Doe investigation reportedly focused on his 2012 recall campaign. (After Walker targeted public-sector unions following his 2010 election as governor, labor and its allies launched a petition drive to throw Walker out of office via recall election.) John Doe probes are conducted in secret so the public can't know all the details, but leaked documents suggest investigators are looking at possible illegal coordination between Walker's recall campaign and independent groups that spent millions of dollars to keep him in office. Here's how the progressive Center for Media and Democracy wrote about the investigation recently:

The John Doe probe began in August of 2012 and is examining possible "illegal campaign coordination between (name redacted), a campaign committee, and certain special interest groups," according to an unsealed filing in the case. Sources told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel the redacted committee is the Walker campaign, Friends of Scott Walker. Campaign filings show that Walker spent $86,000 on legal fees in the second half of 2013.

A John Doe is similar to a grand jury investigation, but in front of a judge rather than a jury, and is conducted under strict secrecy orders. Wisconsin's 4th Circuit Court of Appeals unsealed some documents last week as it rejected a challenge to the probe filed by three of the unnamed "special interest groups" that had received subpoenas in the investigation and issued a ruling allowing the investigation to move forward.

The special interest groups under investigation include Wisconsin Club for Growth, which is led by a top Walker advisor and friend, R.J. Johnson, and which spent at least $9.1 million on "issue ads" supporting Walker and legislative Republicans during the 2011 and 2012 recall elections. Another group is Citizens for a Strong America, which was entirely funded by Wisconsin Club for Growth in 2011 and 2012 and acted as a conduit for funding other groups that spent on election issue ads; CSA's president is John Connors, who previously worked for David Koch's Americans for Prosperity and is part of the leadership at the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity (publishers of and Wisconsin Reporter). Other groups reportedly receiving subpoenas include AFP, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, and the Republican Governors Association.

Unlike the first John Doe probe, this newer one seems to have Walker's political operation in its sights. This ought to have Walker and his aides far more concerned than some old emails from his Milwaukee County days.

Marines shoulder-carry a boat to water during an amphibious operations familiarization drill as part of Exercise Cobra Gold 2014 at Hat Yao beach, Rayong, Kingdom of Thailand, Feb. 12, 2014. Cobra Gold, in its 33rd iteration, demonstrates the U.S. and the Kingdom of Thailand's commitment to our long-standing alliance and regional partnership, prosperity and security in the Asia-Pacific region. The drills were completed by the joint efforts of Royal Thai Marines with Reconnaissance Battalion and U.S. Marines with 3d Reconnaissance Battalion, 3d Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force and the Republic of Korea Marines with 1st Reconnaissance Battalion. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Matthew Troyer/Released)

Kain Colter

Last month, football players at Northwestern University took formal steps to organize a labor union and bargain for benefits like guaranteed multiyear scholarships and medical coverage for concussions and other long-term health issues. The first of what will likely be many battles for the unionization effort came this week, with an hearing before the Chicago regional National Labor Relations Board.

The proceeding, which will continue at least through the end of the week, has pitted the proposed College Athletes Players Association and former Northwestern quarterback (and NFL hopeful) Kain Colter against Northwestern. While the university reacted much less strongly than the NCAA when the unionization efforts were unveiled—the official university statement made sure to say that Northwestern is "proud" of its students for being "leaders and independent thinkers"—it is still the theoretical employer of Colter and the other players and thus must face off against them before the labor board. (Head coach Pat Fitzgerald is expected to testify Friday.) Here's what you need to know about the hearings and what they mean for college football:

What does the union need to prove to win? The College Athletes Players Association, with the help of star witness Colter, is arguing that football players are employees of the university. The group has some strong arguments in its favor, according to University of Illinois law professor and sports labor expert Michael LeRoy. For one, the players work long hours equivalent to a full-time job. Colter testified that football-related activities take up 40 to 50 hours a week during the season and 50 to 60 hours a week during training camp in the summer. The players' efforts also benefit the university—an economics professor who testified on the union's behalf said that Northwestern's football revenue totaled $235 million between 2003 and 2012, while its expenses added up to just $159 million during that time. "It's a financial benefit, and that's putting it mildly," LeRoy said.

An economics professor who testified on the union's behalf said that Northwestern's football revenue totaled $235 million between 2003 and 2012.

What does Northwestern need to prove? The university's argument is that the players are student-athletes and nothing more. The players receive scholarships worth about $60,000 a year, a university athletics official testified, and a lawyer for the school noted that players also get "a world-class education, free tutoring services, core academic advice, and personal and career development opportunity." While some of Northwestern's other counterpoints lacked substance—school lawyers grilled Colter on whether leadership and other skills learned from the football team helped him get a prior internship at Goldman Sachs, a line of thinking LeRoy called "fairly irrelevant" to whether or not college football counts as labor—perhaps its strongest point is that players signed a scholarship contract, agreeing to their amateur status and therefore waiving their collective bargaining power.

What happens now? No matter which side the Chicago labor board takes, the loser will probably appeal that decision to the national board in Washington, DC. That ruling will likely head to a federal appeals court. The entire process could take years, LeRoy said, which presents a unique challenge for union organizers: There's a chance all the players who signed union cards will have graduated and moved on by the time a final decision comes down. One big question is how other schools and teams will react—while teams at private schools like Northwestern can try to unionize, teams at public schools must adhere to their states' collective bargaining laws. If players at some schools are able to negotiate benefits that players at other schools are not, LeRoy said, it could fundamentally change recruiting, realign conferences, and lead to swaths of state legislation addressing the matter. "It's a huge can of worms," he said. "It's a showstopper."

Who's going to win? LeRoy said he thinks the regional and national labor boards will rule in favor of the players due to the boards' liberal slant, but that the courts will rule against Colter & Co. That won't mean the movement was pointless, though—LeRoy expects the NCAA to compromise on many of the union's core issues by that point. Vitally, the Northwestern players aren't asking for pay for play, meaning the university and the NCAA could provide them with the scholarship and medical benefits they're calling for and still maintain its structure and concept of amateurism. Even a formal union doesn't hold up legally, LeRoy said, we may see a "union substitute" in which the threat is credible enough that the NCAA provides players with more voice and benefits. "I don’t think we’re going to have collective bargaining," he said. "But I think this is a necessary step."

Saleh Mohsen al-'Amri of Yakla shows photos of a nephew and cousin who were killed in a December 2013 drone strike in Yemen.

A new report from Human Rights Watch outlines conflicting accounts surrounding a drone strike on a Yemeni wedding convoy that killed 12 people and injured at least 15 others.  

While the US government has not officially acknowledged any role in the December 12, 2013 attack, anonymous officials later told the AP that the operation targeted Shawqi Ali Ahmad al-Badani, an Al Qaeda leader, and maintained that the dead were militants.

But after interviewing witnesses and relatives of the dead and wounded, Human Rights Watch determined that the 11 cars were in a wedding procession. Although the organization concedes the convoy may have included members of Al Qaeda, the report concluded that there is evidence suggesting "that some, if not all those killed and wounded were civilians."

The report, titled "A Wedding That Became a Funeral," has renewed calls for the Obama administration to carry out a transparent, impartial investigation into the incident—and to explain how such a strike is consistent with both international laws of war and Obama's own rules governing drone strikes. Announced last May, the procedures limit the use of drones to targeting those who pose a continuing, imminent threat to the United States, where capture is not feasible, and there is a "near certainty" of no civilian casualties.

The report suggests the strike may have violated the laws of war by "failing to discriminate between combatants and civilians, or by causing civilian loss disproportionate to the expected military advantage."

Read the full investigation here.

On Thursday, John Hudson at Foreign Policy reported that actor Ben Affleck is set to appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next Wednesday to testify on the mass killings in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Affleck's inclusion among the experts scheduled to testify invited some predictable skepticism and ridicule. In response to the news, Washington Post digital foreign editor Anup Kaphle tweeted, "zzzzzz..." National Review correspondent Jim Geraghty joked, "If a Congressman asks about his qualifications as a Congo expert, Ben Affleck should simply answer, 'I'm Batman.'"

"People serious about resolving problems—especially problems related to life and death—want to have serious conversations with experts and leaders in the field; not celebrities," a Republican aide at the House Foreign Affairs Committee told Foreign Policy's "The Cable." (House Republicans reportedly declined to hold a similar, Affleck-inclusive event.)

It's pretty easy to laugh at the idea of the Gigli and Pearl Harbor star now lecturing senators on atrocities in Central Africa. But the Oscar-winning future Batman knows his stuff. He isn't some celebrity who just happened to open his mouth about a humanitarian cause (think: Paris Hilton and Rwanda). The acclaimed Argo director has repeatedly traveled to Congo and has even met with warlords accused of atrocities. Here's his 2008 report from the country for ABC's Nightline, in which he discusses mass rape, war, and survival:  

ABC Entertainment News|ABC Business News

Affleck previously testified before the House Armed Services Committee on the humanitarian crisis in the African nation. That same year, he made the media rounds with Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) to discuss renewed violence in Congo. In 2011, he testified before the House Foreign Affairs Africa Subcommittee. In 2010, Affleck founded the Eastern Congo Initiative, an advocacy and grant-making 501(c)(3) organization. On top of all that, he made this video this month (in which he and Matt Damon humorously trade insults) to help raise money for the Initiative.

So, are there experts who know more about the Democratic Republic of the Congo than Ben Affleck? Of course—and some of them will also testify before the Senate committee next week. But celebrities testifying before Congress, or heading to the Hill to make their case, isn't exactly new. Harrison Ford has swung by the House and Senate to talk about planes, and Val Kilmer visited Capitol Hill last year to push for the expansion of Americans' ability to claim religious exemptions to Obamacare's health insurance mandate.

With Affleck, you get testimony from a famous person who has really done his homework.

Click here to check out our interactive map of celebrity humanitarian efforts in (and the "celebrity recolonization" of) Africa.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is on her last tour in Congress. She's not seeking reelection and will leave the House after 2014. (A plum cable news gig is almost assuredly waiting for her once she reenters the private sector.) In the meantime, she's sticking to her usual habits: making offensive statements. In an interview published Wednesday, Bachmann said that Barack Obama won the presidency because white people felt too guilty about past racial injustices. "I think there was a cachet about having an African-American president because of guilt," she said in an interview with Cal Thomas, a syndicated conservative columnist.

Bachmann didn't stop there. She thinks Hillary Clinton has poor odds of winning the presidency in 2016. "People don't hold guilt for a woman," she said, explaining that much of the country isn't prepared to elect a women as president. "I don’t think there is a pent-up desire."

It's an odd view for Bachmann to hold. After all, she herself tried to become the first female president when she ran for the GOP's 2012 presidential nomination, and she briefly led the polls in Iowa before her campaign cratered, forcing her to drop out the morning after the Iowa caucuses. But these new doubts about the public's willingness to vote for a woman to be president could be a projection based on that sour experience. A poll from last month found that 77 percent of voters expect the country to elect a female president within the next decade. Americans are ready for a female president, just not Bachmann.

(ht Huffington Post)

He's back. On Wednesday, less than three years after being released from federal prison, Louisiana Democrat Edwin Edwards told Bloomberg's Al Hunt he intends to run for the House seat being vacated by Rep. Bill Cassidy, who is running for Senate. That roar you heard was the sound of political reporters packing their suitcases for extended stays in Baton Rouge. Other than the corruption charges that put him in the slammer, Edwards' four terms in the governor's mansion were defined by dramatic populist politics and brash public statements that drew constant comparisons to former Louisiana governor and senator Huey Long.

Prison hasn't seemed to change Edwards. Here are some of his best (or worst) hits:

  • On his 1983 opponent, then Republican Gov. David Treen: "He's so slow, it takes him an hour and a half to watch 60 Minutes."
  • On whether he fears his phone was being tapped by law enforcement: "No—except by jealous husbands."
  • On his electoral prospects against Treen: "The only way I can lose this election is if I get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
  • On similarities between he and his opponent, former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke: "We're both wizards in the sheets."
  • On his fate: "The Chinese have a saying that if you sit by the river long enough, the dead body of your enemy will come floating down the river. I suppose the feds sat by the river long enough, and here comes my body."
  • On his womanizing, 1991: "Father Time has taken care of all that poppycock."
  • On his sex drive, 2012: "I don't need Viagra…Viagra needs me. Doesn't the Times-Picayune know they use my blood to make that stuff?"
  • On his new wife, Trina, who is 51 years his junior: "I learned something good to use Republicans for: sleep with them."
  • On whether it is fair to call him a womanizer: "I ride horses when I go to my ranch. That doesn't make me a cowboy."
  • On Trina (again): "I'm only as old as the woman I feel."
  • On the role of women in his administration: "The motto from here on out is up with skirts and down with pants."
  • On a claim he once slept with six women in one night: "No, it wasn't that way. [The author] was gone when the last one came in."
  • On kissing babies: "It's more fun to kiss mothers."
  • On U.S. Attorney John Volz, who was investigating him for corruption: "When my moods are over, and my time has come to pass, I hope they bury me upside down, so Volz can kiss my ass."
  • On the most talented politician he's ever seen: "Every time I shave and I look in the mirror, I see him."
  • On his future—in 1991: "I don't have any skeletons in my closet. They're all out front. My closets have been raided so many times that there's nothing new, different, bad, or worse that can be said about me."

If Edwards does run, voters may be faced with a choice between Edwards, the convicted felon with a long, proud history of womanizing, and Tony Perkins, president of the social-conservative Family Research Council. Edwards hasn't formally filed paperwork yet, though. He told Bloomberg he wants to set up a super-PAC first.

Soldiers with the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force provide security for the landing team during amphibious insertion training from the Expeditionary Warfare Training Group Pacific during Exercise Iron Fist 2014 aboard Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, Calif., Jan. 29, 2014. Iron Fist is an amphibious exercise that brings together Marines and sailors from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, other I Marine Expeditionary Force units, and soldiers from the JGSDF, to promote military interoperability and hone individual and small-unit skills through challenging, complex and realistic training. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Emmanuel Ramos/Released)