#Adam Schiff a U.S. congressman (D-Calif.) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

malenipshadows · 3 years

Link

+ Former Pres-ident Tr*mp really doesn’t like leakers. He repeatedly deemed Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee throughout Tr*mp’s time in office, the worst of them. ... + It probably shouldn’t come as a huge surprise, then, that in 2018 Tr*mp’s Justice Department secretly subpoenaed Apple for Schiff’s data as part of a leak investigation, The New York Times reported Thursday night (6-10-2021). + The DOJ also seized records of Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), another Intelligence Committee member, as well as former staffers and family members of the lawmakers, including a minor. + It is unclear exactly which leaks the DOJ was investigating, but the inquiry was related to media reports about Tr*mp’s ties to Russia, according to the Times. Regardless, the aggressive, unorthodox effort to pry into the private records of Democratic lawmakers is the latest of several disturbing examples of the Justice Department appearing to operate on behalf of Tr*mp’s political interests. + “Pres-ident Tr*mp repeatedly and flagrantly demanded that the Department

of Justice carry out his political will, and tried to use the Department as a cudgel against his political opponents and members of the media,” Schiff said in a statement. + “It is increasingly apparent that those demands did not fall on deaf ears. The politicization of the Department and the attacks on the rule of law are among the most dangerous assaults on our democracy carried out by the former Pres-ident.”In issuing the subpoenas, the Justice Department placed a gag order on Apple, preventing the company from disclosing to lawmakers that their data had been turned over until this year. + Swalwell said he was informed only last month that his data was obtained by the DOJ, and that the investigation had been closed. “Of course it’s closed,” Swalwell said on CNN. “We did nothing but our jobs, and we followed the rules we were supposed to follow in our investigation… I’m not above the law, just like no one else is above the law, but to go after this many people … boy, that feels like a Donald Tr*mp-driven investigation and I don’t have a lot of faith in his ability to fairly interpret the law.” + CNN revealed on Wednesday (6-09-2021) that a similar gag order had been placed on its lawyers and others as the Justice Department attempted to secure the emails of one of its reporters. The network’s lawyers had been battling with the DOJ’s efforts to obtain the emails for close to six months. A federal judge told the DOJ its argument for access to Pentagon reporter Barbara Starr’s emails was “speculative” and “unanchored by facts,” according to CNN. + There’s more. In May, The Washington Post learned that the Justice Department secretly obtained the phone records of some of its reporters who were covering the Mueller investigation, and attempted to obtain their email records. + “We are deeply troubled by this use of government power to seek access to the communications of journalists,” Cameron Barr, the Post‘s acting executive editor, said at the time. “The Department of Justice should immediately make clear its reasons for this intrusion into the activities of reporters doing their jobs, an activity protected under the First Amendment.” + Hold on, we’re still not done. Earlier this month, the Biden administration disclosed that Tr*mp’s Justice Department had also secretly seized the phone records of four New York Times reporters over the course of four months in 2017. “Seizing the phone records of journalists profoundly undermines press freedom,” Executive Editor Dean Baquet said in a statement. “It threatens to silence the sources we depend on to provide the public with essential information about what the government is doing.” + The cascade of news that the DOJ attempted to seize the records of Tr*mp’s perceived enemies is more evidence of what was already apparent: that the Department of Justice was operating with the welfare of the former pres-ident in mind. Multiple ethics groups have accused then-Attorney General William Barr of using his office to further political purposes, citing Barr’s mischaracterization of the Mueller report among other dubious actions that seemed to have been carried out with Tr*mp’s agenda in mind rather than, you know, justice. + It is unclear to what extent Tr*mp may have been personally directing some of these efforts, if he was at all. But the news about the leak investigation does bring to mind the time then-Sen. Kamala Harris asked Barr if anyone from the White House had ever directed him to open an investigation. + For some strange reason, Barr didn’t seem to understand the question. + This isn’t the last we’re going to hear about corruption within Tr*mp’s Justice Department. The Associated Press reported on Friday that Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco asked DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to open an investigation into the data seizure. And that’s exactly what he’s going to do. + “The DOJ Office of the Inspector General is initiating a review of DOJ’s use of subpoenas and other legal authorities to obtain communication records of Members of Congress and affiliated persons,” Horowitz said later on Friday.

#crooked Donald #tr*mp WH most corrupt regime in U.S. history #Drumpf is worst US president ever #Drumpf administration a disaster believe me #Adam Schiff a U.S. congressman (D-Calif.)#I respect U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff #schiff prosecuted House impeachment hearings of Donald Dunce #Robert S. Mueller III ex-FBI director #special counsel Robert S. Mueller III #tr*mp intentionally interfered with Mueller investigation #William Barr the Tr*mp attorney general #William Barr dubious AG to Tr*mp #Tr*mp DOJ subpoenaed Apple files on Dems #Tr*mp DOJ targeted Dems in retaliatory probe #Tr*mp DOJ pursued electronic files on Dems staffs family members #misuse of federal resources #tr*mp did not drain swamp #tr*mp brought swamp into national politics

1 note · View note

seymour-butz-stuff · 3 years

Link

Congressman Devin Nunes, a California Republican, on Christmas Eve received the legal equivalent of a lump of coal in his stocking: a federal district court judge in Washington, D.C. dismissed a defamation case Nunes launched against The Washington Post and writer Shane Harris. Thus, Nunes, the perennial loser of lawsuits, lost yet again. The case is but one of several Nunes has filed against the Post in a lengthy docket of litigation.

Devin better be careful or he could end up being found a vexatious litigant, at which point couldn’t file suits in that district anymore.

Judge Amit P. Mehta, a Barack Obama appointee, noted out of the gate that Nunes failed to serve Harris with a copy of the relevant case documents as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A party must be served with a summons and a complaint within 90 days. Nunes first filed the case on March 2nd in the Eastern District of Virginia; the Post successfully sought to have it transferred it to the District of Columbia at the end of that month.

That was not the only serious blunder in the Nunes case, the judge decided.

The case surrounds an article titled “Senior intelligence official told lawmakers that Russia wants to see Trump reelected.” The judge’s opinion contains a lengthy recitation of the core reporting; the following truncated version will suffice (citations omitted):

The Article reported that Shelby Pierson, a senior U.S. intelligence official, told members of the House Intelligence Committee, including Plaintiff [Nunes], that Russia had “developed a preference” for President Trump and wanted to see him reelected. According to an unnamed committee official, the briefing was open to all Committee members and covered “election security and foreign interference in the run-up to the 2020 election.” The Article did not specify the date of the briefing.

The Article went on to report that President Trump “learned about Pierson’s remarks from Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), the committee’s ranking Republican and staunch Trump ally.” The Article continued: “Trump grew angry at his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, in the Oval Office, seeing Maguire and his staff as disloyal for speaking to Congress about Russia’s perceived preference.” Citing “people familiar with the matter,” the Article noted that “Trump erroneously believed that Pierson had given the assessment exclusively to Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.”

Nunes sought $250 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages.

He alleged that the report accused him of “criminal misconduct” and caused him “prejudice . . . in his profession and employment as a United States Congressman.” Per the judge’s opinion, Nunes attempted to claim two statements were “false and defamatory: (1) that [Nunes] told President Trump that Pierson had given her assessment of Russia’s preference for President Trump ‘exclusively to Rep. Adam Schiff’ and (2) that the President’s ‘opinion of Maguire shifted’ after hearing from [Nunes] about Pierson’s remarks.” Besides defamation, Nunes also accused the Post of conspiring against him with House Democrats.

The Post moved to dismiss the case by arguing that California law applied. It states that notice must be given before a defamation lawsuit is launched. If it is not, a plaintiff (here, Nunes) can only claim special damages. Nunes did not ask for special damages; the Post argued he therefore asked for nothing.

Nunes moved several months to file an amended complaint several months after filing the original complaint. The court said the amended complaint did not cure the aforementioned errors and blocked Nunes from filing it.

As to the defamation claims, Nunes claimed the Post committed “defamation per se,” which is when statements are defamatory on their face. The court said Nunes was actually alleging defamation by implication and characterized his complaint as such.

Notably, Judge Mehta said Nunes’s complaint “does not challenge the substantial truth of any statement in the Article.” Per the judge (citations and internal punctuation omitted):

Rather, [Nunes] alleges that the defamatory gist of the Article is that [Nunes] lied to and deceived the President of the United States. Thus, [Nunes] contests not any assertion of fact contained in the Article but, rather, the meaning conveyed by those facts.

To establish defamation by implication, the plaintiff must demonstrate (1) that a defamatory inference can reasonably be drawn and (2) that the particular manner or language in which the true facts are conveyed supplies additional, affirmative evidence suggesting that the defendant intends or endorses the defamatory inference. Here, the Complaint alleges two defamatory implications stemming from statements in the Article, neither of which can rationally be considered reasonable or intended or endorsed.

In other words, the Post‘s reporting does not say what Nunes poorly alleged that it says. The judge said it would not make sense for the average reader to conclude that a “staunch ally” of Donald Trump would lie to Trump — to use the Post‘s own words to describe Nunes.

The article contains a link to judge’s complete opinion.

#2 #trump #maga #trump derangement syndrome #vexatious litigant #devin nunes #devins cow

3 notes · View notes

opedguy · 2 years

Text

Jan. 6 House Select Committee Flails

LOS ANGELES (OnlineColumnist.com), Dec. 20, 2021.-- Sending out subpoenas indiscriminately, the House Jan. 6 Select Committee can’t find anything other than innuendo when it comes to establishing a link between the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and link to the White House. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) made clear she will never forgive former President Donald Trump for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot that chased her and her Democrat colleagues to seek refuge in the basement until D.C. and Capitol police and National Guard restored order. Pelosi blames former President Donald Trump have collected numerous emails or texts from various GOP media personalities and Trump officials asking 62-year-old former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to get Trump to stop the violence. But, the very idea that Trump could wave a magic wand to stop the mayhem is preposterous, proving Pelosi’s point that the former president orchestrated the mayhem.

Pelosi vowed, after watching Trump acquitted Feb. 13in the U.S. senate on “incitement of insurrection” to put Trump in double-jeorpardy, essentially trying him a second time because she couldn’t convict him the first time. Pelosi, Democrats and the media have an obsession with retaliating against Trump for whatever reason, largely because he didn’t conform to the liberal scheme of things. When you consider the outrage over 74-year-old Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) refusal to sign on to the most costly boondoggle in U.S. history, Biden’s $1.75 trillion Build Back Better Plan, you can see the liberal horde doesn’t care about the target. Today, it’s Manchin, yesterday and tomorrow it’s Trump, or someone else that has a different opinion. Democrats and their media friends want rule by oligarchy, only one party, one opinion, no matter how harmful to the U.S. economy or American society.

When it comes to the House Select Committee, emails or texts about any person trying to contact Meadows to get Trump to call back the dogs are completely natural, expected from any responsible citizen. No one liked seeing the U.S. Capitol defiled for any reason, any excuse or any rationale. Democrats and the press like to call Trump’s refusal to accept the Nov. 3, 2020 election results the “Big Lie.” But if Democrats recall, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton refused to accept the election results, working feverishly behind the scenes during the entire Trump presidency to see him removed from office. So when Democrats and the media say Trump’s “Big Lie” or election fraud, they need to look no further that Hillary. But when you look at the House Select Committee, the same voices that pleaded with the Senate to convict Trump are at it again, like House Intel Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

Day by day, the House Select Committee floats more trial balloons with the press, much like they did during the entire Trump presidency, accusing the former president of colluding with the Kremlin. Now “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander is being raked over the coals, accused of all kinds of things, including conspiring with the White House to organize the Jan. 6 riot. House Select Committed now accuses Alexander of speaking with several GOP members of Congress, inclu9ing Rep. Paul Gasar (R-Az.), Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Al.) and Rep. Andy Biggs.(R-Az.), suggesting that were all involved in orchestrating the Jan. 6 mayhem But all three Congressman were big supporters of Trump and of course would want to know about Trump’s last big speech Jan. 6 on D.C.’s Ellipse. Showing interest in Trump’s last speech has nothing to do with plotting the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.

Yet the House Select Committee continues its reliance on innuendo and unverified gossip to implicate the Trump White House and GOP congressmen in orchestrating the riot. When you consider that Trump’s Ellipse speech had about one million attendees, the fraction that lashed out at the Capitol was miniscule, yet the House Select Committee wants to convict Trump. “The insinuation that this simple text to Congressman Mo Broooks form an unknown number by someone claiming to be ‘Ali Alexander’ somehow suggests Congressman Brooks in any way helped plan the Capitol attack is absurd, outrageous and defamatory,” Brooks wrote in a statement. But that’s exactly why House Democrats continue to do to desperately grope to find any link between the Jan. 6 rabble rousers and the White House. House Select Committee is another cheap publicity stunt for the liberal press.

When it comes to the “Stop the Steal” rally, it has not linked to the rabble rousers deciding to make a bold statement Jan. 6. While not discussed by Democrats or the press, the Jan. 6 riots were not an “insurrection,” they were an rebellion for the months of riots, looting, arson and anarchy witnessed around the country in the wake of George Floyd’s May 25, 2020 death by former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin. Progressive Democrats hoped to ride Floyd’s death to the economic concessions made to minorities, now outraged that Manchin dared to stop Democrats profligate spending. Biden’s Build Back Better plan isn’t about building anything, it’s about repayment to certain minorities that voted for Biden. Manchin correctly recognized that the BBB plan is a wrecking ball for the U.S. economy, a massive welfare plan, short of slavery reparations, to minority communities.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging the Bullet and Operation Charisma.

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Are There Republicans On The Impeachment Committee

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/are-there-republicans-on-the-impeachment-committee/

Are There Republicans On The Impeachment Committee

Efforts To Impeach Barack Obama

2 AZ GOP members on House Committee slam impeachment proceedings

This article is part of a series about

During Barack Obama‘s tenure as President of the United States from 2009 to 2017, certain Republican members of Congress, as well as Democratic congressman Dennis Kucinich, stated that Obama had engaged in impeachable activity and that he might face attempts to remove him from office. Rationales offered for possible impeachment ranged from Obama allowing people to use bathrooms based on their gender identity, to the 2012 Benghazi attack, to Obama’s enforcement of immigration laws, and false claims that he was born outside the United States.

Multiple surveys of U.S. public opinion found that a near supermajority of Americans rejected the idea of impeaching Obama, though a bit more than a simple majority of Republicans did support such efforts. For example, CNN found in July 2014 that 57% of Republicans supported impeachment, but in general, 65% of American adults, disagreed with impeachment with only 33% supporting such efforts.

Constitutionality Of Senate Trial Of Former President

The question of whether the Senate can hold a trial for and convict a former president is unsettled. Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution provides:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution

Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution, also states the following:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, of the U.S. Constitution

J. Michael Luttig, who served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for 25 years, said that such a trial would be unconstitutional. He interpreted the language of Section 4 to refer to an official in office.

Luttig said, “The very concept of constitutional impeachment presupposes the impeachment, conviction and removal of a president who is, at the time of his impeachment, an incumbent in the office from which he is removed. Indeed, that was the purpose of the impeachment power, to remove from office a president or other ‘civil official’ before he could further harm the nation from the office he then occupies.”

Congressional Opposition To Impeachment

A number of prominent Republicans rejected calls for impeachment, including House SpeakerJohn Boehner, and Sen. John McCain. McCain said impeachment would be a distraction from the 2014 election, and that if “we regain control of the United States Senate we can be far more effective than an effort to impeach the president, which has no chance of succeeding.” Rep. Blake Farenthold said that impeachment would be “an exercise in futility.”

Read Also: How Do Republicans Really Feel About Trump

Congressional Calls For Impeachment

In October 2010, prior to the elections in which Republicans won control of the House, Jonathan Chait published an article in The New Republic called “Scandal TBD” where he predicted that if Republicans were to win control of the House, and Barack Obama were to win re-election in 2012, the Republicans would try to impeach Obama and use any reason possible as pretext.

Pelosi Intends To Appoint A Second Republican To The Jan 6 Committee

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she intends to name a second Republican critic of Donald Trump, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, to a special committee investigating the Capitol riot.

Pelosi already put Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., on the select committee.

Cheney and Kinzinger were among the 10 House Republicans to vote for Trump’s second impeachment and the only two Republicans who voted last month to form the special committee.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Sunday she intends to name a second Republican critic of Donald Trump, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, to a special committee investigating the Capitol riot and she pledged that the Democratic-majority panel will “find the truth.”

With the committee set to hold its first meeting on Tuesday, hearing from police officers who battled the rioters on Jan. 6, House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy has said the GOP will not participate after Pelosi, D-Calif., refused to accept the members he picked.

Pelosi, who already put Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., on the select committee, now says she intends to add Kinzinger, R-Ill. Cheney and Kinzinger were among the 10 House Republicans to vote for Trump’s second impeachment and the only two Republicans who voted last month to form the special committee.

“That would be my plan,” Pelosi said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Pressed on when she would make an announcement, Pelosi said: “Perhaps after I speak with Adam Kinzinger … That is the direction that I would be going on.”

Read Also: Why Is There Republicans And Democrats

Backlash Builds: More Lawmakers Call For Schiff To Resign From House Intel Committee

A growing number of Republican lawmakers and national figures called for Rep. Adam Schiff to resign from the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday; citing years of non-stop and baseless allegations regarding President Trump colluding with foreign nationals.

Hes been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this president would either be impeached or indicted, said senior presidential advisor Kellyanne Conway Monday. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged.

He owes an apology to the American public, added House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.;There is no place in Adam Schiffs world or in Congress that he should be chair of the intel committee.

There is no way he could lead the intel committee and he should step back, McCarthy added.

They should be removed from their chairmanships, said RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this president an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.

Read the full report at Fox News.

Heres What To Expect From The Republicans On The Jan 6 Committee

After a pilgrimage to Bedminster to get the blessing of the GOPs Apricot Archbishop, House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy announced yesterday that he would after all appoint Republican members to Speaker Nancy Pelosis select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection.

McCarthy had vacillated for weeks on the decision. Politico reported that he considered naming more experienced members to the probe, filling his seats with firebrands, and refusing to tap any members at all.

In the end the invertebrate House minority leader took the most low-risk path he could, appointing a pair of firebrands named Jim to please Daddy T and filling the other committee seats with lesser-known members, including one in his first term. Among McCarthys picks there are two more appointees named Jim than there are women or people of color. Take a look.

Acyn

McCarthy reportedly had some difficulty finding Republican representatives willing to participate in the committeebut Jim Jordan was undoubtedly eager to join. Everyone knows what to expect from Jordan, the sweaty, jacketless, former wrestling coach who worked alongside a serial sexual assaulter while simultaneously not ever seeming to notice and allegedly telling one of his wrestlers he should help cover it up.;Given this expertise, Trump surely wanted Jordan on the committee.

But since Donalds Kevin appointed them, Im not holding my breath.

Read Also: How Many Presidents Have The Republicans Tried To Impeach

House Republicans ‘demand The Release Of The Rules’ On Impeachment

House Republicans are calling for the committee leaders overseeing the impeachment inquiry to release the guidelines and regulations under which depositions and transcriptions of testimony are being conducted.;

We write to demand the release of the rules that are governing the depositions and transcribed interviews being conducted by the joint action of your three committees, nearly 80 GOP lawmakers said in their Friday letter to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam SchiffCarolyn MaloneyGOP seeks to keep spotlight on Afghanistan as Dems advance Biden’s .5T spending planOvernight Health Care: Democrats plot response to Texas abortion lawHouse Democrats ramp up probe of FDA approval of Alzheimer’s drug MORE

“The secrecy in which these depositions and interviews are being conducted, and the lack of clarity on the rules that govern attendance and access to records, are deeply concerning in the context of such a serious inquiry, the letter read.

GOP members have been vocal in their criticisms of how Democrats have carried out the impeachment process thus far, alleging it is politically motivated and has lacked transparency. The lawmakers highlighted that multiple attempts to gain access to the closed-door impeachment hearings have repeatedly been rebuffed for members who dont sit on any of the three panels.;

The letter was led by House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Biggs and signed by 76 GOP lawmakers including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy

Law Professors Will Testify At Wednesday’s Hearing

House GOP Releases A Prebuttal To Intel Committee Impeachment Report – Day That Was | MSNBC

From CNN’s Manu Raju

The House Judiciary Committee has announced its list of witnesses for Wednesdays hearing.

Entitled The Impeachment Inquiry into President Donald J. Trump: Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,” the hearing will include testimony from law professors from four schools. It starts at 10 a.m. ET.

Here’s a list of witnesses:

Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School

Pamela S. Karlan;of;Stanford Law School

Michael Gerhardt;of the University of North Carolina School of Law

Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School

Read Also: Do The Republicans Have The House

Rep Hakeem Jeffries D

Jeffries,who was a litigator in private practice before he ran for office,;sits on the Judiciary Committee and chairs the House Democratic Caucus, which has helped shape Democrats’ messaging on impeachment.His position in House Democratic leadership makes him the highest-ranking lawmaker in the group;who will prosecute the case against Trump.;

Jeffries said Wednesday that his role was to;”present the truth to the American people.”

Will Trump Be Impeached

As Democrats hold a majority in the House, the vote is likely to pass.

“We have been asked to turn a blind eye to the criminality, corruption and blatant disregard to the rule of law by the tyrant president we have in the White House,” Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar said in the House debate.

“We as a nation can no longer look away.”

Did Trump’s words at rally incite the riot?

At least nine Republicans have voted in favour impeachment, but the majority remain loyal to the president.

“Instead of moving forward as a unifying force, the majority in the House is choosing to divide us further… Let us look forward, not backward. Let us come together, not apart,” Republican Tom Cole told the House.

He was one of 139 Republicans who last week voted against accepting the result of the 2020 election and Mr Trump’s defeat.

Once it has passed in the House of Representatives, the impeachment article will then head for the Senate, where a trial will be held to determine the president’s guilt.

A two-thirds majority would be needed there to convict Mr Trump, meaning at least 17 Republicans would have to vote for conviction. As many as 20 Senate Republicans are open to convicting the president, the New York Times reports.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he had not yet decided whether or not he would vote in favour of impeachment.

The Senate will not reconvene this week and probably not until 19 January, according to Mr McConnell’s spokesman.

Recommended Reading: Why Do Republicans Say Democrat Party

Trump Releases New Video Condemning Capitol Riot But Does Not Mention Impeachment

President Donald Trump released a video Wednesday to offer his most forceful condemnation yet of last week’s riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Trump did not mention his impeachment in the taped message, which was;released on the White House Twitter account after his personal account was suspended.

“I want to be very clear. I unequivocally condemn the violence that we saw last week. Violence and vandalism have absolutely no place in our country and no place in our movement,” Trump said.;

“No true supporter of mine could ever endorse political violence. No true supporter of mine could ever disrespect law enforcement or our great American flag,” he added. “No true supporter of mine could ever threaten or harass their fellow Americans if you do any of these things, you are not supporting our movement, you’re attacking it, and you are attacking our country.”

In the video, Trump also discussed “unprecedented assault on free speech,” referring to his ban from several social media sites.

He closed the remarks by calling on Americans to come together.;;

Republicans Slam Dems As Committee Readies Impeachment Resolution For Floor Vote

House Republicans railed against their Democratic colleagues’ impeachment resolution Wednesday as the Rules Committee readied the measure for a full floor vote, calling it a “fishing expedition” that restricts GOP members’ input and infringes on the due process rights of President Donald Trump.

Republican members introduced a barrage of dead-on-arrival amendments during the committee markup of the measure, each one failing along party lines. The proposed changes attempted in part to restrict the potential scope of the impeachment inquiry as Democrats move toward the public-facing phase of the probe. The committee is comprised of nine Democrats and four Republicans.

Don’t Miss: How Many Republicans Will Vote For Impeachment

Release Of Deposition Transcripts

On November 4, 2019, two transcripts of the closed-door depositions, those of Ambassadors Yovanovitch and McKinley, were released by the three presiding House committees. The transcripts revealed that Yovanovitch first learned, from Ukrainian officials in November or December 2018, of a campaign by Giuliani and Lutsenko to remove her from her post. Yovanovitch also testified that the U.S. embassy in Ukraine denied a visa application from the former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin “to visit family” in the U.S. Although the application was simply denied because of his corrupt dealings in Ukraine, the ambassador later learned he had lied on his application and that the true purpose of the visit was to meet with Giuliani and “provide information about corruption at the embassy, including my corruption”, she told the committees. Giuliani lobbied the assistant secretary for consular affairs, conceding the true purpose of Shokin’s planned visit to the U.S. The State Department meanwhile remained silent while she faced public attacks in an attempt to recall her to the U.S. Yovanovitch had been told by Sondland that showing support for the U.S. president may help prevent her dismissal but she chose not to heed the advice.

Following public release of the transcripts, Trump asserted they had been “doctored” by Schiff and encouraged Republicans to “put out their own transcripts!”

Trump Taps Eight Republicans To Serve On Impeachment Team: Who They Are What To Know

Eight Republican members of the House of Representatives have been tapped to serve on President Donald Trump’s impeachment team during his Senate trial, the White House announced on Monday.

The group of lawmakers is largely made up of conservative firebrandslike Jim Jordan and Mark Meadowswho have been outspoken critics of impeachment and loyal supporters of the president.

The GOP leadership previously sparred over whether to include House members in the president’s impeachment team, as many feared the lawmakers would lack the right temperament for the trial. Senator John Cornyn told reporters earlier this month that the upper chamber wants to avoid the “circus-like atmosphere of the House.”

“So I think it seems obvious to me that if the president picks a team that does not include House members, that we’d be more likely to have the dignified process that the Constitution calls for,” Cornyn said.

Senator Lindsey Graham told the press earlier this month that he also didn’t think it was “wise” to include House GOP members in the process and that “we need to elevate the argument beyond party politics.”

But the White House backed the decision to include the Republican members, saying in a statement that they “have provided guidance to the White House team, which was prohibited from participating in the proceedings concocted by Democrats in the House of Representatives,” and would continue to do so in the Senate.

Read Also: How Do Republicans Feel About Climate Change

Resolution To Begin Public Hearings

On October 29, 2019, Representative Jim McGovern introduced a resolution , referred to House Rules Committee, which set forth the “format of open hearings in the House Intelligence Committee, including staff-led questioning of witnesses, and the public release of deposition transcripts”. It also proposed the procedures for the transfer of evidence to House Judiciary Committee as it considers articles of impeachment. The resolution was debated in Rules Committee the next day and brought to a floor vote on October 31. It was adopted with a vote of 232 to 196, with two Democrats and all Republicans voting against the measure.

Trump Impeachment: Chaos Erupts As Republicans Barge Into Inquiry Hearing

House Judiciary Committee debates articles of impeachment against the president

Group chanting Let us in enter closed-door meeting where top Pentagon official who oversees Ukraine policy was to testify

Political tensions over an intensifying impeachment inquiry reached fever pitch on Wednesday as Republicans stormed a closed-door committee hearing on Capitol Hill disrupting a crucial deposition related to the Ukraine controversy a day after devastating testimony from a key diplomat.

A group of Republican members of the House of Representatives, chanting Let us in, barged into a secure office suite in the bowels of the US capitol where Laura Cooper, a top Pentagon official who oversees Ukraine policy, was preparing to testify.

The chaos and confusion temporarily shut down the proceedings before the three House committees leading the impeachment inquiry as Republicans tweeted updates of the disruption from their cellphones, which are not permitted in classified areas. Their presence in the chamber reportedly erupted into yelling matches with committee members.

WATCH: here’s the video of when 2 dozen GOP members, led by entered the secure hearing room to interrupt witness testimony in the #ImpeachmentInquiry as they demand access, despite not being committee members. They’re complaining it’s a “Soviet-style process”.

Scott Thuman

The invading Republicans remained in the hearing room into the early afternoon and even ordered pizza and fast food.

It was unclear if Republicans would attempt to disrupt future hearings.

Also Check: Which Republicans Voted Against The Tax Bill

0 notes

livinginlandmarketing · 3 years

Link

With the Associated Press and other major media projecting Joe Biden and running mate Kamala Harris as winners of the White House, two glaring questions — just theoretical mere months ago — are now framing Southern California politics: Who would take Harris’ seat in the U.S. Senate? And who could end up with posts in a Biden administration?

Tough tasks lay ahead — and complex choices. “This will be one of the most important, most difficult and yes most costly transitions in modern American history,” Chris Korge, the Democratic National Committee’s finance chair, warned donors in a recent letter obtained by The Associated Press. “There is so much work to do.”

“There’s a lot of different dominoes that could come into play,” said Marcia Godwin, professor of Public Administration at the University of La Verne, an expert in the political appointments process.

That process will begin in Sacramento, where Gov. Gavin Newsom will be tasked with appointing someone to fill Harris’ post for the remaining two years in the U.S. Senate. A clear frontrunner for the post has not yet emerged and Newsom has not publicly tipped his cards. But myriad names — including a half-dozen familiar politicos from Southern California — already have the pundits buzzing.

Sen. Kamala Harris joined Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia for a town hall on issues facing Californians at the Long Beach Convention Center.Long Beach April 6, 2018. Photo by Brittany Murray, Press Telegram/SCNG

“The fact that we’ve not had a Latinx U.S. senator looms large,” Godwin said, noting that such a choice could make a bold statement about the state’s diversity.

Related links

Biden on cusp of presidency after gains in Georgia, Pennsylvania

What’s at stake for Karen Bass could go beyond election

Romney: Trump’s election fraud claim is wrong, ‘reckless’

Observers also think Newsom may be ready to go outside of the Bay Area talent for his pick, tapping the state’s geographical diversity.

Harris and Sen. Dianne Feinstein have deep roots in Northern California. But this year, contenders figure to include players from Los Angeles and Orange counties, where for years a pool of local leaders with contacts in D.C. and fundraising prowess have emerged.

Six names loom large locally:

Alex Padilla, the state’s secretary of state;

Xavier Becerra, the state’s attorney general;

Hilda Solis, Los Angeles County supervisor;

Karen Bass, congresswoman from L.A.;

Katie Porter, congresswoman from Orange County;

and Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia.

All have spent recent days in the political spotlight. All have deep connections in the region — from Padilla’s roots in the San Fernando Valley to Bass’s connection in places like Venice and Fairfax.

Garcia is a popular leader in his adopted hometown and would be a breakthrough pick — he’s young, a Latinx immigrant and openly gay.

Padilla and Becerra are regarded as thoughtful and focused, coming into public from different disciplines — Padilla’s an engineer, Becerra an attorney.

Bass, regarded as a consensus builder, made the short list of candidates considered as Biden’s running mate.

Solis has experience in Washington, having served as Secretary of Labor in President Barack Obama’s administration.

Orange County’s Porter, a freshman congresswoman who rode 2018’s blue wave into office, is a rising star who has clicked off a series of legislative successes.

Some expect Newsom will insist on making his pick a history-making blockbuster. Many are counting on a diverse choice.

“There’s an expectation, I think, for that particular role to be filled with a person of color, no matter what,” said Mark Gonzalez, Los Angeles County Democratic Party chairman.

Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., speaks during a House Judiciary Committee markup of the Justice in Policing Act of 2020 on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Kevin Dietsch/Pool via AP, File)

Voters appear to be thinking along similar lines. The USC Schwarzenegger Institute found in a poll released this week that 76% of California voters want a senator with “a fresh and new voice in politics,” with legislative experience, but able to distinguish themselves from longtime politicians such as Feinstein.

For months, many have speculated that Newsom might be on the cusp of a “historic first” appointment. But according to the poll, 52% say that that didn’t matter, though 31% wanted Newsom to pick the state’s first Latino U.S. senator and 24% want Newsom to choose the state’s first LGBT senator.

The USC survey assessed seven likely frontrunners using a couple of different methods:

In head-to-head comparisons, pitting the seven individuals against each other in one-on-one matchups, Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, got the highest marks. Others considered included Padilla, Bass and Garcia, as well as Rep. Ro Khanna from San Francisco, State Sen. Toni Atkins from San Diego and Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf.

Rep. Katie Porter pushes the CDC to cover coronavirus testing for uninsured Americans. (Video screen grab from @RepKatiePorter via Twitter)

People polled were also asked whether they could support each of the officials individually, without the head-to-head factor. Long Beach’s Garcia polled at the top, followed by Bass and Padilla.

Some may find themselves off Newsom’s list — but not because of perceived flaws or failures. They simply may be seen as too valuable to the party where they are currently serving, Godwin said.

For example, many Democrats say Orange County’s Porter is badly needed in the House, representing a newly blue region that has a fight on its hands to keep from returning red.

However, Porter could be poised for other posts, Godwin said. If Becerra were, say, to become a senator — Porter might be a contender for attorney general, she said.

Other names are floating in California’s political zeitgeist are possible cabinet frontrunners, including Burbank Rep. Adam Schiff and L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti.

If one or both were called to join a Biden team, new scrambles to replace them could break out.

Would L.A. City Councilman Kevin de Leon run for mayor, among others, if Garcetti were called to D.C.? Garcetti, a co-chair of Biden’s campaign, once considered the White House himself. But amid a homeless crisis in the city that drew President Donald Trump’s ire, he held back.

Does Schiff — fresh off winning another term as an L.A. congressman — put off such a move to set his sights on a run to follow Feinstein as senator?

As the man who led the impeachment case against President Trump, Schiff is a hero among Democrats, and he’s among the party’s most prolific fundraisers. But he could be a polarizing force, as someone who’s none too popular with Trump boosters.

Bass is seen as a potential housing and urban development secretary. And Solis has already had a cabinet role, so she’d have a shorter learning curve.

Godwin noted that the roster of potential administration posts extends to the Inland Empire, where representatives like Pete Aguilar, D-Redlands, Mark Allan Takano, D-Riverside, and Rep. Raul Ruiz, D-Hemet, hold varying levels of expertise and ability to work across the political aisle.

“It would be nice if one of them top positions from California was someone with real roots from the greater Los Angeles area was a local resident,” said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Sherman Oaks.

But he noted that Californians can’t be too greedy.

“It’ll be very hard to get on the phone to yell at Biden (if he fails to choose cabinet members from California) … He’ll just send us a picture of the vice president-elect,” Sherman said.

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti arrive for a press conference at the United Firefighters of Los Angeles Friday, January 10, 2020. The United Firefighters have a announced their support for Biden. (Photo by David Crane, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)

“For first time since Ronald Reagan, we are sending a Californian to the White House,” said Supervisor Janice Hahn on Saturday morning, echoing the sentiments of many in the Golden State. “As our state’s junior senator, Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris understands the challenges we face—whether it is the housing crisis and homelessness, or the need to expand access to mental healthcare. She is in our corner and I cannot wait to work with her and President Biden on behalf of LA County.”

Staff writer Hayley Munguia contributed to this story.

Joe Biden: Stumbles, tragedies and, now, delayed triumph

Kamala Harris’ historic vice president win creates outpouring on Twitter

Kamala Harris becomes first Black woman, South Asian elected VP

Explainer: Why AP called Pennsylvania for Biden

Joe Biden has won presidential race, AP says, as Trump continues challenges

-on November 07, 2020 at 01:24AM by Ryan Carter

#riversidenews

1 note · View note

paulbenedictblog · 4 years

Text

%news%

New Post has been published on %http://paulbenedictsgeneralstore.com%

News The Tweets of a Mad King

News

Since writing “HAPPY MOTHER’S DAY” at 8: 10 a.m. on Sunday, Trump has worn his Twitter fable to compose or elevate allegations of prison habits against no fewer than 20 contributors and organizations. Since Sunday, he has tweeted extra in overall about alleged crimes by his perceived opponents than he has about the pandemic ravaging the country with mass loss of life and unemployment.

The checklist of purported culprits Trump has charged embody two tv details hosts, a comic, at the least five outdated officials from the FBI and Justice Division, the affirm of California, a broadcast tv situation and at the least five top national security officials from President Barack Obama’s administration.

Trump tweeted multiple cases about alleged prison assignment against him by Obama however struggled to clarify past his frequent references to “Obamagate.”

“And in case you leer at what’s gone on, and in case you leer at, now, all of this knowledge that’s being launched,” Trump acknowledged all over a Rose Backyard details conference Monday. “And from what I sign, that’s splendid the birth — some gruesome issues occurred, and it'll by no diagram be allowed to happen in our country all all over again.”

Pressed for specifics by a Washington Submit reporter, Trump demurred.

“ what the crime is. The crime is very evident to each person,” he acknowledged. “All you wish to attain is read the newspapers, with the exception of yours.”

Over the course of his presidency, Trump has responded to criticism of his performance or feedback by suggesting or outright putting ahead that his critics are criminals. Trump, who campaigned for the White Home by leading “Lock her up!” chants against Hillary Clinton, his Democratic rival, is now reverting to a well-recognized political tactic as he faces basically the most major difficulty of his presidency, acknowledged Russell Riley, a presidential historian at the College of Virginia’s Miller Center.

“He’s the exercise of this as a diagram of distraction,” he acknowledged. “As we’ve considered over time, when the stress on him will get become up, there’s an try and deflect attention onto his political opponents.”

The president, who is reported to delight in developed a addiction of looking at copious quantities of cable details coverage at all hours of the day, lashed out against MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough on Tuesday, insinuating that he needs to be prosecuted within the loss of life of a congressional aide.

“When will they open a Cool Case on the Psycho Joe Scarborough topic in Florida. Did he secure away with shatter?” Trump wrote on Twitter at 6: 54 a.m. “Some folks deem so. Why did he go away Congress so quietly and rapidly? Isn’t it evident? What’s occurring now? A entire nut job!”

Trump’s conspiratorial claim that Scarborough killed an aide who died in 2001 has been debunked by The Submit and diversified media retailers. But the president has expressed his frustration with Scarborough’s “Morning Joe” show and its serious coverage by time and all all over again floating the accusation. Scarborough, a contributing idea columnist at The Submit, responded to Trump’s tweet on air, encouraging the president to “turn off the tv” and renew his focal point on the deadly pandemic.

The White Home did not reply to requests for observation about Trump’s claims of prison assignment.

“The diversified aspect is the set up there are crimes,” Trump acknowledged on April 9, 2018, the day details broke that the set up of job of his deepest authorized professional, Michael Cohen, had been raided by the FBI. Cohen later pleaded responsible to quite loads of felonies in conjunction with advertising campaign finance violations, implicating Trump.

Trump responded by insinuating that investigators must investigate Cohen’s father-in-law, despite the actual fact that he did not name any crime.

Since taking set up of job, Trump has casually accused multiple folks of treason, ranging from outdated FBI director James B. Comey to the American media. He has continuously accused folks of perjury or mishandling categorized details, in overall without evidence. He has acknowledged outdated secretary of affirm John F. Kerry “needs to be prosecuted” for an alleged violation of the Logan Act, a infrequently invoked laws fighting non-public electorate from conducting diplomacy on behalf of the U.S. authorities, as a result of his interactions with Iranian officials. Kerry has known as Trump’s allegation “one other presidential lie.”

When Home Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ripped up Trump’s Enlighten of the Union speech in February, Trump acknowledged the act of defiance changed into prison in nature.

“First of all, it’s an legitimate file, you’re no longer allowed, it’s unlawful what she did,” Trump acknowledged. “She broke the laws.”

When Home Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) read an embellished model of a telephone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky all over a congressional listening to in September, Trump urged he needs to be arrested.

“Why isn’t Congressman Adam B. Schiff being brought up on charges for fraudulently making up a press originate and reading it to Congress as if this declare, which changed into very dishonest and poor for me, changed into at once made by the President of the United States? This must by no diagram be allowed!” the president wrote.

While most of Trump’s accusations are no longer grounded in actuality, they're continuously adopted in a conservative media ecosystem that has formed a symbiotic relationship with the president, acknowledged Nicole Hemmer, a pupil at Columbia College and author of “Messengers of the Correct,” about proper-skim media.

That relationship — in which Trump makes exercise of his platform to amplify voices that had beforehand been relegated to the perimeter of public discourse — has been precious to the president as he has faced his delight in location of prison accusations, she acknowledged.

By elevating counter-allegations against Trump’s perceived opponents, the president’s allies delight in “the cease of environment up his alleged criminal activity seem much less contemporary or much less major,” Hemmer acknowledged.

Trump has been accused of many unlawful activities and changed into impeached by the Home for abuse of energy and obstruction of Congress after he encouraged Ukraine’s president to investigate outdated vice president Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. The president changed into acquitted by the Senate. While Trump has denied wrongdoing, quite loads of of his aides and buddies delight in pleaded responsible to a host of crimes.

In contemporary days, Trump has tried to shift attention from the twin financial and effectively being-care crises, seizing on new revelations from the Justice Division that he claims are exculpatory for his administration.

Trump and his allies delight in worn the disclosures to settle a search for at to compose the case that a mammoth prison conspiracy changed into launched against his presidency by a extremely effective cabal of authorities brokers. Coverage of the resolution by the Justice Division to tumble charges against Trump’s outdated national security adviser, Michael Flynn, has taken priority over the pandemic in some conservative media in contemporary days.

Trump, who has intently focused on the Flynn case, is leading the price.

Trump has tweeted that top officials within the Obama administration perpetrated the “the greatest political crime in American history, by far!” He has retweeted posts calling for a astronomical preference of contributors to be “handcuffed and prosecuted,” “indited,” set aside “in penal complex” and left “sitting in a cell.”

Trump’s Mother’s Day storm of tweets came because the loss of life toll from the coronavirus persevered to climb. The president has known as for reopening the country’s financial system, largely declaring victory against the virus and searching for to bolt on to diversified issues — in conjunction with his reelection advertising campaign.

But public effectively being experts proceed to warn that the total focal point of the federal authorities needs to be on stemming the unfold of the virus, which has but to be brought below preserve an eye on.

Testifying before the Senate effectively being committee Tuesday, White Home coronavirus assignment power clinical examiner Anthony S. Fauci predicted American citizens would trip “suffering and loss of life that can per chance perhaps be kept far off from” and extra financial calamity if states ignore federal pointers and reopen businesses too rapidly. Quite loads of Republican senators on the committee acknowledged that the United States essential to step up its checking out functionality to tackle the pandemic.

Bigger than 81,000 American citizens delight in died of complications of the coronavirus, and extra than 1.3 million delight in been infected. Bigger than 30 million folks delight in filed for unemployment advantages in contemporary weeks. Polling suggests most American citizens abominate of Trump’s going via of the pandemic.

The mass devastation has no longer stopped Trump from launching prison accusations against folks that delight in criticized him. In contemporary days, he has focused political opponents by amplifying allegations of sexual harassment, misuse of public airwaves and voter fraud against them.

Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, acknowledged Trump’s willingness to lob allegations of prison wrongdoing by his political opponents is an try and distract.

“Here's all about diversion. Here's a recreation this guy plays continuously,” Biden acknowledged in an interview on ABC’s “Upright Morning The United States” on Tuesday. “The country is in disaster. We’re in an financial disaster, a effectively being disaster. We’re in precise distress. He must cease making an try to always divert attention from the precise concerns of the American folks.”

0 notes

bigyack-com · 4 years

Text

Donald Trump acquitted of all impeachment charges by US senate - world news

President Donald Trump won impeachment acquittal Wednesday in the U.S. Senate, bringing to a close only the third presidential trial in American history with votes that split the country, tested civic norms and fed the tumultuous 2020 race for the White House.A majority of senators expressed unease with Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine that resulted in the two articles of impeachment. But the final tallies — 52-48 favoring acquittal of abuse of power, 53-47 of obstruction of Congress’ investigation — fell far short. Two-thirds “guilty” votes would have been needed to reach the Constitution’s bar of high crimes and misdemeanors to convict and remove Trump from office.The outcome Wednesday followed months of remarkable impeachment proceedings, from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House to Mitch McConnell’s Senate, reflecting the nation’s unrelenting partisan divide three years into the Trump presidency.What started as Trump’s request for Ukraine to “do us a favor” spun into a far-reaching, 28,000-page report compiled by House investigators accusing an American president of engaging in shadow diplomacy that threatened U.S. foreign relations for personal, political gain as he pressured the ally to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden ahead of the next election.No president has ever been removed by the Senate.A politically emboldened Trump has eagerly predicted vindication, deploying the verdict as a political anthem in his reelection bid. The president claims he did nothing wrong, decrying the “witch hunt” and “hoax” as extensions of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian 2016 campaign interference by those out to get him from the start of his presidency.The Wednesday afternoon vote was swift. With Chief Justice John Roberts presiding over the trial, senators sworn to do “impartial justice” stood at their desks for the roll call and stated their votes — “guilty” or “not guilty.”On the first article of impeachment, Trump was charged with abuse of power. He was found not guilty. The second, obstruction of Congress, also produced a not guilty verdict.Only one Republican, Mitt Romney of Utah, the party’s defeated 2012 presidential nominee, broke with the GOP.Romney choked up as said drew on his faith and “oath before God” to announce he would vote guilty on the first charge, abuse of power. He would vote to acquit on the second.Both Bill Clinton in 1999 and Andrew Johnson in 1868 drew cross-party support when they were left in office after an impeachment trial. President Richard Nixon resigned rather than face revolt from his own party.Ahead of voting, some of the most closely watched senators took to the Senate floor to tell their constituents, and the nation, what they had decided. The Senate chaplain opened the trial with daily prayers for the senators, including one Wednesday seeking “integrity.”Influential GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who is retiring, worried that a guilty verdict would “pour gasoline on the fire” of the nation’s culture wars over Trump. He said the House proved its case but it just didn’t rise to the level of impeachment.“It would rip the country apart,” Alexander said before his vote.Other Republicans siding with Trump said it was time to end what McConnell called the “circus” and move on. Trump ally GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham said it was a “sham” designed to destroy a presidency.Most Democrats, though, echoed the House managers’ warnings that Trump, if left unchecked, would continue to abuse the power of his office for personal political gain and try to “cheat” again ahead of the the 2020 election.During the nearly three-week trial, House Democrats prosecuting the case argued that Trump abused power like no other president in history when he pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, ahead of the 2020 election.They detailed an extraordinary shadow diplomacy run by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani that set off alarms at the highest levels of government. After Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine, Trump temporarily halted U.S. aid to the struggling ally battling hostile Russia at its border. The money was eventually released in September as Congress intervened.When the House probed Trump’s actions, the president instructed White House aides to defy congressional subpoenas, leading to the obstruction charge.One key Democrat, Alabama Sen. Doug Jones — perhaps the most endangered politically for reelection in a state where Trump is popular — announced he would vote to convict. “Senators are elected to make tough choices,” Jones saidQuestions from the Ukraine matter continue to swirl. House Democrats may yet summon former national security adviser John Bolton to testify about revelations from his forthcoming book that offer a fresh account of Trump’s actions. Other eyewitnesses and documents are almost sure to surface.In closing arguments for the trial the lead prosecutor, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., appealed to senators’ sense of decency, that “right matters” and “truth matters” and that Trump “is not who you are.’’“The president’s basic lack of character, his willingness to cheat in the election - he’s not going to stop,” Schiff told The Associated Press on Wednesday, predicting more revelations would become public. “It’s not going to change, which means that we are going to have to remain eternally vigilant.”Pelosi was initially reluctant to launch impeachment proceedings against Trump when she took control of the House after the 2018 election, dismissively telling more liberal voices that “he’s not worth it.’’Trump and his GOP allies in Congress argue that Democrats have been trying to undercut him from the start.But a whistleblower complaint of his conversation with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy set off alarms. The call had been placed the day after Mueller announced the findings of his Russia probe.When Trump told Pelosi in September that the call was perfect, she was stunned. “Perfectly wrong,” she said. Days later, the speaker announced the formal impeachment inquiry.The result was the quickest, most partisan impeachment in U.S. history, with no Republicans joining the House Democrats to vote for the charges, though one GOP congressman left the party and voted for impeachment and two Democrats joined Republicans to oppose. The Republican Senate kept up the pace with the fastest trial ever, and the first with no witnesses or deliberations.Trump’s legal team with star attorney Alan Dershowitz made the sweeping, if stunning, assertion that even if the president engaged in the quid pro quo as described, it is not impeachable, because politicians often view their own political interest with the national interest.McConnell, who commands a 53-47 Republican majority, braced for dissent, refusing efforts to prolong the trial with more witnesses, arguing the House should have done a better job.Some GOP senators distanced themselves from Trump’s defense, and other Republicans brushed back calls from conservatives to disclose the name of the anonymous whistleblower. The Associated Press typically does not reveal the identity of whistleblowers.Trump’s approval rating, which has generally languished in the mid- to low-40s, hit a new high of 49% in the latest Gallup polling, which was conducted as the Senate trial was drawing to a close. The poll found that 51% of the public views the Republican Party favorably, the first time the GOP’s number has exceeded 50% since 2005. Read the full article

0 notes

omgstupendousbouquetbasement · 4 years

Text

Trump Impeachment Acquittal a Watershed Moment for Him, US

U.S. President Donald Trump's acquittal Wednesday on impeachment charges is a watershed moment in his presidency, exonerating him of wrongdoing just nine months ahead of next November's national election when he is seeking a second term in the White House. He was found not guilty on the first charge of abuse of power, 52-48; and found not guilty on a second charge of obstruction of Congress, 53-47.

Trump's acquittal likely will have huge long-term implications on politics and the balance of power in Washington with the president's hand strengthened heading into the campaign season. Only one Republican, Senator Mitt Romney, the losing 2012 Republican presidential candidate, voted to convict the Republican Trump on the first charge of abuse of power, assailing his conduct as "wrong, egregiously wrong". On the second charge of obstruction of Congress, Romney voted not guilty.

Lone Republican Senator Speaks Out in Support of Trump's Impeachment Conviction

Senator Mitt Romney says he would vote to convict President Donald Trump of abusing his presidential power, even as the full Senate was set to exonerate Trump on two articles of impeachment

Trump is in a position now to make use of Wednesday's acquittal to his advantage ahead of the election, even as a collection of national polls shows he remains an unpopular president with a job approval rating in the mid-40% range in a politically divided country.

"It’s amazing what I’ve done," he wrote on Twitter as his impeachment trial neared the end, "the most of any President in the first three years (by far), considering that for three years I’ve been under phony political investigations and the Impeachment Hoax! KEEP AMERICA GREAT!"

It’s amazing what I’ve done, the most of any President in the first three years (by far), considering that for three years I’ve been under phony political investigations and the Impeachment Hoax! KEEP AMERICA GREAT!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2020

Power of the presidency

Trump now is the third U.S. president in the country's 244-year history to have faced impeachment charges, but been acquitted in Senate trials to remain in office, after Andrew Johnson in the mid-19th century and Bill Clinton two decades ago. Trump is the first, however, who has been cleared and then faces a re-election campaign to remain as the U.S. leader. An array of Democratic challengers, none of whom has yet to emerge from a large field of candidates as the clear choice of Democratic voters, is vying to be his opponent.

There possibly is a new etched-in-stone understanding of the power of the U.S. presidency, as evidenced by Trump's exoneration on two articles of impeachment, that he abused the power of the presidency by seeking help from Ukraine to investigate a political foe and then obstructed congressional efforts to investigate him.

House Democratic impeachment manager, Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., leaves the Senate chamber after the acquittal of President Donald Trump at the Capitol in Washington, Feb. 5, 2020.

At the outset of the trial, Congressman Adam Schiff, the lead Democrat prosecuting the case against Trump, laid out the stakes.

"Our relationship with Ukraine will survive," he said. "But if we are to decide here that a president of the United States can simply say that, 'Under Article 2 [of the Constitution], I can do whatever I want, and I don't have to treat a political branch of government like it exists,' that will be an unending injury to this country. Ukraine will survive, and so will we, but that will be an unending injury to this country, because the balance of power that our founders set out will never be the same."

But as the trial wound down, one of Trump's impeachment defense lawyers, noted criminal defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, argued to the 100 senators acting as jurors for an expansive view of U.S. presidential power. He said that even if Trump had engaged in a quid pro quo deal with Ukraine to benefit himself politically, it was not an impeachable offense, a viewpoint disputed by U.S. constitutional scholars.

FILE - Attorney Alan Dershowitz speaks to reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Jan. 29, 2020.

But Dershowitz's view, since Trump has been acquitted, could effectively become the standard by which the actions of future presidents are judged.“

If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” Dershowitz argued. He later said his comment had been misconstrued and that he did not mean to contend that U.S. presidents always have unlimited power.

However, another Trump lawyer, deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin, said a president asking Russia and China to look into his political opponents, as Trump has done, does not violate U.S. campaign finance laws making it illegal to accept or solicit a "thing of value" from foreign governments.“

Mere information is not something that would violate the campaign finance laws,” Philbin said. “If there is credible information, credible information of wrongdoing by someone who is running for a public office, it’s not campaign interference for credible information about wrongdoing to be brought to light.”

Interpreting Trump's words

During the weeks of the impeachment investigation in the House of Representatives late last year and the trial in the Senate the last two weeks, there was little dispute of what Trump did, rather the interpretation of it.

In a phone call last July 25, he asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to "do us a favor," to investigate one of his chief 2020 Democratic rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter's work for a Ukrainian natural gas company and a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine had meddled in the 2016 U.S. election to undermine his campaign. At the same time, Trump was blocking release of $391 million of military aid Kyiv wanted to help it fight pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.

No one in the public knew about Trump's request for the Ukraine investigations to benefit himself politically until a still-unidentified government intelligence worker familiar with the call between the two leaders filed a whistleblower complaint alleging that Trump had sought help from a foreign government to help him in the 2020 election.

What's in the Whistleblower Complaint?

The whistleblower complaint alleged President Donald Trump sought Ukrainian help with his 2020 reelection bid

Trump adamantly and repeatedly insisted there was no link between the two elements central to his impeachment, denying that he was demanding a reciprocal quid pro quo deal with Kyiv, the military assistance in exchange for the Biden investigations. He claimed the "us" in his request to Zelenskiy referred to the United States, not him personally.

He described his request to Zelenskiy for the Biden investigations as "perfect." His Republican defenders said that Trump wanted corruption, broadly speaking, investigated in Ukraine, not just the Bidens, although Trump never raised the issue of corruption generally in the phone call with Zelenskiy, according to a rough transcript of the call released by the White House. Trump supporters also noted that the president released the aid after a 55-day delay without Zelenskiy opening any investigations of the Bidens, proof, they say, that the president had not carried out a quid pro quo deal with Ukraine.

But Democratic lawmakers in both the House of Representatives and Senate contended that Trump, despite his denials, had engaged in a deal with Ukraine, seeking to help himself politically while endangering the national security of the United States by denying an ally, Ukraine, vital military aid in its fight against Russia. It was a sentiment that only one Republican, Romney, now a senator from the western state of Utah after losing the 2012 presidential contest, agreed with.

Through weeks of testimony in the House impeachment inquiry, however, a string of government officials, some of them appointed by Trump, said they came to understand that Trump wanted announcement of the Biden investigations before the military aid would be released. But, as Trump's Republican defenders often noted, they had not talked directly with Trump and only assumed he wanted the investigations before the Ukraine assistance would be released.

That evidentiary shortcoming possibly changed, however, in the last two weeks as news surfaced of a claim in a new book by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton. In his as-yet unpublished manuscript, Bolton said that Trump told him directly last August that he wanted the Biden investigations before he would release the aid. A month later, Trump ousted Bolton from his key White House position as the two feuded over a host of foreign policy issues.

Republicans Defeat Call for Witnesses in Trump Trial

The Republican-majority U.S. Senate defeated a Democratic attempt Friday to call new witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. The defeat all but brings deliberations in the trial to a close, with senators expected to acquit Trump of two charges, including allegations he abused the power of his office by leveraging U.S. aid to Ukraine to benefit his own personal political interests. VOA’s congressional correspondent Katherine Gypson has more from Capitol Hill.

White House Objects to Bolton Book, Says It Can't Be Published in Current Form

Letter to former national security adviser says book manuscript appears to contain 'significant amounts of classified information,' some considered top secret

Trump denied Bolton's Ukraine claim, but House impeachment managers prosecuting the case against the president fought to have Bolton testify at the Senate trial. Schiff, the lead impeachment manager, said the trial could not be considered fair without testimony and Ukraine-related documents they wanted to subpoena from the White House, the State Department and the Defense Department.

Trump assailed his one-time security aide and complained again about the Democrats' conduct of the impeachment investigation and trial.

"No matter how many witnesses you give the Democrats, no matter how much information is given, like the quickly produced Transcripts, it will NEVER be enough for them," Trump tweeted. "They will always scream UNFAIR. The Impeachment Hoax is just another political CON JOB!"

No matter how many witnesses you give the Democrats, no matter how much information is given, like the quickly produced Transcripts, it will NEVER be enough for them. They will always scream UNFAIR. The Impeachment Hoax is just another political CON JOB!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2020

But Schiff needed the votes of four Republican senators to join with 47 Democrats in the 100-member Senate for a simple majority calling Bolton as a witness. In the end, all but two senators of the 53-seat Senate Republican majority stood with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a staunch Trump ally, and voted against hearing witnesses, including Bolton.

With that large hurdle cleared, McConnell moved toward the final stages of the trial on the two impeachment articles, reaching the conclusion with Trump's acquittal on Wednesday.

from Blogger https://ift.tt/2vcWDPp via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

malenipshadows · 3 years

Link

+ The Justice Department during the Tr*mp administration sought records from Apple, Inc., relating to communications by House Intelligence Committee members as well as some of their aides and family members, a committee official said. + Apple in May notified individuals associated with the committee that the Justice Department had issued grand-jury subpoenas for their information in February 2018, the official said. + The committee immediately contacted the Justice Department for clarification and additional information, the official said, adding that the department informed the committee last month (May 2021) that the matter had been closed. + In 2018, Tr*mp administration officials had complained about leaks to the media regarding alleged ties between Russia and the Tr*mp presidential campaign.

+ Apple didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. + House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, both California Democrats, called for an investigation into the Justice Department’s pursuit of the communications data, first reported by the New York Times. That newspaper reported that the records of at least a dozen people connected to the panel in 2017 and early 2018, including Mr. Schiff’s, were seized in the probe. + At the time of the subpoenas, then-pres-ident Donald Tr*mp and officials in his administration, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, were trying to locate the source of leaks about contacts between Russia and figures in Mr. Tr*mp’s 2016 election campaign. Mr. Tr*mp’s second attorney general, William Barr, renewed the leak investigations after taking office in 2019, directing a federal prosecutor from New Jersey to work on about a half-dozen cases, according to a person familiar with the matter. + Mr. Sessions, who had recused himself from the Russia investigation, declined to comment Mr. Barr also declined to discuss any subpoenas of lawmakers’ communications records.

#Tr*mp DOJ subpoenaed Apple files on Dems #Tr*mp DOJ targeted Dems in retaliatory probe #Tr*mp DOJ pursued electronic files on Dems staffs family members #tr*mp WH most corrupt regime in U.S. history #tr*mp sycophants misuse federal dollars to aid tr*mp #misuse of federal resources #Nancy Pelosi the U.S. House speaker #Nancy Pelosi 3rd in presidential succession line #Adam Schiff a U.S. congressman (D-Calif.)#I respect U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff #Nanci Pelosi speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives #schiff prosecuted House impeachment hearings of Donald Dunce #William Barr the Tr*mp attorney general #William Barr dubious AG to Tr*mp #Tr*mp an embarrassment to the USA #Jeffrey Sessions #Jeff Sessions the Tr*mp attorney general #Comey firing linked to Russia probe of Drumpf #donald dunce insults military dead & disabled troops #another court denies crooked donald bid to void 2020 presidential election results

0 notes

seymour-butz-stuff · 5 years

Link

Among those who participated in the select committee that probed the attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya were Mike Pompeo, then a Kansas congressman and now secretary of state and a key target of the current Democratic investigation, and Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio), who is the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee. The panel’s chairman, former congressman Trey Gowdy (S.C.), will serve as an outside lawyer for Trump.

“The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong,” Gowdy said in 2012, as a House panel moved to hold then-attorney general Eric Holder in contempt for failing to cooperate with its probe of a botched gunrunning operation. “Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles.”

Gowdy did not respond to requests for comment but criticized the House investigation last week in Fox News Channel appearances — calling its leader, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), “deeply partisan” and accusing him of leaking information “like a sieve.”

In a 2016 addendum to the House Benghazi probe’s findings, Pompeo and Jordan thrashed Democrats, saying they “showed little interest in seeking the truth” and “spent the bulk of their time trying to discredit the Republican-led committee and leveling baseless personal attacks.” But in past weeks, the two have used similar tactics to undermine the House impeachment probe by, in Pompeo’s case, accusing Democrats of “bullying and intimidating State Department employees” in justifying a decision to block testimony and, in Jordan’s case, accusing the probe’s leader of misconduct and disqualifying political bias.

“There is obviously a massive hypocrisy here,” said Jen Psaki, an Obama administration veteran who served as State Department spokeswoman during the Benghazi probe.

Pompeo, she added, “was one of the ringleaders of a massive political circus around Benghazi; he was responsible for dragging countless Foreign Service officers, civil servants — people who had been serving Democrats and Republicans for decades — in front of Congress, through the mud. Now he’s claiming that he’s defending the institution? That irony is not lost.”

I wish all of Gowdy’s ardent defenders from 2012 would look upon this heel turn for what it is, but I know they’re all too delusional to do anything but drown in the latest concoction that Fox News is brewing.

They insisted he was a crusader, clothed in shimmering gold lit by the coming dawn, who would never be turned away from his mission of uncovering the truth no matter the cost. That anyone who insisted he was an extreme partisan dogged by hypocrisy and the occasional bout of abject stupidity were themselves the ones who were partisan.

0 notes

opedguy · 3 years

Text

Press Slams Trump for Slew of Pardons

LOS ANGELES (OnlineColumnist.com), Dec. 27, 2020.--Showing that it doesn’t matter what they attack 74-year-old President Donald Trump on, CNN’s John Berman slammed him for pardoning what he calls “corrupt Republican congressmen.” Berman of course excuses his network for spreading four years of lies about Trump for alleged ties to the Kremlin, something fabricated by former Secretary of State and 2016 Democrat nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton. Berman and his primetime hosts at CNN circulated nightly news for four years about Trump alleged ties to the Russia. CNN routinely paraded House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on CNN’s nightly line-up, saying without evidence that Trump was a Russian asset, regardless of a lack of proof. Yet to Berman and other CNN hosts, only Trump or his surrogates lie about everything under the sun, especially the Covid-19 crisis and the sputtering U.S. economy.

Pardoning former GOP congressmen, Trump served notice to what he calls the fake news media” that he wouldn’t let the corrupt U.S. law enforcement and intel community get away with murder. Unlike members of the press, Trump knows what it’s like to be persecuted by the Department of Justice, FBI, CIA and National Security Agency [NSA], spending four years defending what he calls the Russian hoax. Untold numbers of articles appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post claiming Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election. When Trump accused former President Barack Obama of spying on hi campaign, he watched the press laugh in his face. But whatever lies Democrats or press reported, there were no consequences. Former President Barack Obama’s White House, Department of Justice [DOJ], FBI, CIA and National Security Agency [NSA], there were not consequences.

When 78-year-old President Joe Biden gets inaugurated Jan. 20, 3020, he will be the first President that knowingly participated in a conspiracy while vice president to sabotage Trump’s 2016 campaign. Biden was president at a Jan. 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting with the national security apparatus, members of the FBI, CIA, DOJ, NSA and other White House officials to set up former National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for allegedly violating the 1799 Logan Act for having a few innocent conversations with former Russian Amb. Sergey Kislyak. Former FBI Direct James Comey was present giving the green light to interview Flynn after the Jan. 20, 2017 inauguration at the White House, asking him about conversations with the Russian government during the transition. Flynn was charged by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller of lying to FBI agents.

When U.S. citizens now think of the DOJ, FBI, CIA and NSA, they have suspicions that they play politics, framing innocent people, accusing them of Russian collusion. All Democrats and the press talked about for much of Trump’s four years were fake stories published in the New York Times, Washington Post and other anti-Trump outlets talking about Trump’s alleged ties to Russia. Trump has former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to thank for letting Obama’s White House use her bogus paid opposition research AKA “The Steele Dossier” to make wild allegations of Russian collusion. Trump knows that Democrats and the media never accepted his presidency from Day 1, yet they expect Trump to accept that Biden won the Nov. 3 election fair-and-square. Without proof, Trump tired but failed to make his case of voter fraud to the federal courts.

CNN and other corrupt broadcast news networks continue to hammer Trump until the bitter end. “It’s a good night to be a corrupt Republicans congressman or a confessed liar from the Russian probe or a convicted murderer of Iraqi civilians,” Berman said today on CNN. Yet Berman never talks about CNN’s four years of lies, with its hosts and pundits all preaching to the choir accusing Trump of Russian collusion. Even after 76-year-old former Special Counse Robert Muellerl cleared Trump and his campaign of wrong doing March 23, 2019, the fake news media continued to promote the discredited Russian collusion conspiracy. Yet Berman accuses Trump of inappropriately pardoning anyone connected with the Russian hoax, something to his day CNN and other anti-Trump news outlets promote without evidence or proof. No, it’s only Trump that lies, not corrupt Democrats and the news media.

Trump’s presidency raised many important issues of how a corrupt news media can demonize anyone they seek to destroy politically with impunity. No one in the fake news has paid any price for spending four years spreading the Russian hoax yet has the nerve to blame Trump for pardoning anyone caught up in the most egregious government conspiracy in U.S. history. When former Atty. Gen. Bill Barr failed to return indictments for former Obama White House officials, including former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Deputy Atty. Gen. Rod Rosenstein and others, Trump realized the fix was in. He would get no justice after harassed by his own government for nearly his entire four-year-term. But to political hacks like Berman, they must continue the cover-up for the fake news industry.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma. Reply Reply All Forward

0 notes

fullspectrum-cbd-oil · 4 years

Text

Dem Senators Seek Russia Sanctions After 2020 Election Meddling Reports

Three Democratic senators are asking the Trump Administration to put sanctions on Russia after reports claim the Kremlin is working to interfere in the 2020 election.

In their letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin, Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Bob Menendez (D-NY) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) write, “We urge you to immediately and forcefully impose sanctions on the government of the Russian federation.” They also asked for sanctions on Russian actors and anybody providing financial support to the election meddling efforts.

They added later, “We urge you to immediately draw upon the reported conclusions of the Intelligence Community to identify and target for sanctions all those determined to be responsible for ongoing election interference, including President Putin … Doing anything less would be an abdication of your responsibility to protect and defend the U.S. from this serious threat to our national security and to the integrity of our election process.”

NEW: Three senior Democratic senators have written to Treasury Sec. Mnuchin & Sec. of State Pompeo urging them "to immediately and forcefully" hit Russia with sanctions in response to reports that the intel community told Congress that Russia is interfering in the 2020 elections. pic.twitter.com/LQ1xy1AQe4

— Emma Loop (@LoopEmma) February 24, 2020

The intelligence community has recently warned Congress that the Russians are interfering in the 2020 election in order to get Trump re-elected. Trump was reportedly upset by the briefing because some of his political foes like Congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) were present during the briefing. And he has rejected the notion that the Russians are working to get him re-elected.

The intelligence community also believes that the Russians are working to boost the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), according to reporting from The Washington Post.

Republicans in the Senate have repeatedly blocked bills aimed at preventing election meddling, which were introduced after the intelligence community found that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to push forward with election meddling bills and last December, Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) blocked an election meddling bill in the Senate and suggested it was “anti-Trump.”

from IJR https://ift.tt/37UXqlN via IFTTT

#IFTTT #IJR

0 notes

bountyofbeads · 4 years

Text

Senior intelligence official told lawmakers that Russia wants to see Trump reelected

By Ellen Nakashima, Shane Harris, Josh Dawsey and Anne Gearan | Published

Feb 21 at 6:53 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 21, 2020 |

A senior U.S. intelligence official told lawmakers last week that Russia wants to see President Trump reelected, viewing his administration as more favorable to the Kremlin’s interests, according to people who were briefed on the comments.

After learning of that analysis, which was provided to House lawmakers in a classified hearing, Trump grew angry at his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, in the Oval Office, seeing Maguire and his staff as disloyal for speaking to Congress about Russia’s perceived preference. The intelligence official’s analysis and Trump’s furious response ruined Maguire’s chances of becoming the permanent intelligence chief, according to people familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.

It was not clear what specific steps, if any, U.S. intelligence officials think Russia may have taken to help Trump, according to the individuals.

In Moscow, Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin, dismissed the U.S. intelligence analysis.

“These are new paranoid reports, which, to our deep regret, will continue to grow in number as the election day approaches,” Peskov said Friday. “Naturally, they have nothing to do with the truth.”

Trump announced Wednesday that he was replacing Maguire with a vocal loyalist, Richard Grenell, who is the U.S. ambassador to Germany. The shake-up at the top of the intelligence community is the latest move in a post-impeachment purge. Trump has instructed aides to identify and remove officials across the government who aren’t defending his interests, and he wants them replaced with loyalists.

Maguire, a career official who is respected by the intelligence rank and file, was considered a leading candidate to be nominated to the post of DNI, White House aides had said. But Trump’s opinion shifted last week when he heard from a Republican ally about the official’s remarks.

The official, Shelby Pierson, said several times during the briefing that Russia had “developed a preference” for Trump, according to a U.S. official familiar with her comments. That conclusion was part of a broader discussion of election security that also touched on when the U.S. government should warn Democratic candidates if they are being targeted by foreign governments.

The New York Times first reported on the intelligence conclusion that Russia wants to help the president in 2020.

Trump erroneously believed that Pierson had given the assessment exclusively to Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, people familiar with the matter said. Trump also believed that the information would be helpful to Democrats if it were released publicly, the people said. Schiff was the lead impeachment manager, or prosecutor, during Trump’s Senate trial on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Trump learned about Pierson’s remarks from Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), the committee’s ranking Republican and a staunch Trump ally, said one person familiar with the matter. Trump’s suspicions of the intelligence community have often been fueled by Nunes, who was with the president in California on Wednesday when he announced on Twitter that Grenell would become the acting director, officials said.

A spokesman for Nunes did not respond to requests for comment.

“Members on both sides participated, including ranking member Nunes, and heard the exact same briefing from experts across the intelligence community,” a committee official said. “No special or separate briefing was provided to one side or to any single member, including the chairman.”

The briefing, which was offered to all members of the committee, covered “election security and foreign interference in the run-up to the 2020 election,” the committee official said.

Other people familiar with the briefing described it as a contentious re-litigating of a previous intelligence assessment that Russia interfered in 2016 to help Trump. Republican members asked why the Russians would want to help Trump when he has levied punishing sanctions on their country, and they challenged Pierson to back up her claim with evidence. It is unclear how she responded.

Republicans on the committee also accused some of the briefers from other agencies of being part of an effort to sabotage Trump’s reelection, these people said. Schiff, for his part, said in a tweet Thursday evening: “We count on the intelligence community to inform Congress of any threat of foreign interference in our elections. If reports are true, and the president is interfering with that, he is again jeopardizing our efforts to stop foreign meddling.”

Trump became angry with Maguire and blamed him for Pierson’s remarks when the two met the next day during a special briefing for Trump on election security attended by officials from other agencies, but not Pierson.

At that briefing, Trump angrily asked Maguire why he had to learn of what Pierson had said from Nunes and not from his own aides, according to administration officials with knowledge of the meeting. He said that Maguire should not have let the Capitol Hill briefing happen — particularly before he received the briefing — and that he should not have learned about it from a congressman, said one administration official.

Trump told Maguire and other aides in the Oval Office that he did not believe Russia was interfering to help him or planning to do so, and that the intelligence community was getting “played,” according to an administration official with knowledge of the meeting. He said that the information would be used against him unfairly and that he could not believe that people were believing such a story again, reflecting his opinion that Russian interference in 2016 was a “hoax” made up by officials with a political agenda.

Maguire struck an apologetic tone and said he was looking into it, this official said.

Trump gave Maguire “a dressing-down,” said another individual, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. “That was the catalyst” that led to the sidelining of Maguire in favor of Grenell, the person said.

Maguire came away “despondent,” said another individual.

A spokeswoman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment. The White House did not comment on Trump’s Oval Office comments to Maguire.

Trump’s removal of Maguire exacerbated long-standing tensions between intelligence officials and the president. Intelligence leaders have long been some of Trump’s favorite targets on Twitter and at campaign rallies, where he portrays them as members of a “deep state” bent on sabotaging his reelection.

But officials at the agencies insist they have carried on the tradition of providing the president and his top aides with unvarnished information not infected by politics or policy agendas.

Grenell has no lengthy intelligence experience. His history of pro-Trump tweets and his personal relationships with Trump’s children have caused current and former officials to doubt whether he could credibly serve as the country’s top intelligence official, which they said Maguire did, despite having spent his career in the military.

White House officials said Trump’s decision to make Grenell the acting director rather than nominate him for the permanent position reflected concerns that he might not win confirmation in the Senate, given his polarizing reputation. “The president likes acting [officials] better,” one White House official said.

On Thursday, Grenell said in a tweet that the president would nominate a permanent DNI “soon” and that it would not be him. A senior White House official said a nominee would be announced before March 11.

Late Thursday, Trump thanked Grenell “for stepping in to serve as acting DNI” in a message on Twitter. “I will be nominating a terrific candidate for the job very soon. Stay tuned!” The president told reporters aboard Air Force One that Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), a staunch Trump supporter who also is running for U.S. Senate, is under consideration for the permanent post.

The president has been focused lately on officials who are allegedly disloyal to him, particularly at the Justice Department, the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the State Department, aides said, and has heard from outside advisers that “real MAGA people can’t get jobs in the administration,” in the words of an administration official, referring to Trump’s 2016 campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”

Trump has centralized his efforts to purge the ranks of his perceived opponents. In recent weeks he pushed out Sean Doocey, the head of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, over the fierce objections of some White House aides, replacing him with Johnny McEntee, Trump’s former personal assistant. Trump has instructed McEntee, who lost his job in 2018 over concerns about his online gambling, to install more loyalists in government positions.

Some of those removed from their jobs testified about the president’s actions toward Ukraine during his impeachment hearings.

Trump removed Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, as well as Vindman’s twin brother, who did not testify, from their positions at the National Security Council. Alexander Vindman witnessed a phone call Trump had with Ukraine’s president in which Trump pressured the leader to conduct investigations of Trump’s Democratic rivals.

Trump asked for the resignation of Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, who told House lawmakers the president had engineered a quid pro quo with Ukraine, conditioning a White House meeting with the country’s president on investigations of former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

This week, Trump also asked for the resignation of John C. Rood, the official in charge of Defense Department policy, who had certified that Ukraine had met anti-corruption obligations required by law to receive U.S. aid that Trump froze.

The deputy national security adviser, Victoria Coates, has also been removed from her post after some colleagues, including trade adviser Peter Navarro, accused her of being the author of “Anonymous,” a scathing account of dysfunction in the White House, according to people familiar with the matter. Coates has strenuously denied the accusation. She was moved to an advisory position in the Energy Department.

By contrast, Grenell appears to be an ideal Trump appointee. The president appreciates that he publicly bashes Germany over policy disagreements. Grenell also defends the president on Fox News and on Twitter, and when he visits the White House for meetings, Trump usually wants to see him, current and former administration officials say.

As acting DNI, Grenell will oversee the intelligence community’s efforts to combat election interference and disinformation, but he has been skeptical of Russia’s role in 2016.

“Russian or Russian-approved tactics like cyber warfare and campaigns of misinformation have been happening for decades,” he wrote in a 2016 opinion article for Fox News, playing down the severity of the threat. That view is at odds with the conclusions of senior U.S. intelligence officials, who have said Russia’s operation in 2016 was sweeping and systematic, and unlike previous Russian or Soviet efforts.

______

Isabelle Khurshudyan in Moscow contributed to this report.

*********

Trump says he’s considering Rep. Douglas Collins for permanent DNI post; Collins says he doesn’t want it

By Ashley Parker and John Wagner | Published February 21 at 8:11 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted Feb 21, 2020

AIR FORCE ONE — President Trump told reporters Thursday evening that he was considering Rep. Douglas A. Collins (R-Ga.) as his permanent director of national intelligence — a move that Collins shot down a few hours later.

The move not only would fill a post that has not been permanently filled since Daniel Coats resigned last summer, but would help Trump and his fellow Republicans avoid what is already shaping up to be a messy intraparty fight for the Georgia Senate seat, where Collins is running against Sen. Kelly Loeffler in the party’s primary.

Collins is just one of several candidates he’s considering, said the president, who spoke to reporters as he flew from Colorado to Nevada as part of a four-day swing out West.

During a television appearance Friday morning, Collins said it was “humbling” to be among those considered by Trump, but he said he doesn’t want the job.

“This is not a job that interests me at this time, it’s not one that I would accept because I’m running a Senate race down here in Georgia,” Collins said on Fox Business Network during an interview in which he emphasized his longtime support for the president.

“I’m sure the president will pick somebody appropriate for that job,” Collins said of the intelligence post.

Earlier this week, Trump announced that Richard Grenell, the U.S. ambassador to Germany, would replace Joseph Maguire as the acting intelligence director. But both Trump and Grenell have said he is not expected to become the permanent chief, a post that requires Senate confirmation.

Collins has been a vocal and loyal defender of the president, including through impeachment, but his decision to run against Loeffler infuriated many in his party. Loeffler, too, emerged as a strong Trump loyalist during impeachment and sharply criticized Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) — to whom she and her husband had previously donated money — for voting both to call witnesses and also to impeach Trump.

But a Collins nomination would also certainly infuriate critics of the president, who believe the agency should not be run by a clear partisan.

As news spread on Twitter on Thursday night, Jennifer Granholm, the former Democratic governor of Michigan, shared her disapproval.

“Of course — solves a Senate primary problem for him in Georgia, and places another rabid partisan at DNI,” she wrote. “You’re welcome, Putin.”

*********

‘We will hunt you down’: Man threatened attorney of Trump whistleblower, prosecutors say

By Reis Thebault | Published February 20 at 9:25 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 21, 2020 |

President Trump was standing at a lectern adorned with the executive office seal, addressing an arena packed with thousands of his most strident supporters, when he paused his standard rally stump speech and reached into his suit coat.

Last year, as he harangued the “hyperpartisan impeachment witch hunt” and the whistleblower who helped launch it, Trump unfolded a printout of a just-published Fox News story and waved it at the crowd in northern Louisiana.

“Look at this character. They just handed me this story,” the president said of the article, which detailed old tweets by Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence official who sounded the alarm on Trump’s involvement in pressuring Ukraine to investigate a political rival.

The 2017 posts were critical of the president and mentioned the need for “#rebellion.” Before reading them aloud, Trump called Zaid “a sleazeball.” He ended his digression by saying: “These people are bad people, and it’s so bad what they do to our country. They rip the guts out of our country.”

The day after the rally, Nov. 7, 2019, Zaid received a disquieting email.

“All traitors must die miserable deaths,” the message read. “Those that represent traitors shall meet the same fate. We will hunt you down and bleed you out like the pigs you are.”

The email came from Brittan J. Atkinson, said Michigan federal prosecutors, who was indicted on charges of making death threats against Zaid. The newly unsealed court filing was first reported by Politico and noted by Seamus Hughes, the deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University.

Atkinson sent the menacing message from Gladwin County, in northern Michigan, the indictment said. He is charged with violating federal interstate communication laws, which prohibit “any threat to injure the person of another.” The felony offense is punishable by up to five years in prison.

The filing states that Atkinson signed off by telling Zaid, “We have nothing but time, and you are running out of it.”

“Keep looking over your shoulder,” Atkinson is alleged to have written. “We know who you are, where you live and who you associate with. We are all strangers in a crowd to you.”

It is unclear whether Trump’s words inspired Atkinson to send that email, but experts say the threat highlights the dangers of the barbed rhetoric and often personal insults deployed by the president and his supporters, who have attacked the whistleblower repeatedly, posting his purported identity online and reading his name aloud in the Senate.

“I hope this indictment sends a message to others that such behavior will not be tolerated by a civil society that is governed by law,” Zaid said in a statement.

“My job was to ensure the rule of law was followed in how whistleblowers are treated. That role should not be negatively weaponized by partisans,” he added. “I will continue to zealously represent my clients, to include and especially whistleblowers, and to ensure the rule of law is enforced and protected.”

Zaid wasn’t the only one to get threats. Bradley Moss, a partner at Zaid’s firm, tweeted to Trump the morning after the president’s rally in Louisiana.

“Thank you so much for the specific commentary about my firm last night,” Moss wrote, tagging Trump’s Twitter handle. “I woke up to a ton of hate mail and death threats.”

As news of the indictment spread, some in the legal community applauded the prosecutors in Michigan and called for increased protections for whistleblowers and their lawyers.

“Whistleblowers are not traitors,” said David Colapinto, the general counsel at the National Whistleblower Center, a nonprofit organization. “It is the job of the president to protect whistleblowers, not incite violence against them.”

Walter M. Shaub Jr., the former director of the independent Office of Government Ethics who clashed with the Trump administration over ethics violations, said the threats could portend further violence.

“Trump is going to get someone hurt or worse with this personal attacks on people,” Shaub said on Twitter.

An attorney for Atkinson could not be reached for comment. The Detroit News reported that Atkinson appeared in court on Thursday and entered a plea of not guilty.

*********

THE REST OF THE WORLD IS PREPARING FOR FOUR MORE YEARS OF TRUMP

By David Ignatius | Published February 20 at 6:12 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 21, 2020 |

Many commentators have argued that the big winner in Wednesday’s poisonous Democratic Party debate was President Trump. But as the world assesses the United States in this 2020 election season, the long-term political beneficiaries may be foreign rivals such as China’s President Xi Jinping.

The circular firing squad in Las Vegas probably raised expectations abroad that the Democrats won’t unite behind a candidate with wide popular appeal who can beat Trump. People throughout Eastern Europe and Asia who have struggled to escape from socialism must find Sen. Bernie Sanders’s enthusiasm for it — and the fact that the Vermont independent is leading the field — especially bizarre.

The Democrats’ lack of interest in the world will also be noted. Foreign policy was barely mentioned in Las Vegas. As the candidates shouted at each other, they seemed unaware that voters would be judging them in part on their fitness to be commander in chief. Rather than discuss rational global climate policies, such as a carbon tax, they talked about putting U.S. energy executives in jail.

But the world moves on. If a sensible, moderate Democrat seems unlikely to emerge from the scrum, then U.S. allies and adversaries will prepare for the likelihood of four more years of the erratic, bullying, “America First” incumbent. Countries will hedge their bets, knowing that Trump’s promises are unreliable. Even for the closest U.S. allies, friendship is not a suicide pact. They will adjust, accommodate and distance.

This concern about a United States adrift from its traditional leadership role was evident last weekend at the Munich Security Conference. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier spoke for many at the conference when he complained: “Our closest ally, the United States of America, under the current administration, rejects the very concept of the international community.”

Europeans are realizing, too, that the United States’ turn inward goes much deeper than Trump. Steinmeier bemoaned Trump’s retreat from transatlantic ties, but he recognized, “We know that this shift began a while ago, and it will continue even after this administration.”

A former top national security official in Republican and Democratic administrations summed up the implications of the U.S. political morass for foreign allies: “They understand now that waiting it out is not a good strategy. They know that the backstop is no longer there.”

Europeans feel a nostalgia for the old order, summed up in the “Westlessness” theme of the Munich conference. But there’s opportunism, too — a desire to expand influence as America’s contracts. You could see the gleam in the eye of French President Emmanuel Macron as he discussed onstage with Wolfgang Ischinger, the conference’s chairman, the possibility that Germany might soon look to France’s nuclear deterrent, rather than depending solely on U.S. pledges.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acted as though this European disaffection doesn’t exist. “I’m happy to report that the death of the transatlantic alliance is grossly overexaggerated,” he told the conference. “The West is winning, and we’re winning together.” That bland reassurance didn’t find much traction, even among Americans in the audience.

What puzzles Europeans is that the United States seems to want to have it both ways. “America wants to retrench, but it also wants to remain a hegemon and tell people what to do,” says a former senior European intelligence official. “That isn’t going to work.”

Anxiety abroad about Trump’s reelection was probably augmented by Wednesday’s announcement that he would appoint Richard Grenell, ambassador to Germany and a ferocious political loyalist, as acting director of national intelligence.

Allies worry that Grenell’s appointment signals an expanding campaign to control the intelligence community and retaliate against Trump’s perceived enemies. If allies decide that a second-term Trump will compromise the independence and professionalism of U.S. intelligence agencies, they may begin to reconsider their liaison relationships.

Who benefits in a world where Republicans trumpet “America First” and Democrats don’t even debate foreign policy? The answer is painfully obvious to foreign officials. As the United States retreats, China steps forward. Since Xi’s accession in 2013, China has advertised its plans to dominate global technology and business.

Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper talked in Munich of making the world choose between being America’s technology partner or China’s. But he isn’t going to like the answer: Even Britain, the United States’ closest ally, has said it plans to continue its relationship with Huawei, China’s flagship technology company.

The Democrats seemed poised on the edge of a cliff Wednesday night, heading toward nomination of a candidate who could be as polarizing as Trump. Maybe the Democrats will find a way back from the brink and pick a winner. But the world is adjusting to the prospect that Trump’s version of America may be here a good while longer.

*********

TRUMP APPOINTS A PARTISAN PROPAGANDIST TO RUN THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY

By Max Boot | Published February 20 at 2:01 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 21, 2020 |

(**This article has been updated.)

President Trump has done a lot of crazy, scary things since being acquitted by the Senate on Feb. 5 — from protecting his friends in legal trouble to punishing witnesses who testified against him. But quite possibly the craziest and scariest thing he has done is to appoint Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell as acting director of national intelligence.

The 2004 law that created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence specifies that it must be headed by someone with “extensive national security expertise.” Previous occupants of the post had decades of relevant experience in fields such as intelligence, diplomacy and the military. The least experienced was Trump’s first appointee, Dan Coats, but even he had spent a quarter-century in Congress, including three years on the Senate Intelligence Committee, followed by nearly four years as ambassador to Germany. Compared to Grenell, though, Coats looks like the second coming of Allen Dulles and “Wild Bill” Donovan combined.

“Ric” Grenell has no intelligence background. He spent the George W. Bush administration as the spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, where he developed a terrible reputation among reporters. The veteran Reuters correspondent Irwin Arieff told HuffPost that Grenell was “the most dishonest and deceptive press person I ever worked with. He often lied.” That is a big problem, given that the job of the DNI is to tell the truth — including uncomfortable truths that the president would rather not hear.

After leaving the Bush administration, Grenell became a public relations consultant, Fox News talking head and Twitter troll. In 2012, he was hired and quickly fired by the Romney campaign as its foreign policy spokesman after his abusive tweets came to light, many of which denigrated women in highly personal terms. (Another factor in Grenell’s dismissal was that he is openly gay, which offended the Christian right.)

Grenell became a noxious pro-Trump troll in 2015-2016. He claimed that a Gold Star father criticized Trump to enrich himself, called the Democratic convention an “anti-police” rally and suggested that a female journalist slept her way into her job. He badgered and harassed journalists online (including me). He was such a Trump toady that he even acquired “Gold” level status at the Trump International Hotel in Washington.

This flackery led to Grenell’s appointment as ambassador to Germany — a post he finally took up in 2018 after a Senate confirmation battle. He offended his hosts from Day One, issuing a Twitter diktat that “German companies doing business in Iran should wind down operations immediately.” Wolfgang Ischinger, a former German ambassador to Washington, told him “never tell the host country what to do, if you want to stay out of trouble.” But Grenell continued to offend by announcing his intention to “empower” right-wing populists throughout Europe. Grenell was widely seen as spreading Trumpism in Europe rather than representing the U.S. government. His biggest achievement was in his recent role as a special envoy to Serbia and Kosovo — he got those countries to reopen rail links.

Given Grenell’s lack of intelligence qualifications, it’s doubtful that even a Republican-controlled Senate would confirm him as DNI. But while Senate opposition dissuaded Trump from nominating Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Tex.) last year after Coats’s departure, it won’t stop Grenell from assuming the job in an “acting” capacity even while he nominally remains ambassador to Germany.

Grenell’s appointment is Trump’s latest move to take complete control of any institutions that might challenge his authoritarian designs. Coats incurred Trump’s wrath by issuing unvarnished intelligence assessments that confirmed that Russia had attacked the 2016 election and that Iran was in compliance with the nuclear accord. That kind of truth-telling is the last thing Trump wants.

Coats’s temporary replacement, Joseph Maguire, also failed to protect Trump as he expects to be protected. The New York Times reported that Maguire’s ouster came after one of his aides briefed the House Intelligence Committee last week that Russia is attempting to intervene again in the U.S. election, in an effort to reelect Trump. The Post reported that Trump erupted at Maguire over what the president views as disloyalty. Think about that: Trump regards efforts to protect the integrity of our elections as a firing offense. So now Maguire is out as DNI, and Grenell is in.

By appointing a partisan propagandist to a post that requires strict nonpartisanship, Trump is ensuring that the acting DNI in this election year will place his interests above those of the country. Given that Trump has consistently said he would accept foreign election help — indeed, he tried to blackmail Ukraine into helping him — that is a terrifying prospect for the future of our democracy. There are, mercifully, institutional checks to limit a DNI’s ability to weaponize the intelligence community on behalf of the president’s personal interests. With Grenell at the helm, we are likely to see those safeguards tested as never before.

*********

0 notes

kacydeneen · 4 years

Text

Lt. Col. Vindman Explains 'Duty' to Come Forward at Hearing

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, an Army officer at the National Security Council, kicked off the third public hearing in House Democrats' impeachment inquiry by testifying that it was his "duty" to report concerns over what he called an improper "demand" by President Donald Trump during a July phone call with Ukraine's new president to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son.

Appearing alongside Jennifer Williams, his counterpart in Vice President Mike Pence's office, Vindman also championed fellow civil servants now enmeshed in the inquiry and called out "vile character attacks" against them. Yet in a theme he would return to, Vindman pointedly spoke of America as a place where those who speak their mind can still live free from fear of threats to their safety, using his family story as an example.

Opening Statements From Impeachment Hearings Day 3

"Next month will mark 40 years since my family arrived in the United States as refugees," said Vindman, an immigrant awarded a Purple Heart for combat wounds in Iraq who became the top White House expert on Ukraine. "When my father was 47 years old he left behind his entire life and the only home he had ever known to start over in the United States so that his three sons could have better, safer lives."

Vindman said that his "simple act" of testifying would not be tolerated in "many places" elsewhere in the world, Russia in particular.

Who's Who in the Trump-Ukraine Affair

"In Russia, my act of expressing my concerns to the chain of command in an official and private channel would have severe personal and professional repercussions, and offering public testimony involving the president would surely cost me my life," he said.

He ended his opening statement with a message directed to his father. Vindman said that his appearance is "proof that you made the right decision 40 years ago to leave the Soviet Union and come here to the United States of America in search of a better life for our family.

Trump Impeachment Timeline: House Begins Public Hearings

"Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth," he said.

Vindman would be asked to explain those comments about his father toward the end of Tuesday's hearing -- after having weathered questions about his own judgment and loyalty.

"You realize when you came forward out of sense of duty, you knew you were putting yourself in direct opposition to the most powerful person in the world?" said Rep. Sean Maloney, D-N.Y.

"I knew I was assuming a lot of risk," Vindman said.

Asked by Maloney why he felt comfortable coming forward, Vindman said, "Congressman, because this is America. This is the country I have served and defended. That all of my brothers have served and, here, right matters."

The moment led to applause in the hearing room -- the second time this has happened since ousted U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified on Friday.

Here were other top moments from Tuesday's hearing.

Republican Counsel Appears to Question Vindman's Loyalty

Earlier in the hearing the Republicans' lead counsel, Steve Castor, asked Vindman about the former head of Ukraine's national security agency offering him the role of the nation's defense minister during Zelenskiy's inauguration.

Vindman said he rejected the offer from Oleksandr Danylyuk three times and "notified my chain of command and the appropriate counterintelligence folks" about it upon returning to the U.S.

Castor pressed Vindman on whether he “left the door open” to potentially accepting the offer in the future, saying, "that was a big honor, correct?"

Vindman said it would be an honor and he's aware of other former servicemembers who have left their roles to work in developing democracies.

But Vindman repeated, "I'm an American. I came here when I was a toddler and I immediately dismissed these offers."

"The whole notion was rather comical," he added when pressed again.

Afterward Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., criticized a Fox News host who suggested that because of Vindman's family background, "he tends to feel simpatico with Ukraine."

"It appears that your immigrant heritage is being used against you," Krishnamoorthi said.

Description of President Trump's July Call: 'Concerned,' 'Improper,' 'Unusual,' 'Political'

Both Vindman and Williams were among those who listened in on Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and previously testified behind closed doors about their concerns.

On Tuesday, Vindman reiterated that "what I heard was improper" and he reported his concerns to National Security Council lawyer John Eisenberg.

"It is improper for the president of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen and political opponent," Vindman said. "It was also clear that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma, it would be interpreted as a partisan play. This would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing bipartisan support, undermine U.S. national security, and advance Russia’s strategic objectives in the region."

Williams testified that her personal view of the call was that it was "unusual," different from the about a dozen of presidential calls she had listened in on before.

The issue was that the call "involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter," she said.

Williams testified that she added an "update" to Pence's daily briefing book indicating the call between Trump and Zelinskiy and a memo of the call was also included. She said she didn't know whether Pence read the update or memo.

Williams said she didn't discuss the call with Pence or anyone else, in part because her supervisor Keith Kellogg had also listened to the call.

Vindman Doesn't See Anything 'Nefarious' in Putting Trump-Zelenskiy Call Memo in Highly Classified Server, 'Burisma' Being Omitted

Vindman told the Democrats' counsel Daniel Goldman that the decision to put a memo of Trump's July call on a highly classified server was made "on the fly" by NSC lawyers and was intended to prevent leaks and limit access to a "sensitive transcript."

"I didn't take it as anything nefarious," he said.

Vindman and Williams both testified they remembered Ukraine's president specifically using the word "Burisma" during the call, though that word was left out of the call memo ultimately released to the public in which the company was simply referred to as "the company." Vindman had also noted another omission: "there are recordings.”

Vindman again downplayed that action as possibly occurring in bad faith.

"I'd say it's informed speculation that the folks that produce these transcripts do the best they can and they just didn't catch the word," Vindman said, explaining that it was his duty to put that word back into his edit for the call.

"These are administrative errors," he explained, again describing the omission as not nefarious. "These might be meaningful, but it's not that big a deal."

Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., noted that Vindman had testified in his earlier deposition that the name Burisma would suggest that Zelenskiy had been prepped for the call to expect the issue to come up.

"It seemed to me he was either tracking this issue because it was reported in the press or he was otherwise prepped," Vindman said.

"Ranking Member -- It's Lt. Col Vindman, Please"

Ranking member Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., prompted a quick retort from Vindman during a line of questioning about the whistleblower who sparked the events that have lead to the inquiry when Nunes addressed the witness as "Mr. Vindman."

"Mr. Vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower," Nunes said.

"Ranking member, it's Lt. Col. Vindman, please," the witness shot back.

Asked later by Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, why he corrected Nunes and wanted to be called “Lt. Col.,” Vindman said “the attacks that I’ve had in the press, and Twitter” had seemed to be attempting to marginalize him as a military officer. Vindman then acknowledged, as Stewart said, that Nunes meant no disrespect in that instance.

Moments before the exchange Vindman had testified that his "core function is to coordinate U.S. government policy, interagency policy" and he had spoken to government officials about Trump's July call "with appropriate need to know" that included State Department official George Kent and "an individual in the intelligence community."

"As you know the intelligence has 17 different agencies -- what agency was this individual from?" Nunes said.

Rep. Schiff interrupted, saying, "we need to protect the whistleblower."

Pressed on the issue, Vindman said he was advised by counsel not to provide specifics on who in the intelligence community he had spoken to.

"You can either answer the question or you can plead the fifth," Nunes said.

That prompted Vindman's lawyer to intervene, calling for a ruling from the chairman, and Schiff put an end to the exchange.

Vindman Confronts Criticism of His Judgment By Former Boss

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, asked Vindman to respond to comments about his judgment by his former bosses and concerns by colleagues that he had leaked information before.

During previous closed-door testimony, Vindman's then-supervisor at the NSC, Tim Morrison, had said that during predecessor Fiona Hill's transition, "Fiona and others had raised concerns about Alex's judgment."

"I had concerns that he did not exercise appropriate judgment as to whom he would say what," said Morrison, who announced his own resignation shortly before testifying.

Vindman responded by reading what he said was his own last evaluation by Hill from July.

The document called Vindman a "top 1% military officer and the best Army officer I ever worked with in my 15 years of military service. He is brilliant, unflappable and exercises excellent judgment."

Of Morrison, Vindman said they had only recently started working together and were trying to "figure out our relationship."

Vindman said he never leaked information and it was "preposterous" that he would do so.

Morrison was certain to be asked about his assessment of Vindman when he appeared in part two of the committee's public hearing on Tuesday afternoon.

Photo Credit: AFP via Getty Images This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser. Lt. Col. Vindman Explains 'Duty' to Come Forward at Hearing published first on Miami News

0 notes

paulbenedictblog · 4 years

Text

%news%

New Post has been published on %http://paulbenedictsgeneralstore.com%

Cnn news Prosecutors examining former Rep. Bob Livingston over Ukraine: Sources

Cnn news

Editor's point to: An earlier headline for this account acknowledged federal prosecutors were inspecting feeble Fetch. Bob Livingston as segment of their probe into Ukraine. Because the account experiences, in maintaining with sources, Livingston is no longer a goal in the investigation. The updated headline displays ABC’s reporting that, in maintaining with sources, the Southern District of New York is calling into alleged imaginable contacts between the feeble congressman and President Trump’s non-public licensed educated, Rudy Giuliani, in reference to Giuliani’s efforts connected to Ukraine. Livingston denies any contact with Giuliani for the final several years.

Drawn to Impeachment Inquiry?

Add Impeachment Inquiry as an curiosity to discontinuance wide awake up to now on the most up-to-date Impeachment Inquiry news, video, and diagnosis from ABC Info.

A recent name in the Dwelling impeachment inquiry, feeble Republican Fetch. Bob Livingston, has surfaced in the ongoing investigation by federal prosecutors in New York into efforts by President Donald Trump's non-public licensed educated Rudy Giuliani and his mates in reference to Ukraine, a couple of sources comprise told ABC Info.

More particularly, the sources acknowledged, prosecutors in the Southern District of New York are searching into whether the feeble congressman had contact with Giuliani connected to the saunter for the removal of then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

Livingston, who performed a key role in the course of the impeachment lawsuits of feeble President Invoice Clinton in the course of the 1990s, has emerged in the Dwelling impeachment inquiry after his name was once floated during testimony from a feeble White Dwelling reliable earlier this week.

Joshua Roberts/Reuters

Pale Representative Bob Livingstone (R-LA) speaks to the media after a gathering with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Washington, March 21, 2016.

On Wednesday, feeble Nationwide Security Council Director for Ukraine Catherine Croft, during her deposition earlier than Dwelling impeachment investigators, acknowledged that she "bought a couple of calls" from Livingston whereas she was once at the White Dwelling, telling her that then-Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch be fired, in line alongside with her opening assertion bought by ABC Info.

Livingston was once slated to succeed feeble Dwelling Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1998, however as a replacement he resigned in the course of the Dwelling impeachment debate over whether Clinton lied below oath or obstructed justice in reference to an affair --- amid revelations of Livingston’s comprise previous extramarital affairs.

Requested by ABC Info whether there was once any connection between his alleged push to oust Yovanovitch and that of Giuliani's, Livingston acknowledged, "The simple reply is that no, there was once no connection between our purchasers nor of our efforts and these of Mr. Giuliani." Livingston declined to divulge particularly about whether he pushed for Yovanovitch’s removal or whether he had been contacted by investigators or prosecutors, Livingston declined to divulge.

The U.S. Authorized educated's Office for the Southern District of New York declined to divulge on the subject. Alternatively sources conversant in the investigation bid Livingston is no longer a goal of the probe.

Alex Wong/Getty Photography, FILE

Rudy Giuliani, feeble New York Metropolis mayor and recent licensed educated for President Donald Trump, speaks to participants of the media during a White Dwelling occasion at the South Lawn of the White Dwelling in Washington, D.C., May maybe well 30, 2018.

Two of Giuliani’s mates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, comprise now been indicted in a advertising and marketing campaign finance case out of the Southern District of New York. Both men comprise pleaded no longer guilty. In line with the indictment, Parnas sought Yovanovitch’s ouster earlier this one year alongside with their efforts to fetch Ukrainian officers to investigate the president' political rival feeble Vice President Joe Biden and his son.

As ABC Info has previously reported, Lengthy island investigators are searching into the commercial relationship between Giuliani and his Soviet-born mates, specializing in whether Giuliani had to register as a a ways off places agent with the Justice Division for his work for his a ways off places purchasers, in maintaining with sources.

Additionally below scrutiny by prosecutors in the Southern District of New York in reference to efforts to oust the feeble ambassador to Ukraine is feeble Fetch. Pete Lessons, R-Texas, who as previously reported by ABC Info, allegedly met with Parnas as they sought his assistance in pushing aside Yovanovitch.

Lessons previously told ABC Info he was once subpoenaed in connection with the alleged unlawful straw donations described in the indictment in opposition to the two Giuliani mates, and acknowledged that he's fully cooperating with the investigation. Lessons has acknowledged he has no longer been told that he's a point of curiosity of the investigation and he has denied any impropriety.

Jerry Larson/AP, FILE

Pale Fetch. Pete Lessons focus on to the McLennan County Republican Occasion in Waco, Texas, Oct. 3, 2019.

Livingston’s emergence as a player in Ukraine lobbying doesn't reach as a total surprise.

Now a powerhouse Washington lobbyist, the feeble Louisiana congressman, thru his lobbying agency Livingston Group, has been actively lobbying on behalf of a minimum of a couple of Ukrainian purchasers since final one year, data filed below the Foreign Agent Registration Act point to.

Amongst Livingston's greatest Ukraine client lately is an imprecise LLC named Progressive Abilities & Replace Consulting, which was once published in FARA filings as an effort organized by supporters of Ukraine's feeble High Minister Yulia Tymoshenko during her presidential campaignin the latter half of 2018 and early 2019.

Tymoshenko was once a political rival of feeble Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych, the predecessor of contemporary Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's predecessor and a feeble client of Trump advertising and marketing campaign supervisor Paul Manafort.

NurPhoto by Getty Photography, FILE

Chief of the 'Batkivshchyna' ('The Motherland') political occasion Yulia Tymoshenko speaks during a Parliament session of Verkhovna Rada, in Kyiv, Ukraine, Oct. 2, 2019.

FARA data point to that feeble Fetch. Bob McEwen, a registered agent for the Livingston Group, arranged meetings between Tymoshenko and Giuliani during her outing to Washington, D.C., in December 2018. That week, she also met with other U.S. lawmakers and political figures, including Dwelling Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., now leading the impeachment inquiry, and Sen. Tom Cotton,R-Ark.

After Tymoshenko misplaced to Zelenskiy in the presidential election earlier this one year, Livingston Group -- thru efforts led by McEwen -- pushed for Tymoshenko to change into Zelenskiy's top minister.

Or no longer it is unclear what connection, if any, exists between Livingston's lobbing on behalf of his Ukrainian purchasers and his push to oust the ambassador.

Sooner than representing Tymoshenko, Livingston also shepherded a Washington talk over with of Ukraine’s Deputy Minister of Economic Building Natalia Mykolska in May maybe well 2018 on behalf of a change neighborhood named the Affiliation of Enterprises UKRMETALURGPROM.

In early 2018, Tymoshenko was once also represented by feeble Trump advertising and marketing campaign reliable Corey Lewandowski's feeble agency Avenue Solutions.

0 notes