SPOILER

Vice President - Mike Pence

Het kabinet
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Secretary of Defense - General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis
Attorney General - Jeff Sessions
Secretary of the Interior - Ryan Zinke
Secretary of Agriculture - Sonny Perdue
Secretary of Commerce - Wilbur Ross
Secretary of Labor - Alexander Acosta
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Alex Azar
Secretary of Housing & Urban Development - Ben Carson
Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Energy - Rick Perry
Secretary of Education - Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Veterans Affairs - Ronny Jackson??? Robert Wilkie (Acting)
Secretary of Homeland Security - Kirstjen Nielsen

Cabinet-level officials:
White House Chief of Staff - John F. Kelly
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - Nikki Haley
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - Mick Mulvaney
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Scott Pruitt
Administrator of the Small Business Administration - Linda McMahon

Andere kopstukken:
Ivanka Trump (Advisor to the President), Jared Kushner (Senior Adviser Strategic Planning), Stephen Miller (Senior Adviser Policy), John Bolton (National Security Adviser), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor), Donald McGahn (White House Counsel), Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Press Secretary), Christopher Wray (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation), Robert Mueller (Special Counsel), Rod Rosenstein (United States Deputy Attorney General).

Verdwenen of voormalige kopstukken:
Kabinet: Tom Price (HHS), David Shulkin (VA), Rex Tillerson (State)
DOJ/FBI: Sally Yates, James Comey, Preet Bharara, Andrew McCabe
Communicatie WH: Mike Dubke, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci, Hope Hicks
Adviseurs enzo: Michael Flynn, Herbert McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rob Porter, Gary Cohn, Steve Bannon, John McEntee

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: juni

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 21:14 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
Serieus? Wat een motivatie uit de mond van die man...
https://www.nu.nl/buitenl(...)ijke-informatie.html

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 21:14 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
Serieus? Wat een motivatie uit de mond van die man...
https://www.nu.nl/buitenl(...)ijke-informatie.html

quote:

And in all of this, Trump really doesn't have a leg to stand on. For months during the 2016 campaign, Michael Flynn was one of his lead surrogates, even leading a chant of "Lock her up" during the Republican National Convention. If it was wrong to be political while having a security clearance, Trump sure didn't seem to speak up about Flynn or ask him to tone it down. In fact, he hired Flynn despite the White House knowing that Flynn was under investigation for secretly working as a paid lobbyist for Turkey. So Flynn was allegedly "monetizing" and "politicizing" his past position, and Trump's impulse was to promote him rather than punish him.

But that's also the point. Trump isn't concerned about people making political statements; he's worried about them making the wrong ones. Most of the people on this list aren't partisans. They present problems precisely because they're mostly not, and yet they're still taking the highly unusual steps of speaking out. So the White House must make them into political actors. That's what Monday's spectacle was about.

WP

quote:

Last month, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) had downplayed Trump’s threat to revoke the officials’ security clearances, telling reporters at the Capitol, “I think he’s trolling people, honestly.”

https://www.washingtonpos(...)m_term=.41c9d8058e2f

twitter:

kaitlancollins twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 21:40:35 The date on President Trump's statement about revoking John Brennan's security clearance? July 26. Three weeks ago. I guess it's just a coincidence that the White House decided to announce this as they struggle to deal with the fallout from Omarosa's book. reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 23:15 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

twitter:

kaitlancollins twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 21:40:35 The date on President Trump's statement about revoking John Brennan's security clearance? July 26. Three weeks ago. I guess it's just a coincidence that the White House decided to announce this as they struggle to deal with the fallout from Omarosa's book. [ afbeelding ] reageer retweet

Old, maar nog niet publiek, news dus.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 23:05:09 John Brennan tells @DeadlineWH that he found out that Trump revoked his security clearance when someone alerted him to Sarah Sanders's briefing and he turned on his television to watch; says he hasn't heard from any Trump officials yet. reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 23:36 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Zelfs Brennan wist er nog niet van

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 23:05:09 John Brennan tells @DeadlineWH that he found out that Trump revoked his security clearance when someone alerted him to Sarah Sanders's briefing and he turned on his television to watch; says he hasn't heard from any Trump officials yet. reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 23:37 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Die had het vast uitgevonden als hij had getracht geheime informatie in te zien.

Anyway, wel interessant hoe dat dan werkt. Dagtekening 26 juni, maar wie krijgt dat dan te weten? Hoe wordt het beleid? Waarom is niet alles publiek? Wat is er nog meer?

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 23:30:25 An official familiar with the decision confirmed to NBC News that Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats was not informed prior to the announcement to revoke John Brennan's security clearance. https://t.co/AXPfy5ogmm reageer retweet

twitter:

kaitlancollins twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 21:52:14 The White House has now issued a second statement that doesn't include this date. https://t.co/dpNsUUo0Y8 reageer retweet

quote:

She works for Trump. He can’t stand him. This is life with Kellyanne and George Conway. (Washington Post)

Kellyanne Conway is in her living room, showing me an enormous painting of Audrey Hepburn wearing a peacock on her head, but her husband, George, really wants us to come into his office and look at a photograph of the moment everything changed.

It’s a picture he took on election night 2016: Donald Trump is reaching for the first draft of his acceptance speech, just as victory seemed imminent. Back then, George was such an ardent supporter of the president, and so proud of his wife for her historic role as campaign manager, that he wept for joy.

“That photo was from before you cried,” Kellyanne says

“Now I cry for other reasons,” George mutters.

Kellyanne pretends to ignore that comment, something she’s been doing a lot of lately.

“You gotta see this picture,” George, 54, says. “You should like this, it’s your boss.”

“He’s not just my boss,” Kellyanne, 51, says. “He’s our president.”

“Yeah,” George says, walking out of the room. “We’ll see how long that lasts.”

Here at the Conways’, it’s a house divided. She is Trump’s loyal adviser, the woman who carried him over the finish line to the White House. He is one of the president’s most notable conservative critics and wishes he had never introduced his wife to Trump in the first place.

SPOILER

Kellyanne invited me here because she thought it would be a good symbol for her commitment to, and the enduring strength of, the Trump presidency. The White House may be shedding staff at record speed, but this new home is a sign that Kellyanne isn’t going anywhere; that she is, in fact, flourishing.

And that may be true. But as I spent time with Kellyanne and George, I saw an alternative symbol: The Conways, like the rest of the country, have been jolted by the Trump presidency. They love each other, are exasperated by each other, talk about each other behind each other’s backs. They share a roof and live in different bunkers.

This may be the story of any marriage — partners can drive each other crazy and still stay together for 50 years — but this marriage is, in many ways, emblematic of our national political predicament, particularly on the right.

And their feud, thanks to George’s newfound Twitter hobby, is playing out for more than just the neighbors to see.

When the president was in search of a new communications director last year, George tweeted it was “absurd” that the president so often says one thing and then does the opposite. In addition to various tweets about corgis and the Philadelphia Eagles, he has retweeted dozens of articles critical of the president and his administration, and he penned a 3,473-word essay rebutting Trump’s assertion that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s Russia investigation was “unconstitutional.”

Because George is married to Kellyanne, the chief architect and top saleswoman for Trumpism, and because his dissent seemed to come out of nowhere, George went viral. His retweets were themselves retweeted and topped with bug-eyed emoji. His follower count soared to more than 90,000, and the left adopted this conservative super lawyer as an honorary member of the resistance.

And yet, anyone wondering how Kellyanne and George manage to live in the same place these days should really see the house.

The $7.7 million Mediterranean revivalist , with its terra-cotta roof and three-story turret, looks like a mini Mar-a-Lago. Clocking in at 15,000 square feet, it gives the Conways room for their four children, two corgis and art collection, with plenty of space left over for the kind of dinner parties typical in this tony neighborhood off Embassy Row.

Inside, Kellyanne, who is shorter than she appears on television, scrambles up the staircase barefoot to put on workout clothes. George, a stocky man with a mop of dark hair (“He looks Hawaiian,” as Kellyanne puts it), retires to his office.

“George, we’re going for a walk,” Kellyanne, now wearing sneakers and her hair in a ponytail, shouts.

George never comes on these walks.

In fairness to George, Kellyanne is difficult to keep up with.

We’re in the woods, chugging up a steep incline. We’re in Georgetown going on and off the sidewalk, and on and off the record. We’re in Tenleytown, weaving through the sideways glances of lookie-lous, then power-walking through Glover Park.

It’s a swampy August night, but Kellyanne doesn’t have a drop of sweat on her.

And she talks, about any and everything: issues with her father (he left when she was 3), feminists (the funny thing, she says, is she’s living the life they claim to want), or her thoughts on the administration’s practice, since reversed, of having federal agents separate migrant families at the border (She didn’t like it, she says, but that wasn’t the president’s fault).

It’s never his fault. Kellyanne prides herself as someone willing to “go into any den, and talk about any subject,” and often the subject is her boss, our president — whether he deserves the latest volley of outrage from the left, the center, and occasionally the home office just off her living room. She goes on CNN and takes the fight to the journalists Trump calls the enemy. If the president throws playground punches at the news media, the Justice Department, his fellow Republicans, she’ll find a way to explain that he was the one being bullied. She’ll do it with the ferocity of a mother — or a daughter.

It can be a spectacle. Fans call her courageous; critics call her shameless; TV bookers just call her.

Now we’re somewhere back near the house, and we’ve arrived at a different view of family loyalty, one she’d rather not discuss.

“If you make this story all about him, I’ll definitely push back on that after it’s printed,” Kellyanne says, talking about George. “There’s no story about me, except the overcoming of circumstance and the fact that I’m so independent.”

But it’s a story about both of them. Of course it is. The more time I spend with them, the more I know that. It’s the story of people who love Trump, and the people who are trying to love them.

Kellyanne remembers how encouraging George was of that independence when they first got married 17 years ago. Back then, Kellyanne was just finding her footing as a sought-after pollster in Washington. She remembers one of George’s friends telling him that the best thing for their marriage would be for her to shut down her business — the company she built from scratch — and how George, even though he made enough money himself to support the family, encouraged her to keep working toward her own dream.

And now?

“I feel there’s a part of him that thinks I chose Donald Trump over him,” Kellyanne says as we walk. “Which is ridiculous. One is my work and one is my marriage.”

Naturally, though, the two things overlap. When George criticizes the president publicly, Kellyanne says, the media coverage and the implication that they are pitted against each other bothers their children. And as for the president himself, Kellyanne won’t say it irks him, but she does think he finds it “impolite.” On that, she’d agree.

“I think it’s disrespectful,” she says. “I think it disrespects his wife.”

Kellyanne is an independent woman, an independent woman stuck between two men who could blow up her day with a tweet.

“Nobody knows who I am because of my husband,” she says. “People know of my husband because of me.”

After our six-mile sojourn, it is late when we get back to their house. George is in his office, eating a bowl of cereal and yawning. He’s too tired for an interview at the moment, he says. He’s never done an interview on his thoughts on Trump, preferring to let the tweets speak for themselves.

Two hours after I leave, he’s awake and online. A tweet from Merriam-Webster has caught his eye, and he presses the retweet button:

Merriam-Webster: ‘Mendacious’ (adj.) - likely to tell lies

‘Mendacity’ (n.) - a lack of honesty or a lie

There's a theory among D.C. Trumpologists that this is all a charade. A way for the Conways to be part of both the Trump White House and the Trump-leery establishment. They live in a part of the city where wealth and influence serve as a cooling balm for the partisan inflammation that has spread elsewhere. In their neighborhood, everybody — Democrat and Republican — belongs to the garden party.

They live across the street from Vernon Jordan, once a top adviser to Bill Clinton, just down the way from Adrienne Arsht, the uber-rich philanthropist and Democratic donor, and next door to a house that until recently belonged to Oleg Deripaska, the Vladimir Putin ally who owned Paul Manafort’s debt. Other than the Russian oligarch, whom they never met, the Conways say they get along with their neighbors swimmingly.

From here it’s easy to imagine, if you’d like, that not much has changed since Trump took office, save for a bump in everyone’s stock portfolio. Mendacity is a vocabulary word, and the border is 1,500 miles away. Here, a husband subtweeting his wife’s boss may seem less an act of moral courage than a juicy gossip item, or possibly a way for the family to hedge its bets. (After all, isn’t this the same George Conway who once — allegedly! — leaked details of the curvature of Bill Clinton’s genitals to the Drudge Report?)

Kellyanne, for her part, told me that part of George’s motivation might be that he’s just playing his favorite “role” of “agitator.”

She, too, is familiar with playing a role. Back before she was the president’s wingwoman — a gut check for his political agenda and messaging — she worked for Ted Cruz during the 2016 campaign. Then, she called on Trump to release his tax returns, called him “vulgar” and “unpresidential.”

Now she’s bound to Trump, both on and off camera. She speaks with the president daily, offering advice both on policy and messaging. She hits the road in her “personal” capacity to stump for candidates and spread the gospel of Trump. She is helping run the administration’s war on opioids, works to maintain relationships with Republicans on the Hill and is one of the only threads from the White House that goes all the way back to the campaign. For a president who fears betrayal, that’s worth a lot.

“I think he looks at her as part of the family,” said Jim McLaughlin, a Republican pollster who knows both the president and Kellyanne.

In Washington, changes in allegiance are nothing new, nor is the art of redirecting any criticism that might follow. Trump loyalists have not changed the fundamental rules of the city — the weapon of shame remains most powerful in the hands of the shameless — but they have redefined the boundaries of play. Some people seem uncomfortable with that, but not Kellyanne. Here’s a conversation from a few days after our walk:

Me: You told me you found [George’s tweets] disrespectful.

Kellyanne: It is disrespectful, it’s a violation of basic decency, certainly, if not marital vows . . . as “a person familiar with their relationship.”

Me: No, we’re on the record here. You can’t say after the fact “as someone familiar.”

Kellyanne: I told you everything about his tweets was off the record.

Me: No, that’s not true. That never happened.

Kellyanne: Well, people do see it this way. People do see it that way, I don’t say I do, but people see it that way.

Me: But I’m saying we never discussed everything about his tweets being off the record. There are certain things you said that I put off the record.

Kellyanne: Fine. I’ve never actually said what I think about it and I won’t say what I think about it, which tells you what I think about it.

It's three days after the house tour, and we're in Ventnor, N.J., just a boardwalk away from Atlantic City, and George is out walking the two Corgis, Skipper and Bonnie.

“I have a dog trainer friend who says when they start pulling, the trick is to turn around quickly and pull in the other direction,” George says, spinning on his ankles and gently yanking the dogs to demonstrate. This has always been George’s way — not just resisting the current of the world, but trying to redirect the stream itself.

We’re outside of George and Kellyanne’s beach house, and I’m drowning in metaphors.

Kellyanne bought this house, back in the late ’90s when she was single and just starting to make good money. She had to renovate it a few years later, after learning it had been built by boatbuilders who didn’t know much about constructing a foundation.

She picked this spot because it felt like home; her mother had been employed at a casino nearby for more than 20 years and still lives in the house where she raised Kellyanne less than an hour away. The beach house also happens to be right down the road from Trump’s old Taj Mahal resort and casino.

“It was wildly popular,” says Kellyanne.

“It went bankrupt twice,” says George.

George isn’t from around here. He grew up in Massachusetts, a contrarian since, as a child, he decided to root for the Yankees instead of the Red Sox. By the time he was 30 he was a hotshot lawyer, a partner at a big-time law firm in New York City. While there, George fell into a clutch of Republicans secretly working behind the scenes to lay the groundwork for Bill Clinton’s impeachment. It wasn’t his day job, just a hobby, but one that got him a lot of attention. One of his friends from that time, Ann Coulter, introduced him to Kellyanne.

George would, in turn, introduce Kellyanne to Donald Trump.

Shortly after getting married in 2001, Kellyanne and George moved into an apartment in Manhattan’s Trump World Tower. There, George made an impression on the future president at a condo board meeting where he argued against removing Trump’s name from the building. The speech earned George an offer to join the condo board, which he declined but passed on to his wife, who accepted.

“Knowing what I know now,” George told me later, back in Washington, “I would have said no, and never mentioned it when I got home.”

Nevertheless, George liked Trump well enough for a time that he considered joining his administration with a top role in the Justice Department. But his pre-nomination process coincided with Trump firing FBI Director James B. Comey and the beginning of the Mueller investigation. Friends of George told me he decided he didn’t want to be part of a DOJ that would constantly be at odds with the president.

Instead, George immersed himself in the small fraternity of anti-Trump conservatives. He is now a man without a party: In early March of this year, George changed his affiliation from Republican to “unaffiliated.” He has, according to Politico, offered unsolicited advice to journalists who have written articles critical of the president. And recently, he has been spotted at a semi-secret group of Trump skeptics known as the Meeting of the Concerned, eviscerating his wife’s boss among fellow conservatives who would like to see Trump, and by extension Kellyanne, out of a job.

If he’s being honest, that would make George happy, too.

“If there’s an issue,” George said, “it’s because she’s in that job, for that man.”

His wife may find his gestures of resistance disrespectful of her, but George disagrees. He can redirect criticism as deftly as she can. “Her problem is with her boss,” he says, “not me.”

“If my wife were the counselor to the CEO of Pepsi and I had a problem with her boss, I would simply drink my Coke and keep my mouth shut,” he says. “If the president were simply mediocre or even bad, I’d have nothing to say. This is much different.”

George is clearly worried about Kellyanne and her reputation, just as Kellyanne told me she is worried about George’s. But that doesn’t mean everything has changed. He’s still proud of what she’s been able to accomplish, he says. And when he looks at that picture from election night, he’s still reminded of the sheer elation he felt.

“I’m just saddened by how things turned out,” he says.

On their last full day together on the beach, George is in the kitchen with his wife by his side. Their four kids (Claudia and George, Jr., 13-year-old twins; Charlotte, 10; Vanessa, 8) are running around with their friends before the family takes a trip to the water park. Kellyanne has left her work phone in another room, and so has George. She’s more than her job, she says; he’s more than his tweets.

Tomorrow this house will be set up for “Face the Nation,” after which Kellyanne will be swarmed on the street by fans while George watches the second half of the show — the part where pundits analyze his wife’s interview — alone in the kitchen. But for now, things feel almost like they used to be. This is what George misses at times, his simpler life.

He starts to open up about his tweets. Kellyanne is cutting vegetables 10 feet away with a longtime friend. The women start singing “The Glory of Love,” a central song in the weepy movie “Beaches,” which also took place on the Jersey Shore and is about two childhood best friends.

“It’s an outlet, that keeps it a small part of my life,” George says of his tweeting.

You’ve got to win a little, lose a little, yes, and always have the blues a little.

“It’s a quick easy way to express myself, that keeps me from making it a bigger part of my life,” he says.

You’ve got to give a little, take a little, and let your poor heart break a little.

“I think I’m actually holding back a little,” he says. “I think the reason why is obvious.”

Kellyanne is now singing loudly into a cucumber, completely drowning out George, who has stopped talking and just looks on.

That’s the story of, that’s the glory of love.

twitter:

RVAwonk twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 20:44:12 BREAKING: Sarah Sanders says Trump admin is also reviewing the possibility of revoking security clearances of James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, & Lisa Page.This is sick. And will harm national security. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 00:22 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

twitter:

RVAwonk twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 20:44:12 BREAKING: Sarah Sanders says Trump admin is also reviewing the possibility of revoking security clearances of James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, & Lisa Page.This is sick. And will harm national security. reageer retweet

Iedereen is corrupt, behalve Donnie.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 00:22 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

twitter:

RVAwonk twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 20:44:12 BREAKING: Sarah Sanders says Trump admin is also reviewing the possibility of revoking security clearances of James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, & Lisa Page.This is sick. And will harm national security. reageer retweet

Iedereen is corrupt, behalve Donnie.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 00:33 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Je weet dat het onzin is, want bv Comey had klaarblijkelijk al lang geen clearance meer. https://slate.com/news-an(...)at-doesnt-exist.html

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 08:17 schreef vipergts het volgende:
Waarom bepalen de veiligheidsdiensten dat niet zelf dan als het zo schadelijk is voor de nationale veiligheid. Kan toch niet iemand zijn clearance terug te geven of zit Trump een hele dag een lijst te checken.

twitter:

MichaelAvenatti twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 08:18:33 There are approx 56 Guatemalan children in Houston and McAllen (in custody) who were separated from their parents at the border. We are working on gaining their release to me so that I can fly them home ASAP to their parents. This mess needs to be cleaned-up NOW. #Basta reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 08:37 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Dit bedenkt trump niet.
Hier zit een kwade genius achter, die dit influistert irl of telefonisch.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 08:37 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Dit bedenkt trump niet.
Hier zit een kwade genius achter, die dit influistert irl of telefonisch.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 00:12 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Best interessante inkijk in het huwelijk van de Conways, waar ze denk ik verre van het enige koppel zijn die diametraal tegenover elkaar staan wat dit betreft ... alleen doorgaans andersom.

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 08:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trump Revokes Ex-CIA Director John Brennan’s Security Clearance

Trump zelf geeft al aan dat het is wegens de Russia-probe. Schoolvoorbeeldje van machtsmisbruik en obstructie.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 09:41 schreef speknek het volgende:

[..]

Machtsmisbruik en kinderachtig zeker, maar obstructie zie ik niet zo. Iemand die misschien betrokken was bij het onderzoek maar nu niet meer zijn bevoegdheden afnemen kun je met wat goede wil zelfs spinnen als de eerlijke rechtsgang bevorderen.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 09:46 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Brennan is toch getuige?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 09:51 schreef speknek het volgende:

[..]

Dat maakt het alleen maar sterker. Hij zou getuige moeten zijn van wat hij wist, niet wat hij kan opzoeken.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 10:23 schreef Re het volgende:
het gaat toch ook meer om advise/consultancy bij belangrijke national security issues zodat ze gebriefed kunnen worden over de situatie etc?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 00:33 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Je weet dat het onzin is, want bv Comey had klaarblijkelijk al lang geen clearance meer. https://slate.com/news-an(...)at-doesnt-exist.html

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 08:37 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Dit bedenkt trump niet.
Hier zit een kwade genius achter, die dit influistert irl of telefonisch.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 11:23 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Dat maakt geen verschil waar zou een veiligheidsdienst of een senaatscommissie zijn eigen glazen in gooien.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 11:47 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Omdat ik het iq van trump laag inschat, ondanks zijn bluf- en streetwise gedrag in het verleden, vermoed ik zo maar dat hij “gewoon” als een puppet handelt.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 10:23 schreef Re het volgende:
het gaat toch ook meer om advise/consultancy bij belangrijke national security issues zodat ze gebriefed kunnen worden over de situatie etc?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:16 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Is het niet meer een privilege wat je krijgt als ex directeur zodat je een beetje op de hoogte blijft. Je kunt mij niet wijsmaken dat de huidige directeur zijn voorganger belt voor advies. Ze hebben analisten en adviseurs zat. En het komt vrij zwak over

quote:

In 1787, the year the Constitution was adopted, Thomas Jefferson famously wrote to a friend, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”

That’s how he felt before he became president, anyway. Twenty years later, after enduring the oversight of the press from inside the White House, he was less sure of its value. “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper,” he wrote. “Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”

Jefferson’s discomfort was, and remains, understandable. Reporting the news in an open society is an enterprise laced with conflict. His discomfort also illustrates the need for the right he helped enshrine. As the founders believed from their own experience, a well-informed public is best equipped to root out corruption and, over the long haul, promote liberty and justice.

“Public discussion is a political duty,” the Supreme Court said in 1964. That discussion must be “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open,” and “may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”

In 2018, some of the most damaging attacks are coming from government officials. Criticizing the news media — for underplaying or overplaying stories, for getting something wrong — is entirely right. News reporters and editors are human, and make mistakes. Correcting them is core to our job. But insisting that truths you don’t like are “fake news” is dangerous to the lifeblood of democracy. And calling journalists the “enemy of the people” is dangerous, period.

These attacks on the press are particularly threatening to journalists in nations with a less secure rule of law and to smaller publications in the United States, already buffeted by the industry’s economic crisis. And yet the journalists at those papers continue to do the hard work of asking questions and telling the stories that you otherwise wouldn’t hear. Consider The San Luis Obispo Tribune, which wrote about the death of a jail inmate who was restrained for 46 hours. The account forced the county to change how it treats mentally ill prisoners.

Answering a call last week from The Boston Globe, The Times is joining hundreds of newspapers, from large metro-area dailies to small local weeklies, to remind readers of the value of America’s free press. These editorials, some of which we’ve excerpted, together affirm a fundamental American institution.

If you haven’t already, please subscribe to your local papers. Praise them when you think they’ve done a good job and criticize them when you think they could do better. We’re all in this together.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:16 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Is het niet meer een privilege wat je krijgt als ex directeur zodat je een beetje op de hoogte blijft. Je kunt mij niet wijsmaken dat de huidige directeur zijn voorganger belt voor advies. Ze hebben analisten en adviseurs zat. En het komt vrij zwak over

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:16 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Is het niet meer een privilege wat je krijgt als ex directeur zodat je een beetje op de hoogte blijft. Je kunt mij niet wijsmaken dat de huidige directeur zijn voorganger belt voor advies. Ze hebben analisten en adviseurs zat. En het komt vrij zwak over

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:18 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Hoezo komt het zwak over als je dat doet?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:33 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

In zo'n functie krijg je te maken met een situaties die al helemaal geanalyseerd zijn en waarschijnlijk worden je een aantal opties voorgelegd en wordt je geacht een beslissing te nemen. Als je daarna nog je voorganger moet consulteren doen of je werknemers iets niet goed omdat de situatie onduidelijk is of je zit op de verkeerde plek

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:29 schreef RM-rf het volgende:

[..]

bij inlichtingendiensten is juist dat erg gebruikelijk en ook wenselijk....

juist vanwege de enorme aantallen gevoeligheden, specifieke insider-kennis, know-how en ervaring die juist niet zomaar vervangen kan worden door een nieuw blik adviseurs in te zetten vanuit 'politieke' overwegingen...

Juist in de inlichtingendienst-business is het een erg gevaarlijk idee als de politiek tezeer 'sturend' gaat optreden en vanuit politieke wenselijkheid gaat bepalen dat de personen aan de basis vooral enkel bepaalde politiek wenselijke informatie en inlichtingen opzoeken

Bedenk ook dat het juist ook voor de nu werkenden generatie inlichtingendienst-medewerkers een erg onprettig idee kan zijn dat er een nieuwe regering na deze kan komen die vervolgens hen als 'vijand' zal gaan zien en opeens bepaalde veiligeids-clearances die ze hebben op basis van een 'vertrouwen' en 'betrouwbaarheid' gaat intrekken...

De volgende stap zou dan zijn dat een volgende regering ook deze inlichtingendienst-medewerkers gaat vervolgen... wat destreus kan zijn voor de motivatie waarop juist ook de huidige generatie werkt

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:44 schreef vipergts het volgende:
Die directeur neemt alleen beslissingen die zit niet al die info te vergaren. Iemand levert die info aan de diecteur van een veiligheidsdienst en heeft dus dezelfde knowhow e.d.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:40 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Jij bent toevallig ook hoofd van een enorme inlichtingendienst dat je precies weet hoe dat werkt?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:51 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Nee jij wel? het verbaasd me gewoon dat het zo werkt, ik kan me gewoon niet voorstellen dat in die hoge functies het zo werkt. Het lijkt mij aannemelijker dat je die clearance houdt als bedankje voor bewezen diensten.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:52 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Dat lijkt me helemaal onzinnig, pensionado's toegang geven tot supergeheime informatie zonder dat het direct een functie heeft.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:47 schreef RM-rf het volgende:

[..]

Die directeur heeft wel degelijk een van het beste overzicht over lopende operaties... hij moet er uiteindelijk verslag over brengen en heel goed in de gaten houden welke risico's er bestaan, zeker ook politieke gevoeligheden.

CIA-drecteuren en ook FBI directeuren zijn ongelooflijk belangijke schakels in de aansturing van deze overheidsorganiaties en het contact tussen de politiek en de operationele laag.

Die clearance an sich is zelf niet belangrijk, het is niet zo dat ex-directeuren de hele tijd classified informatie gaan opvragen, maar het kan wel voor adviserende taken wenselijk zijn dat er niet het probleem bestaat dat er in contact met hen opgepast moet worden welke informatie wel of niet besproken mag worden (overigens, het doorgeven, of onzorgvuldige omgang ermee blijft strafbaar, ook voor ex-directeuren; maar geacht mag worden dat juist zij dat goed weten, vaak beter dan de politici zelf)...

Wél heel schadeljk is het signaal dat de politieke bestuurslaag aan de operationele laag nu geeft door het vanuit (partij-)politieke overwegingen intrekken van clearances van ex-medewerkers.

quote:

When Alexander Bortnikov, the head of Russia’s internal security service, told me during an early August 2016 phone call that Russia wasn’t interfering in our presidential election, I knew he was lying. Over the previous several years I had grown weary of Mr. Bortnikov’s denials of Russia’s perfidy — about its mistreatment of American diplomats and citizens in Moscow, its repeated failure to adhere to cease-fire agreements in Syria and its paramilitary intervention in eastern Ukraine, to name just a few issues.

When I warned Mr. Bortnikov that Russian interference in our election was intolerable and would roil United States-Russia relations for many years, he denied Russian involvement in any election, in America or elsewhere, with a feigned sincerity that I had heard many times before. President Vladimir Putin of Russia reiterated those denials numerous times over the past two years, often to Donald Trump’s seeming approval.

Russian denials are, in a word, hogwash.

Before, during and after its now infamous meddling in our last presidential election, Russia practiced the art of shaping political events abroad through its well-honed active measures program, which employs an array of technical capabilities, information operations and old-fashioned human intelligence spycraft. Electoral politics in Western democracies presents an especially inviting target, as a variety of politicians, political parties, media outlets, think tanks and influencers are readily manipulated, wittingly and unwittingly, or even bought outright by Russian intelligence operatives. The very freedoms and liberties that liberal Western democracies cherish and that autocracies fear have been exploited by Russian intelligence services not only to collect sensitive information but also to distribute propaganda and disinformation, increasingly via the growing number of social media platforms.

Having worked closely with the F.B.I. over many years on counterintelligence investigations, I was well aware of Russia’s ability to work surreptitiously within the United States, cultivating relationships with individuals who wield actual or potential power. Like Mr. Bortnikov, these Russian operatives and agents are well trained in the art of deception. They troll political, business and cultural waters in search of gullible or unprincipled individuals who become pliant in the hands of their Russian puppet masters. Too often, those puppets are found.

In my many conversations with James Comey, the F.B.I. director, in the summer of 2016, we talked about the potential for American citizens, involved in partisan politics or not, to be pawns in Russian hands. We knew that Russian intelligence services would do all they could to achieve their objectives, which the United States intelligence community publicly assessed a few short months later were to undermine public faith in the American democratic process, harm the electability of the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, and show preference for Mr. Trump. We also publicly assessed that Mr. Putin’s intelligence services were following his orders. Director Comey and I, along with the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael Rogers, pledged that our agencies would share, as appropriate, whatever information was collected, especially considering the proven ability of Russian intelligence services to suborn United States citizens.

The already challenging work of the American intelligence and law enforcement communities was made more difficult in late July 2016, however, when Mr. Trump, then a presidential candidate, publicly called upon Russia to find the missing emails of Mrs. Clinton. By issuing such a statement, Mr. Trump was not only encouraging a foreign nation to collect intelligence against a United States citizen, but also openly authorizing his followers to work with our primary global adversary against his political opponent.

Such a public clarion call certainly makes one wonder what Mr. Trump privately encouraged his advisers to do — and what they actually did — to win the election. While I had deep insight into Russian activities during the 2016 election, I now am aware — thanks to the reporting of an open and free press — of many more of the highly suspicious dalliances of some American citizens with people affiliated with the Russian intelligence services.

Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are, in a word, hogwash.

The only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminally liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy, and how many members of “Trump Incorporated” attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets. A jury is about to deliberate bank and tax fraud charges against one of those people, Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman. And the campaign’s former deputy chairman, Rick Gates, has pleaded guilty to financial fraud and lying to investigators.

Mr. Trump clearly has become more desperate to protect himself and those close to him, which is why he made the politically motivated decision to revoke my security clearance in an attempt to scare into silence others who might dare to challenge him. Now more than ever, it is critically important that the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his team of investigators be allowed to complete their work without interference — from Mr. Trump or anyone else — so that all Americans can get the answers they so rightly deserve.

John O. Brennan was director of the Central Intelligence Agency from March 2013 to January 2017.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 12:52 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Dat lijkt me helemaal onzinnig, pensionado's toegang geven tot supergeheime informatie zonder dat het direct een functie heeft.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 13:07 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Kijk nu komen we ergens in dit geval ga ik er van uit dat iemand in die functie zijn taken netjes heeft over gedragen aan zijn opvolger.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 13:14 schreef RM-rf het volgende:

[..]

_als_ je uit kunt gaan van een perfecte theoretische omstandigheid waar alle kennis en know-how netjes overdragen is geworden en dat ook echt 100% mogelijk zou zijn...
Maar in de realiteit gaat het juist daarin vaak fout, of is dat zelfs domweg niet mogelijk en raakt ook altijd mogelijk informatie verloren bij een wisseling van personeel.
juist daarom heeft het veel nut om bij oude ex-medewerkers eenvoudig navraag te kunnen doen en soms ook lopende zaken te _mogen_ bespreken...

het intrekken van een clearance maakt juist dat totaal onmogelijk...
Vanaf dat moment _mag_ men niet meer informatie uit lopende operaties delen.

Je moet dat zien als een situatie waarin het 'verboden' is met een ex-medewerker inhoudelijk te spreken over lopende zaken.
dat is natuurlijk gewoon onwenselijk, zolang er verder geen werkelijke duidelijke reden zijn waarom iemand opeens niet meer te vertrouwen zou zijn.

Het is natuurljk onjuist om een voorstelling te hebben dat het gegeven dat die mensen een clearance behouden, ook zou betekenen dat ze alle ins-en-outs van lopende operaties actief zelf mogen opvragen of er toegang toe hebben...
dat is niet het geval, ze kunnen er enkel van horen als iemand uit die lopende informatie ook daadwerkelijk er nu in ziet hen in te schakelen en die specifieke informatie deelt

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 13:24 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Weet je dan toevallig ook waar in dit geval de cia niet zelf bepaald wie clearance krijgt en wie niet, want zo als ik het begrijpt nomineert een president iemand en bepaald de senaat. Waarom bepaald de senaat dan niet of hij zijn v clearance houdt zijn die lui echt zo kinderachtig dat ze niet tegen een kritische tweet kunnen van iemand die zo ooit zelf benoemd hebben.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 13:24 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Weet je dan toevallig ook waar in dit geval de cia niet zelf bepaald wie clearance krijgt en wie niet, want zo als ik het begrijpt nomineert een president iemand en bepaald de senaat. Waarom bepaald de senaat dan niet of hij zijn v clearance houdt zijn die lui echt zo kinderachtig dat ze niet tegen een kritische tweet kunnen van iemand die zo ooit zelf benoemd hebben.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 13:54 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Je geeft het antwoord zelf al. Security clearance word niet door de Senaat gegeven maar door de executive, overigens en laat dat nu Trump zijn, een man die nog nooit betrapt is op een vermogen om kritiek te kunnen incasseren.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 14:50:44 THE FAKE NEWS MEDIA IS THE OPPOSITION PARTY. It is very bad for our Great Country....BUT WE ARE WINNING! reageer retweet

twitter:

BloombergTV twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 15:33:39 Stocks jump on signs China's tired of losing the trade war https://t.co/9YICjC8PAL reageer retweet

quote:

In the time since the election, a little-known Trump campaign staffer named Daniel Gelbinovich reached out to a number of Washington lobbyists with an eyebrow-raising ask: to shield a Putin ally from U.S. sanctions.

Two lobbyists—speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the matter—told The Daily Beast that Gelbinovich approached them and told them he was trying to help Roman Abramovich, a Russian oligarch worth more than $11 billion, find a lobbyist to help keep him from being added to the Treasury Department’s sanctions list.

Gelbinovich confirmed this reporting.

“I approached the lobbyists on behalf of a private equity firm that requested outreach for this type of work,” he said in an email to The Daily Beast. “The firm claimed that this outreach was on behalf of the individual you mentioned. I do not have a direct connection to Mr. Abramovich myself.”

SPOILER

Gelbinovich’s claims to have worked on behalf of Abramovich, if true, are another piece of the web of connections between Trump World and powerful Russians. And that web is already thick: Besides President Trump’s much-vaunted personal friendliness with Russian President Vladimir Putin himself, Trump and his allies have a long history of doing business with Russian power players. His daughter is longtime friends with Abramovich’s former partner; his commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, invested in a shipping firm linked to Putin’s judo partner, who is under U.S. sanctions, according to The New York Times; and Trump himself teamed up with oligarch Aras Agalarov to put on the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013.

The revelation of Gelbinovich’s claim to have worked on behalf of Abramovich also comes as a jury begins deliberations on the fate of another Trump campaign alum, Paul Manafort—who faces criminal charges related to his work for a Putin ally in Ukraine.

Evelyn Farkas, an Atlantic Council senior fellow, said the Gelbinovich effort highlights the growing consternation in Moscow about U.S. sanctions.

“That just tells you how much nervousness there is in Russia about being put on the sanctions list,” said Farkas, who worked on Russia matters at the Pentagon during the Obama administration. “The thing is, if he’s put on the U.S. sanctions list, then he’s in effect—because we do everything still in close coordination with the EU—then he’ll be put on the EU sanctions list, which is the bigger impact on him because of the fact that he owns property in the U.K., which is still in the EU.”

Gelbinovich was a low-level staffer on the Trump campaign, according to campaign sources, frequently booking travel for senior staff. He was on the campaign in its very early days. A picture published by the Daily Mail on Aug. 27, 2015, shows him sitting alone at a long, bare table in Trump campaign headquarters, cradling a phone and flanked by “Trump Make America Great Again!” signs.

After the campaign, he did a stint at the lobbying firm Williams & Jensen, according to a public lobbying disclosure filing, working for Coca-Cola. Gelbinovich told The Daily Beast he is now self-employed and consulting, and that his work regarding Abramovich had nothing to do with Williams & Jensen.

Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a former Russian magnate who spent years in prison and is now a Kremlin critic, told Bloomberg that Abramovich is a close ally of Putin.

“There’s no oligarch among those still accepted in the West who’s closer and more trusted by Putin than Abramovich,” he said.

A May 2018 story in The Independent described Abramovich as “very close to the Kremlin” but “not quite in Vladimir Putin’s inner circle.” And Luke Harding wrote in the Guardian that Abramovich was one of Putin’s early boosters, recommending that Boris Yeltsin bring him on.

In response to The Daily Beast’s queries, John Mann, a spokesperson for Abramovich, said the oligarch did not sign off on any outreach to D.C. lobbyists.

“At no time has Mr. Abramovich, or anyone authorized to act on his behalf, engaged any individual or company to lobby on his behalf in the United States,” he said in an email to The Daily Beast. “We have instructed our attorneys to draft a cease-and-desist letter regarding the representations reportedly made by Mr. Gelbinovich, whom we had never heard of before today.”

Gelbinovich, for his part, claimed that none of the lobbyists he contacted agreed to represent Abramovich.

But Gelbinovich is not the only Trump associate to claim an affiliation with the Russian oligarch. Ivanka Trump has been friends with Dasha Zhukova, who has two children with Abramovich, for more than a decade, according to Bloomberg. Zhukova and Abramovich announced they would split in August 2017. The president’s daughter has posted multiple pictures with Zhukova on her Instagram. Bloomberg also noted that Jared Kushner and Abramovich have had several social encounters, which the president’s son-in-law revealed when applying for a security clearance.

Despite his powerful social circle, Abramovich has faced legal challenges this past year. The BBC reported in June that he withdrew his application for a visa to the U.K. after his investor visa expired in May. The BBC pointed to exacerbated diplomatic tensions between the U.K. and Russia over the chemical weapon attack on retired Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia as a possible explanation for Abramovich’s visa troubles. In the wake of his visa troubles, Abramovich took up Israeli citizenship, according to the Guardian.

Some of Putin’s oligarch allies have been iced out of the American financial system under the Trump administration as the Treasury Department has implemented sanctions retaliating against the Kremlin for meddling in the 2016 presidential election. In April of this year, Treasury announced a new round of sanctions targeting Russian entities and oligarchs, including Oleg Deripaska, the Putin ally who put millions into the pocket of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Pushing back against these sanctions has been a key focus of Russian foreign policy for years. When Kremlin-linked Russians met with Trump campaign bosses at Trump Tower in June 2016, participants claimed the group just discussed adoptions—likely Putin’s decision to bar Americans from adopting Russian children, a move retaliating against American sanctions.

And when alleged Russian operative Maria Butina questioned then-candidate Trump on July 22, 2015, she asked him about sanctions.

“I know Putin, and I’ll tell you what, we’ll get along with Putin,” Trump told her. “I would get along very nicely with Putin, I mean, where we have the strength. I don’t think you’d need the sanctions. I think we would get along very, very well.”

The sanctions list hasn’t just survived the Trump administration; it’s grown. And it’s generated plenty of potential leads for Trump allies like Gelbinovich looking to cash in on their influence in Washington.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 15:38 schreef Nintex het volgende:
T R U M P wint de trade war met China.

twitter:

BloombergTV twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 15:33:39 Stocks jump on signs China's tired of losing the trade war https://t.co/9YICjC8PAL reageer retweet

Eind deze maand komen ze naar Washington voor een 'deal'.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 15:53 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Hulde dat Trump de Chinezen zo ver heeft gekregen dat ze een deal willen maken. Maar zoals hierboven al wordt opgemerkt: is inmiddels al duidelijk wat Trump precies wil?

twitter:

AP twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 15:57:15 BREAKING: Publicist for Aretha Franklin says the Queen of Soul died Thursday at her home in Detroit. reageer retweet

Aretha Franklin: Obama Inauguration Day Sings "My Country Tis Of Thee"

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 16:27 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

AP twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 15:57:15 BREAKING: Publicist for Aretha Franklin says the Queen of Soul died Thursday at her home in Detroit. reageer retweet

Aretha Franklin: Obama Inauguration Day Sings "My Country Tis Of Thee"

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 14:52 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 14:50:44 THE FAKE NEWS MEDIA IS THE OPPOSITION PARTY. It is very bad for our Great Country....BUT WE ARE WINNING! reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 16:46 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Ik snap echt niet dat collega's hier niet ingrijpen. Dit wil je juist niet in je land.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 16:27 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

AP twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 15:57:15 BREAKING: Publicist for Aretha Franklin says the Queen of Soul died Thursday at her home in Detroit. reageer retweet

Aretha Franklin: Obama Inauguration Day Sings "My Country Tis Of Thee"

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 17:31 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Ik ben benieuwd of Trump iets zal zeggen of tweeten.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 17:36:26 The Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin, is dead. She was a great woman, with a wonderful gift from God, her voice. She will be missed! reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 18:48 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
De fivethirtyeight House tracker is online, district per district een voorspelling en allerlei interessante grafiekjes. Ik zou zeker even een kijkje nemen: https://projects.fivethir(...)tion-forecast/house/.

Huidige stand: D's 75.4% kans op een meerderheid, R's 24.6%.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 18:39 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 19:28 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Je zou kunnen wijzen op het verschil in klasse tussen de twee statements, maar what's the fucking point. De man heeft onlangs één van z'n onderdanen een hond genoemd. De verwachtingen zijn niet meer hoog.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 19:35 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:
Omarosa blijkt toch echt één van Trumps slechtere keuzes te zijn geweest (joh!). Nu heeft ze weer een tape vrijgegeven waarop Lara Trump (de vrouw van de vergeten zoon) haar inderdaad 15k per maand aanbiedt na haar ontslag uit het WH.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p(...)er-15k-month-n901306

Waarom zou je een hond 15k per maand betalen?

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 19:35 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:
Omarosa blijkt toch echt één van Trumps slechtere keuzes te zijn geweest (joh!). Nu heeft ze weer een tape vrijgegeven waarop Lara Trump (de vrouw van de vergeten zoon) haar inderdaad 15k per maand aanbiedt na haar ontslag uit het WH.

https://www.nbcnews.com/p(...)er-15k-month-n901306

Waarom zou je een hond 15k per maand betalen?

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 19:55:26 Here's the video of Trump saying that Aretha Franklin "worked for me on numerous occasions. She was terrific." Doesn't seem like the W.H. has clairified yet what he meant. (via Yahoo) https://t.co/LErBeAQ7bw reageer retweet

twitter:

JakeBGibson twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 16:22:52 Light moment in Manafort Trial: After Judge Ellis directed jury to begin deliberations he said “Mr. Trump are you here?” Audible gasp in courtroom, heads spun to see prosecutor Jim Trump present for next case, no relation to the president. Even Paul Manafort laughed... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 20:27 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

JakeBGibson twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 16:22:52 Light moment in Manafort Trial: After Judge Ellis directed jury to begin deliberations he said “Mr. Trump are you here?” Audible gasp in courtroom, heads spun to see prosecutor Jim Trump present for next case, no relation to the president. Even Paul Manafort laughed... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 21:14 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Die 538 forecast is wel echt een prachtig staaltje werk en dan nog heb je lui die zeggen dat ze het fout hadden in 2016... als parels voor de zwijnen.

Ben wel benieuwd naar hoe dit samenhangt met de kansen in de senaatsrace... ongetwijfeld zijn ze vrij sterk gecorreleerd.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 21:29 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Eigenlijk niet. De kans op controle van de Senaat zou ik eerder tegenovergesteld inschatten.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 21:32 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Het meest waarschijnlijke scenario is gedeelde controle van het Congres, de Dems het Huis, GOP de Senaat.

twitter:

NateSilver538 twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 01:18:13 A fun forecasting factoid is that if you forecast the Democrats to win the House and Republicans to win the Senate, you're probably going to be wrong on at least one of those forecasts. On the bright side, it's quite unlikely that you'll be wrong about both. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 21:32 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Wat Monolith zegt inderdaad.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 21:34 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Wat bedoelde je dan precies? Heb ik je verkeerd begrepen.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 21:40:01 Bill McRaven, the ret. U.S. Navy admiral who oversaw operation that killed Osama bin Laden, writes that he would "consider it an honor" for Trump to revoke his security clearance in solidarity with John Brennan. https://t.co/srMfWpilC5 reageer retweet

quote:

Dear Mr. President:

Former CIA director John Brennan, whose security clearance you revoked on Wednesday, is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him.

Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.

Like most Americans, I had hoped that when you became president, you would rise to the occasion and become the leader this great nation needs.

A good leader tries to embody the best qualities of his or her organization. A good leader sets the example for others to follow. A good leader always puts the welfare of others before himself or herself.

Your leadership, however, has shown little of these qualities. Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.

If you think for a moment that your McCarthy-era tactics will suppress the voices of criticism, you are sadly mistaken. The criticism will continue until you become the leader we prayed you would be.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 23:25 schreef Nintex het volgende:
De deep state roert zich. Zouden ze een coup beramen?

quote:

Paul Manafort's jurors asked if the judge could "redefine" for them "reasonable doubt."
They also asked two questions related to Manafort's tax filing and foreign bank account disclosure charges.

https://twitter.com/ShimonPro/status/1030201953027014657?s=19

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 23:30:00 Omarosa's book publisher to the Trump campaign: "My clients will not be intimidated by hollow legal threats and have proceeded with publication of the Book as schedule."https://t.co/ILIgWtBfAI reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 23:40:02 "Your client does not have a viable legal claim merely because unspecified truthful statements in the Book may embarrass the president or his associates. At base, your letter is nothing more than an obvious attempt to silence legitimate criticism of the president." https://t.co/fvwTH0a0bH reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 23:31 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

nowthisnews twitterde op woensdag 15-08-2018 om 22:48:00 Fox News tried coming after Denmark's social safety net. This Danish politician's retort was legendary. https://t.co/VLh1Gc4umg reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:04 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

4 betreffende vragen

The jury has proposed these 4 questions:
Q: Is one required to file an FBAR if they own less than 50% of the company and no signatory authority?
Q: Define "shelf company"?
Q: Can you redefine reasonable doubt?
Q: Can the exhibit list be amended to include the indictment?

https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1030202285681508352?s=20

twitter:

ComfortablySmug twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 23:54:17 "No one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens but its lowest ones." - Nelson Mandela #FreePaulManafort https://t.co/NbtdzyLwL5 reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:12 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Bizar .. redefine "reasonable doubt"... waarom niet define? Waarom redefine?

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 23:48:58 I can almost certainly tell you what the first question is about: there's one juror who's nervous about their role, and s/he has asked the foreperson to ask the judge for help/clarification. Don't assume this was an "all-jury" question. I've seen this sort of thing happen before. https://t.co/7oMUs2lbuT reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 16-08-2018 om 23:53:58 This hasn't been my experience. Jurors are responsible, generally speaking--they have conversations about "reasonable doubt" and typically some disagreement will arise, or confusion, between two (or more) jurors' definitions. So they ask the judge to settle it/erase any confusion. https://t.co/f7H6XaDCNq reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:31 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Gezien de vier vragen lijkt me de jury niet al te slim.

Zou wel een plot twist zijn als Manafort door een paar #MAGA fans vrij komt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:40 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Waarom gebruik je daar de emoticon bij??

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:40 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Waarom gebruik je daar de emoticon bij??

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:48 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Die man hoort niet in het gevang die hoort een medaille te krijgen.

quote:

Op donderdag 16 augustus 2018 23:25 schreef Nintex het volgende:
De deep state roert zich. Zouden ze een coup beramen?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:54 schreef monkyyy het volgende:
Een coup in Amerika, hoe zie je dat concreet voor je?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:01 schreef Treinhomo het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:08 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Hij had de eed liever op The Art of the Deal willen afleggen maar dat mocht niet.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:09 schreef Treinhomo het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:14 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Fake news?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:01 schreef Treinhomo het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:20 schreef monkyyy het volgende:


Bij een coup denk ik aan tanks die door de straten rijden en de staatsleider in z'n ondergoed in een cel gooit. Ik zie dat de "deepstate" (wie/wat dat ook mag zijn) niet voor elkaar krijgen. Dus ik ben wel benieuwd wat voor onheilspellende dingen nintex in het verschiet ziet.

Trump Wants To Have A Big Military Parade

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:23 schreef Treinhomo het volgende:

[..]

Trump Wants To Have A Big Military Parade

twitter:

NBCNews twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 03:55:05 Amid reports Thursday of soaring costs, Pentagon announces that Defense Dept. and White House are postponing President Trump's planned military parade from Nov. 2018 to sometime in 2019. https://t.co/5xS5SLJxvk reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:54 schreef Nintex het volgende:

Het feit dat Brennan et al nog gewoon alles kunnen inzien buiten functie is natuurlijk waanzin.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 00:45:00 Trump's speeches feature unidentified mystery allies that he uses to back his policies.The White House won't identify the people Trump describes in remarks."When he doesn’t have real anecdotes, it appears that he finds his own." https://t.co/qcr3cp9ijw reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 01:15:13 Major Trump donors are bothered that the campaign may have been used as a slush fund to pay fired or troublesome employees."It's diverting donor money that could be used to wage the midterm election battle ... instead, it's an elongated hush payment." https://t.co/zoVHLqe21c reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 02:35:05 The Omarosa tapes, according to NYT, have rattled the W.H. in a way few things other than Mueller's investigation have.Trump's aides have been concerned that they'll make appearances on other tapes, of which Omarosa is believed to have as many as 200.https://t.co/cwg39zoZdi reageer retweet

Erin Burnett details ‘absurd’ offer from Trump's family to Omarosa

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 01:54 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Mjah eerder een soft coup

De militaire types en intelligence mensen voeren de druk op, waardoor het leger niet meer loyaal is aan de president, maar aan een aantal dissidenten. Waarna er een soort van grand bargain / verzoening nodig is die het leger en de intelligence services een nog grotere vinger in de pap geven.

Het feit dat Brennan et al nog gewoon alles kunnen inzien buiten functie is natuurlijk waanzin. Dat is precies hoe het met Flynn mis is gelopen. Die had ook nog steeds zijn security clearance.

quote:

Special counsel Robert Mueller has given lawyers for ex-Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort "well over 1000 proposed exhibits," or pieces of evidence, which prosecutors want to show jurors at Manafort's next federal criminal trial in Washington, D.C., a court filing revealed Thursday.

That number of exhibits dwarfs the fewer than 400 pieces of evidence Mueller's team of prosecutors introduced at Manafort's ongoing trial in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia.

Jurors in that case began deliberations Thursday morning. They have yet to reach a verdict on bank fraud and tax crime charges.

Manafort, 69, a longtime Republican consultant, is scheduled to next go on trial Sept. 17 in Washington, where he is accused of money laundering and failing to register as an agent for a foreign government. Charges accusing him of trying to tamper with witnesses were lodged in June, months after the original case was filed.

Both trials are related to the lucrative work Manafort did for a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine, years before he became chairman of Donald Trump's presidential campaign in 2016. Manafort, who was jailed without bond in June after being accused of witness tampering, has pleaded not guilty in both cases.

SPOILER

Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who will preside over the Washington trial, had given Manafort's lawyers and Mueller until next Monday to file a joint pretrial statement. That statement would detail their respective lists of proposed exhibits, list their expert witnesses, give an estimate of how long their respective cases will take to present to the jury, and propose jury instructions.

But in their filing Thursday, Manafort's lawyers asked Jackson to give them another week on that task.

Jackson later Thursday gave them just four extra days — until Aug. 24.

The judge also said in an order that she "encouraged" Mueller "to review the exhibit list closely with an eye towards streamlining the presentation of its case."

Manafort's attorneys had cited how long it will take to review the large volume of exhibits proposed by Mueller, most of which were not part of the Virginia trial.

"Review of these materials will be time-consuming," Manafort's defense team wrote.

"The task simply cannot be accomplished while Mr. Manafort's legal team is engaged in trial before Judge [T.S.] Ellis" in Virginia, they added. "It is unknown when the jury will return a verdict."

Defense lawyers also noted the trial in Virginia "has not allowed" them enough time to confer with Mueller's team about the joint pretrial statement that is due next week.

This is the second time Manafort's team has requested an extension of that deadline. Jackson previously had asked both sides to submit their statement on Aug. 1.

Mueller's office, which declined to comment, has previously expressed irritation with Manafort's team for asking for that extension.

In July, Mueller's team told Jackson that it had given the defense "a roadmap" of its case by divulging all the information deemed necessary for the joint pretrial statement.

"With each submission to the defense, the government asked the defense to alert it to its position, so the government could inform the Court" in time to meet the original deadline, Mueller's prosecutors wrote.

"Not once did Manafort respond, in any way, to any of the government's disclosures," prosecutors said.

Manafort's lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC.

Jackson previously has said she would be opposed to postponing the start of the trial beyond Sept. 17.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 04:23 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

God, ga toch eens heen met dat getroll, je weet dondersgoed dat je onzin aan het uitkramen bent. Het is niet grappig, gevat of edgy.

Ondertussen heeft het Senaat unaniem een resolutie aangenomen waarin staat dat de pers niet de vijand van het volk is. Je zou zeggen dat het belachelijk is dat dat moet gebeuren, maar hey, direct na de editorialbeweging van vandaag kwam er een bommelding binnen bij de Boston Globe. Het is wachten tot de eerste journalist neergeschoten wordt uit naam van Trump.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 00:31 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Gezien de vier vragen lijkt me de jury niet al te slim.

Zou wel een plot twist zijn als Manafort door een paar #MAGA fans vrij komt.

Het is een vrij complexe zaak dus je kunt je afvragen in hoeverre men het hele verhaal van de buitenlandse geldstromen, lobbyen en andere feiten begrepen heeft.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 11:30 schreef Re het volgende:
De weg naar een dictatoriale staat is een grote aanslag (op een krant bijvoorbeeld)... dus die komt er wel ... Niet BNW waardig natuurlijk omdat dat niet past in het plaatje

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 12:50:00 Sens. Feinstein, Leahy, and Durbin claim that documents that are currently "committee confidential" in the Judiciary Committee contain information indicating that SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh misled the Senate during his 2006 nomination hearing. https://t.co/gZns7cBjpJ reageer retweet

SPOILER

A Republican Congressman Is Actually Upset About Obama's Tan Suit

twitter:

jacobsoboroff twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 01:28:50 BREAKING: Trump administration releases latest numbers on migrant kids it separated from parents.This is most detailed data we've seen so far.➡️ 2,654 total kids separated.➡️ 565 *still* separated; 24 are 0-5 year olds.➡️ Parents of 366 *already* deported; 6 are 0-5. https://t.co/c3YAnJzk7R reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 13:44:01 How does a politician, Cuomo, known for pushing people and businesses out of his state, not to mention having the highest taxes in the U.S., survive making the statement, WE’RE NOT GOING TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, IT WAS NEVER THAT GREAT? Which section of the sentence is worse? reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 13:57:56 The local politicians who run Washington, D.C. (poorly) know a windfall when they see it. When asked to give us a price for holding a great celebratory military parade, they wanted a number so ridiculously high that I cancelled it. Never let someone hold you up! I will instead... reageer retweet

SPOILER

Eddie Murphy Gio Jo

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 14:10:05 ....attend the big parade already scheduled at Andrews Air Force Base on a different date, & go to the Paris parade, celebrating the end of the War, on November 11th. Maybe we will do something next year in D.C. when the cost comes WAY DOWN. Now we can buy some more jet fighters! reageer retweet

SPOILER

Never Go Full Retard

quote:

Washington (CNN)Retired Adm. William McRaven, the man who oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden, issued a stunning rebuke of President Donald Trump's decision to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan on Thursday, defending the former spy chief as "one of the finest public servants I have ever known."

In an op-ed published by the Washington Post, McRaven, a former Navy SEAL who led US Joint Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014, not only called Brennan "a man of unparalleled integrity," but volunteered to have his own security clearance revoked in an act of solidarity.
"Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don't know him," McRaven wrote.
In op-ed, Brennan says Trump revoked his security clearance to 'scare into silence' critics
In op-ed, Brennan says Trump revoked his security clearance to 'scare into silence' critics
"Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency," he added.

quote:

According to two people in attendance, Trump then flippantly replied to the Vietnam vet, “Well, I think you just didn’t like the movie,” before finally moving on.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 15:50:00 Ex-acting CIA Dir. Mike Morell on CBS: "The use of a national security tool for political purposes is inappropriate, unprecedented, and dangerous in a democracy ... the risk here is that a number of people will no longer speak out because they'll be afraid of the president." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 15:33 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Raar kereltje, die Trump.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 16:06:13 Wow! Big pushback on Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York for his really dumb statement about America’s lack of greatness. I have already MADE America Great Again, just look at the markets, jobs, military- setting records, and we will do even better. Andrew “chocked” badly, mistake! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 16:17:03 When a politician admits that “We’re not going to make America great again,” there doesn’t seem to be much reason to ever vote for him. This could be a career threatening statement by Andrew Cuomo, with many wanting him to resign-he will get higher ratings than his brother Chris! reageer retweet

twitter:

cspan twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 14:52:01 Kellyanne Conway: "Why is everybody so obsessed with the President of the United States that they can't even begin or finish a sentence without mentioning his name five times. It's kind of weird." https://t.co/S6aTURBiAu reageer retweet

quote:

The Pentagon’s top spokesperson was ostensibly seeking to make peace with the media when she headed down to the building’s press bullpen about three weeks ago for an off-the-record discussion on how to improve relations.

But the meeting quickly grew combative, according to three people who were in the room. When reporters raised issues like vanishing access to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and other top officials, Dana White pushed back by criticizing the accuracy of press corps members’ reporting.

She made clear, according to the reporters present, that she was watching what they wrote and put on-air — with the implication that there would be repercussions for stories she and her staff did not like.

White and the Pentagon’s press operation have already restricted access to briefings, interviews and travel with Mattis. But in recent weeks, several reporters said that they increasingly feel as though individual journalists are being retaliated against for stories they’ve written, losing yet more access. In one case this spring, officials pulled away a reporter’s plum opportunity to embed with U.S. troops overseas following a story they found too critical.

SPOILER

Another example involved the military-news outlet Defense One, which was left out of a media roundtable with the deputy secretary of defense earlier this month to help roll out President Donald Trump’s proposed Space Force. The slight came after a Defense One reporter got an early scoop on plans to set up the new branch, breaking the story before the Pentagon was ready for it to go public.

Kevin Baron, the executive editor of the site, confirmed that none of his reporters were invited to the briefing and said that White had conceded to him in an email that the snub was due to the initial story.

Baron said White apologized for the incident in the email, saying that she was not aware that Defense One had been singled out and that the decision was made unbeknownst to her office’s leadership. The briefing had been organized out of the deputy secretary of defense’s office.

“It seems Defense One was deliberately left out of a briefing in retaliation for our reporting,” Baron said, adding that he had been assured that “we would be included to all future, relevant briefings.”

Baron said he was pleased with how the situation was resolved and that White addressed it with him promptly.

White declined to comment, other than to offer a statement through Pentagon spokesman Charles Summers: “We are guided by the principles of information and committed to ensuring the accessibility of timely and accurate information to the media, the Congress and the American people. And we prioritize diversity of reporting during engagements and travel with Secretary Mattis and all of our senior leaders in the Department of Defense.”

After initially declining to comment further, Summers called back to more forcefully deny any retaliation against reporters, though he said he had not seen the email Baron said White sent him and could not address it.

“There is no retaliation,” Summers said, adding that while some reporters might feel they are invited on fewer foreign trips with Mattis than they were in previous administrations, that was because the department was seeking to include more “regional media and bring non-traditional media.”

“The notion that someone doesn’t have access or someone is shut out, that’s absolutely not accurate,” Summers added.

Still, Pentagon reporters say that the sorts of tactics they’re noticing, coupled with eroding access to top Defense Department officials, make it increasingly difficult to provide information to Americans about the activities of the Defense Department, a huge sector of the Trump administration that controls billions of dollars in spending and oversees U.S. troops at home and abroad.

“There is a climate of punitiveness here if you don’t write what they like,” one reporter said.

Another reporter said: “It’s not unusual for an administration to monitor what reporters are doing and reporters produce. What’s unusual now is it’s being used to evaluate whether we’ll be included in things or invited to things. ... It’s never been so overt.”

White, a political appointee who previously worked for The Heritage Foundation and in Republican politics, has also been accused of retaliating against her own staff: On Tuesday, CNN broke the news that she is being investigated by the Defense Department inspector general for allegedly using staff members to run personal errands, such as picking up dry-cleaning or lunch, and helping her with personal business, including filling out mortgage paperwork. In addition, CNN reported that she is accused of retaliating against staffers who complained by having them transferred.

Reporters say they see similar treatment applied to their colleagues by White and others in her department. Several Pentagon reporters said NBC News’ Courtney Kube has not been invited to multiple briefings and has been left off emails alerting reporters about press opportunities. Kube has written about issues in Mattis’ relationship with President Donald Trump, earning the particular ire of the defense secretary, who derided one of her stories as “fiction” to other reporters.

Reporters who find themselves left out of briefings or excluded from traveling with the press secretary — seemingly with little explanation — have been left to wonder if it was something they said or wrote. For instance, after The New York Times published a story on the death of four American soldiers in Niger — ahead of the official Pentagon report on the subject — there was a background briefing to prepare reporters for the Pentagon’s assessment. Two reporters from other outlets who were in the room told POLITICO that, when they looked around, it struck them as odd that nobody from the Times was present.

Times Washington Bureau Chief Elisabeth Bumiller declined to comment.

“There have been individual cases where people have been told we don’t like your coverage,” one reporter said. “You’ll say to someone innocuously, ‘Are you going to that briefing?’ and that’s how you’ll discover they weren’t invited. You don’t know. You find out by accident you weren’t invited.”

Mattis occasionally strolls into the Pentagon press bullpen to talk with reporters and, when he does, his staff usually sends out an email to give reporters a heads-up — but the message typically does not reach everybody. As a result, reporters have started alerting one another when such a note goes out.

The issues extend beyond briefings. The Washington Post’s Dan Lamothe had a rare opportunity to embed with U.S. Special Forces in Afghanistan in May pulled away after officials objected to an April story he wrote on Afghan commandos, according to reporters familiar with the situation.

The story in question was a straightforward account of how the Afghan military, by increasing its number of elite commando troops, was depleting its conventional army ranks. But officials took issue with the tone and some of the quotes used, the reporters said.

Securing that type of embed with special forces requires intense planning and consideration of risk on both sides, said a reporter from a different outlet, who called it “a hell of a thing to get.” To have the opportunity revoked, the reporter said, “is as egregious as it is unusual.”

Lamothe was able to embed with other units — salvaging the trip he had planned — but he lost out on his front row seat on the elite U.S. forces.

In a statement to POLITICO, Lamothe said: “During a reporting visit in April to cover U.S. troops in Afghanistan, I was offered a rare opportunity to embed with U.S. Special Forces fighting Islamic State militants in Afghanistan. While preparing for that assignment in May, I was told that the Special Forces embed offer was revoked. I traveled back to Afghanistan a short time later, and instead accepted offers to embed with the Army’s new security force adviser brigade and U.S. military advisers who train the Afghan air force. I stand by my reporting, and thank the units that allowed me to spend time alongside them.”

It's not clear whether that decision was made by Pentagon civilian staff or by the military. But Baron said tensions have grown to the point that any snub of a news organization raises questions of retribution.

“Because of the preexisting climate, people start to wonder if it’s retaliation more than I think you would normally,” he said. “I worry, because I’ve heard that it may be happening to other reporters, and I worry what kind of signal it sends to the rest of military bases around the world.”

In many realms of journalism, it’s not unheard of for a company or an agency to cut off a reporter after a tough story. Last month, controversy erupted after the White House banned CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins from covering a Rose Garden event, because officials were unhappy with questions she shouted at Trump during an Oval Office photo op.

But given the gravity of their beat, Pentagon reporters have traditionally stayed above the political fray. Journalists who work out of the Pentagon’s press center are free to roam most areas of the building, and many have worked there for years, allowing them to build strong relationships, especially with the nonpolitical staff. But much of that has eroded under Trump. Many believe Mattis has avoided the press in part to stay out of the president’s cross hairs.

Hired in April 2017, White alienated many in the Pentagon — inside and outside the press corps — by forcing out a popular military spokesman, Col. Steve Warren, shortly after coming on the job. Her relationship with the press has been difficult since, all the way through to the accusations of retribution.

“It’s definitely a change of past practice from previous administrations and defense secretaries,” said Baron, the Defense One executive editor. “It’s not something that we’re used to at the Pentagon. Things are just different at the Pentagon. These are veteran reporters who cover life and death and war and peace.”

One former Pentagon spokesman said retaliation for stories “should not be in the toolbox.”

“You should have good healthy relationships with the press corps covering your agency,” the former spokesman said. “If you invest in those relationships, you won’t even have to get to the point of retaliation.”

He added, “Like war itself, it should be the last option.”

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 17:03 schreef Homijn het volgende:
Valt het jullie ook op dat er nogal wat Nederlandse Trump-fans op internet actief zijn? Ze praten als hersenloze zombies, of als een stel papegaaien, precies na wat Trump zoal zegt. Als je ze met ongemakkelijke feiten confronteert of met de vele leugens van Trump, gaan ze je de huid vol schelden....

twitter:

JohnWDean twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 07:19:19 Memo To Trump’s White House Staff: FYI. Very few people who worked at Nixon’s White House later included that fact on their resumes. It doesn’t do much for a career to be on the wrong side of history, nor to have worked for the worst president in American history. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 17:03 schreef Homijn het volgende:
Valt het jullie ook op dat er nogal wat Nederlandse Trump-fans op internet actief zijn? Ze praten als hersenloze zombies, of als een stel papegaaien, precies na wat Trump zoal zegt. Als je ze met ongemakkelijke feiten confronteert of met de vele leugens van Trump, gaan ze je de huid vol schelden....

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 17:38 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Tune in: Omarosa will be live on @MSNBC at 1PM ET with a new secret recording.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 18:54 schreef SureD1 het volgende:
Eenvandaag maakte melding van het feit dar het Mueller onderzoek binnen een week of twee zou worden afgerond en gepubliceerd. Ik weet dat Guilliani dat roept maar is daar ook een miner seniele bron voor? Nee toch?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 18:54 schreef SureD1 het volgende:
Eenvandaag maakte melding van het feit dar het Mueller onderzoek binnen een week of twee zou worden afgerond en gepubliceerd. Ik weet dat Guilliani dat roept maar is daar ook een miner seniele bron voor? Nee toch?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 18:57 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Welke bron gaf 1vandaag? Is volgens mij nergens serieus melding van gemaakt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:03 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Ze zeiden gewoon iets van 'nu het rapport van mueller een dezer weken uitkomt...'

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 18:54 schreef SureD1 het volgende:
Eenvandaag maakte melding van het feit dar het Mueller onderzoek binnen een week of twee zou worden afgerond en gepubliceerd. Ik weet dat Guilliani dat roept maar is daar ook een miner seniele bron voor? Nee toch?

quote:

Georgia county to close 7 of 9 voting precincts, civil rights attorney calls it 'voter suppression'

RANDOLPH COUNTY, Ga. (WJBF) - One Georgia county is considering closing 7 of its 9 voting precincts before November's election.

Randolph County is in southwest Georgia, about an hour south of Columbus.

The director of elections there announced in the newspaper plans to only keep two precincts open, even though all of them were used for the primary and July runoff.

One civil rights attorney calls it voter suppression, and says it appears racially motivated.

"We're talking about a county that is 60 percent black. It's in the black belt and has twice the rate of African American population compared to the rest of the state. When you cut out 75% of those polling places, it's going to have an affect on African Americans and all but guarantee lower turnout," says Sena Young, Legal Director at the ACLU of Georgia.

One of the precincts the board plans to close actually has the MOST registered voters in Randolph County, and 95 percent of them are black.

There are meetings scheduled for Thursday night and Friday about the plan.

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 17:09:17 NEW: "I think the whole Manafort trial is very sad," Pres. Trump says. "I think it's a very sad day for our country.""He happens to be a very good person, and I think it's very sad what they've done to Paul Manafort." https://t.co/4caphYyiaT https://t.co/HF9piSKJCv reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:40 schreef Mike het volgende:
Vroeger waren de Republikeinen de partij van Law & Order. Tegenwoordig vinden ze dat mensen die zich schuldig hebben gemaakt aan allerlei misdrijven vrijuit moeten gaan. Mits niet zwart natuurlijk.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Trump heeft Sessions gevraagd om Omarosa te arresteren. Waarvoor precies is onduidelijk.

Dus je hebt wel een punt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 17:03 schreef Homijn het volgende:
Valt het jullie ook op dat er nogal wat Nederlandse Trump-fans op internet actief zijn? Ze praten als hersenloze zombies, of als een stel papegaaien, precies na wat Trump zoal zegt. Als je ze met ongemakkelijke feiten confronteert of met de vele leugens van Trump, gaan ze je de huid vol schelden....

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:43 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Voor het maken van opnames in de situation room.

Dat is compleet illegaal.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:43 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Voor het maken van opnames in de situation room.

Dat is compleet illegaal.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:08 schreef Tchock het volgende:

[..]

Nee. Het is redelijk gebruikelijk blijkbaar dat onderzoeken rond verkiezingen zich stil houden duren om niet te interfereren met gaande verkiezingen, maar maar dat is geen harde regel.

https://edition.cnn.com/2(...)on-russia/index.html

Kortom: het zou kunnen dat Mueller een dezer weken met iets komt, maar hij zou net zo goed nog weet ik veel hoe veel maanden door kunnen gaan.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:40 schreef Mike het volgende:
Vroeger waren de Republikeinen de partij van Law & Order. Tegenwoordig vinden ze dat mensen die zich schuldig hebben gemaakt aan allerlei misdrijven vrijuit moeten gaan. Mits niet zwart natuurlijk.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:09 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Hoe het ook loopt, Paul krijgt waarschijnlijk een presidentieel pardon als het tot een veroordeling komt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:57 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Aardig stukje uit de Groene over het Midwesten:

https://www.groene.nl/artikel/de-verrijzenis-van-de-rest

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:17 schreef OMG het volgende:

[..]

Klopt wel, de afgelopen jaren zijn er wel wat bedrijven hier in Indy uitgebreid, overgenomen, etc. qua tech gedoe.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:25 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

De woningmarkt in de bekende tech hubs is ook totaal overspannen. Ze gaan daar enigszins ten onder aan hun eigen succes.

twitter:

AP_Politics twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 20:23:46 BREAKING: Judge in Manafort trial says he's received threats, won't reveal jurors' names over fears for their safety reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:26 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Wat ook totaal niet nodig is, omdat de tech bedrijven juist gemakkelijk mensen vanuit huis of andere locaites zouden kunnen laten werken.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:57 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Aardig stukje uit de Groene over het Midwesten:

https://www.groene.nl/artikel/de-verrijzenis-van-de-rest

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:39 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Dat valt in de praktijk wel tegen. Teams functioneren doorgaans toch het best als ze samen in één hok zitten. Maar dat is natuurlijk nog niet eens de voornaamste reden dat het daar zo druk is. Als je enigszins in de buurt zit kun je veel kennis delen via meetups of vergelijkbare events. Het heeft ook een katalyserende werking. Mensen trekken er heen voor de werkgevers en andere werkgevers trekken er weer heen vanwege personeel of ontstaan als start-ups.
Nederland heeft de luxe dat je het grootste gedeelte van het land vrij gemakkelijk kunt bereizen voor dat soort zaken. Detroit - San Fransisco is wel even andere koek dan Rotterdam - Amsterdam.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:52 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Mijn broer was er niet zo lang geleden voor een conferentie en hij schrok van het grote verschil tussen arm en rijk in San Francisco.

's avonds hoorde je geluiden van schietpartijen in de achterbuurten aan de ene kant en de feestjes van Google en Facebook aan de andere kant. Het grootste gedeelte van de bevolking die er oorspronkelijk woonde heeft nauwelijks iets gehad aan de tech boom. Er worden gigantische villa's gebouwd voor de Aziaten die er naartoe getrokken zijn en er gebeurd weinig om de stad zelf te ontwikkelen buiten de campussen van de tech bedrijven om.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:39 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Dat valt in de praktijk wel tegen. Teams functioneren doorgaans toch het best als ze samen in één hok zitten. Maar dat is natuurlijk nog niet eens de voornaamste reden dat het daar zo druk is. Als je enigszins in de buurt zit kun je veel kennis delen via meetups of vergelijkbare events. Het heeft ook een katalyserende werking. Mensen trekken er heen voor de werkgevers en andere werkgevers trekken er weer heen vanwege personeel of ontstaan als start-ups.
Nederland heeft de luxe dat je het grootste gedeelte van het land vrij gemakkelijk kunt bereizen voor dat soort zaken. Detroit - San Fransisco is wel even andere koek dan Rotterdam - Amsterdam.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:54 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Het is gewoon het toonbeeld van Amerikaans kapitalisme. Mensen beklagen zich wel over zaken als sociale huur in Amsterdam, maar het alternatief is taferelen zoals in San Fransisco.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 21:26 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Het is ook wel een beetje wat de nerds van Silicon Valley voor prioriteiten stellen natuurlijk. Vroeger zorgde de industrie voor meer werkgelegenheid, maar afgezien van een paar computers, veel drank en drugs, een kliimrek in het kantoor en een berg stroom hebben deze bedrijven niet zoveel nodig. Ze zullen niet zo snel investeren of vragen om betere infrastructuur buiten de internetaansluitingen. En de "je slaapt/werkt/feest' op het kantoor mentaliteit maakt ook het bouwen van extra betaalbare woningen natuurlijk overbodig in de ogen van de CEO's.

quote:

In Amsterdam gaat het allemaal te snel voor Nederlandse begrippen, ze houden het daar gewoon niet bij. Daarnaast gaan de huisjesmelkers uit van de 30% ruling voor de expats. Je hebt zo voor 1600 a 1800 euro p/m een appartement in de vrije sector. Het kostte mijn broer ongeveer 3 weken om woonruimte te vinden voor zijn buitenlandse collega's. Die verdienen naar Nederlandse maatstaven veel en betalen nauwelijks belasting. Als je 4000 a 5000 euro in de maand binnen harkt en je betaald daar maar 30% belasting over ben je prima bereid om 1500+ euro neer te tellen voor een appartement. Er is zoveel vraag naar woonruimte in Amsterdam dat je alleen uit goede bedoelingen lagere huurprijzen gaat vragen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:52 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Mijn broer was er niet zo lang geleden voor een conferentie en hij schrok van het grote verschil tussen arm en rijk in San Francisco.

's avonds hoorde je geluiden van schietpartijen in de achterbuurten aan de ene kant en de feestjes van Google en Facebook aan de andere kant. Het grootste gedeelte van de bevolking die er oorspronkelijk woonde heeft nauwelijks iets gehad aan de tech boom. Er worden gigantische villa's gebouwd voor de Aziaten die er naartoe getrokken zijn en er gebeurd weinig om de stad zelf te ontwikkelen buiten de campussen van de tech bedrijven om.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 00:03 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Wat een kolder weer. Noem mij die buurt maar waar je zowel schietpartijen als een bedrijfsfeestje op het hoofdkantoor van Google tegelijkertijd kunt horen. Die grens is niet zo scherp.

En de oorspronkelijke bewoners zijn de native Americans, die hebben überhaupt vrij weinig aan de komst van kolonisten gehad.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 23:25:20 https://t.co/TmICRUV9uo reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 00:16 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Je hoort weinig schietpartijen in Mountain View waar Google HQ is, dat is ruim 60 km van San Francisco. In San Francisco kun je bij een gunstige wind mischien schoten uit Oakland horen, dat wel.

Prijzen voor woonruimte in Santa Clara, waar Mountain View ligt, waren eind vorige eeuw al ridicuul hoog doordat Silicon Valley al wat langer bestaat en de prijzen daar enorm opdrijft.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 00:46 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Ik ben bekend met de omgeving ik heb er zelf een tijd gewoond. De huren zijn belachelijk maar daar zijn de lonen dan ook naar bij de tech bedrijven. Het was kortom weer een lulverhaal van Nintex.

quote:

The Justice Department is investigating whether longtime Republican fundraiser Elliott Broidy sought to sell his influence with the Trump administration by offering to deliver U.S. government actions for foreign officials in exchange for tens of millions of dollars, according to three people familiar with the probe.

As part of the investigation, prosecutors are scrutinizing a plan that Broidy allegedly developed to try to persuade the Trump government to extradite a Chinese dissident back to his home country, a move sought by Chinese President Xi Jinping, according to two of the people.

They are also investigating claims that Broidy sought $75 million from a Malaysian business official if the Justice Department ended its investigation of a development fund run by the Malaysian government. The Malaysian probe has examined the role of the former prime minister in the embezzlement of billions of dollars from the fund.

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment. Christopher Clark, an attorney for Broidy, declined to comment.

SPOILER

Broidy’s alleged activities were detailed in news reports earlier this year that cited hacked emails. The Los Angeles-based venture capitalist, who served as top fundraiser for the Republican Party and President Trump, has said that allegations against him are an effort by his enemies to smear him.

Rudolph W. Giuliani, an attorney for Trump, said he had no knowledge of any request for records related to Broidy. The White House referred a request for comment to the Republican National Committee, which declined to comment.

In recent weeks, prosecutors with the Justice Department’s public integrity section — which examines possible political and government corruption — have sought documents related to Broidy’s business dealings.

Among the information sought by investigators are details about Broidy’s work on behalf of and interactions with the Chinese and Malaysian officials, according to two people familiar with the document requests.

As part of their efforts, prosecutors have subpoenaed casino magnate Steve Wynn, the former RNC finance chairman and longtime Trump friend, for copies of records and communications related to Broidy.

An attorney for Wynn, Reid Weingarten, declined to comment, saying only that Wynn is cooperating with the Justice Department.

“Steve Wynn is completely cooperating with the investigation and he certainly has no reason to believe that anyone acted improperly in anything he knew about or was involved in,” Weingarten said in a statement.

Wynn was tapped by Trump to serve as the RNC’s lead fundraiser after the election. Earlier this year, he stepped down from that post and from his executive role at his resort company after reports of sexual misconduct. Wynn has denied the allegations of inappropriate behavior.

The public integrity probe is the latest legal challenge for Broidy, who helped corral big donors to support Trump’s presidential campaign, throwing a lavish fundraiser for the then-nominee at his Los Angeles-area home during the 2016 campaign. After the election, he was appointed to serve as a national deputy chairman for the RNC.

Broidy sought to parlay his party role and connections to the White House and on Capitol Hill in pitches to foreign governments, according to a person with direct knowledge of his activities.

In April, he resigned from his RNC position in the wake of a report that he had paid a former Playboy model $1.6 million in exchange for her silence about a sexual affair. Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen — another RNC fundraiser — helped arrange the settlement, Broidy acknowledged.

Cohen is under investigation by federal prosecutors in Manhattan who are examining whether he fraudulently obtained millions of dollars in loans and whether his efforts to squash negative stories about Trump during the campaign violated election law.

Broidy’s business dealings captured the attention of investigators for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who asked at least one witness about Broidy’s activities, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Broidy’s attempts to solve high-level headaches for the Chinese and Malaysian governments were first reported this spring by the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, which cited in part a cache of hacked emails.

Broidy has said the documents were stolen by enemies seeking to ruin his reputation.

“This whole narrative is a fabrication driven by hackers who want to undermine me,” Broidy said in a statement to the Times. Earlier this year, he filed a lawsuit against the country of Qatar, alleging that it hacked his email accounts in retaliation for his allegations that Qatar supports terrorists. A spokesman for the Qatari government has called the suit “without fact or merit.”

The Journal reported in March that, according to a draft contract, Broidy and his wife, Robin Rosenzweig, were seeking $75 million from Malaysian businessman Jho Low if federal prosecutors dropped their investigation into a Malaysian state investment fund.

The Justice Department has filed civil suits claiming $4.5 billion in public money was misappropriated from the fund, 1Malaysia Development Berhad, seeking to claim a portion of those assets. Last month, Malaysian authorities charged f ormer prime minister Najib Razak with embezzling billions in public money from the fund.

Clark, the Broidy attorney, told The Journal that Rosenzweig’s firm had been hired to provide strategic advice to Low, adding that “at no time did Mr. Broidy or Ms. Rosenzweig, or anyone acting on their behalf, discuss Mr. Low’s case with President Trump, any member of his staff, or anyone at the U.S. Department of Justice.”

The Times reported in April that Broidy had explored ways to force Chinese exile Guo Wengui to leave the United States. The billionaire businessman had fled China in 2014 as he was facing arrest for a range of charges, including corruption. Guo has said the allegations were fabricated by a government that wants to silence him.

Since his arrival in the U.S., Guo has publicly detailed allegations of corruption in the Chinese ruling party.

The Times reported that Broidy drafted a plan to enlist Emirati officials to pressure the U.S. to turn over Guo. In his statement to the newspaper, Broidy said he “never had a strategy or plan regarding Mr. Guo nor was there any compensation given or even discussed.”

Broidy’s alleged efforts to push for Guo’s extradition came after Wynn separately helped deliver a message from the Xi government seeking to have the dissident returned to China, according to a person familiar with the effort.

Wynn, who has contacts with Chinese officials because of his business interests in Macau, hand-delivered a letter to Trump seeking Guo’s deportation, The Journal reported last year. A spokesman for Wynn Resorts has said that the report about Wynn’s role was false.

At the time, the president expressed interest in assisting the Chinese, but was met with resistance by senior law enforcement officials, according to the person.

White House officials did not respond to requests for comment.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 00:16 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Je hoort weinig schietpartijen in Mountain View waar Google HQ is, dat is ruim 60 km van San Francisco. In San Francisco kun je bij een gunstige wind mischien schoten uit Oakland horen, dat wel.

Prijzen voor woonruimte in Santa Clara, waar Mountain View ligt, waren eind vorige eeuw al ridicuul hoog doordat Silicon Valley al wat langer bestaat en de prijzen daar enorm opdrijft.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:07 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Waarom GOP fundraiser? Hij was tot april 2018 deputy finance chair voor de RNC, daarvoor voorzitter...

quote:

The public integrity probe is the latest legal challenge for Broidy, who helped corral big donors to support Trump’s presidential campaign, throwing a lavish fundraiser for the then-nominee at his Los Angeles-area home during the 2016 campaign. After the election, he was appointed to serve as a national deputy chairman for the RNC.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:21 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Hij was dat. Nu niet meer dus. Ze geven daar zijn huidige status aan? De rest wordt gewoon in het artikel genoemd?

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:34 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Former recent GOP deputy finance chair lijkt me relevanter dan "fundraiser".

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 01:29:16 People realize this is one of the former finance chairs of the RNC, right? And that another former RNC finance chair is Michael Cohen, who's under federal investigation for financial crimes?And we wonder why Republicans won't support a full investigation of this administration? https://t.co/iGKa9G2jEN reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:51 schreef buckets_of_lube het volgende:

[..]

Plekken als Columbus, Pittsburgh, en Denver hebben de mazzel dat er veel studenten zijn. Waarom iemand in godsnaam naar Cleveland zou willen verhuizen...

quote:

Op woensdag 15 augustus 2018 23:58 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Brennan is afleiding, moet je niet intrappen.

quote:

The White House has drafted documents revoking the security clearances of current and former officials whom President Trump has demanded be punished for criticizing him or playing a role in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to senior administration officials.

Trump wants to sign “most, if not all” of them, said one senior White House official, who indicated that communications aides, including press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Bill Shine, the newly named deputy chief of staff, have discussed the optimum times to release them as a distraction during unfavorable news cycles.

[..]

The senior White House official acknowledged that the step against Brennan had been prepared in late July, when Sanders first said Trump was considering it. But the decision to take that step was made this week to divert attention from nonstop coverage of a critical book released by fired Trump aide Omarosa Manigault Newman.

Consideration is being given to holding other prepared documents in reserve for similar opportunities in the future, the official said.
[..]

quote:

Special Counsel Robert Mueller recommended in a court filing on Friday that a judge sentence former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos to up to six months in prison for lying to federal agents investigating whether Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in October to lying to FBI agents and is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 7.

According to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s sentencing memorandum to the judge, Papadopoulos lied about his contacts with people who claimed to have ties to top Russian officials, including his meeting with a professor who said Russia had “dirt” on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“The defendant’s crime was serious and caused damage to the government’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election,” Mueller’s memo said.

“The defendant lied in order to conceal his contacts with Russians and Russian intermediaries during the campaign and made his false statements to investigators on January 27, 2017, early in the investigation, when key investigative decisions, including who to interview and when, were being made,” Mueller said.

Mueller said the government believed a sentence of up to six months in prison was “appropriate and warranted” along with a fine of $9,500.

Muller also indicated that Papadopoulos had not fully cooperated with prosecutors.

“The defendant did not provide ‘substantial assistance,’ and much of the information provided ... came only after the government confronted him with his own emails, text messages, internet search history and other information it obtained via search warrants and subpoenas,” Mueller wrote.

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 02:59:04 "The defendant's lies undermined investigators' ability to challenge the Professor or potentially detain or arrest him while he was still in the United States." This is the professor who promised Papadopoulos dirt on Clinton. Mueller team asking Papadopoulos get six months https://t.co/erQWSGvySy reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 04:46:36 Papadopoulos received $10k in cash from a foreign national whom he believed was an Intel officer, then kept that cash in a safe pending his sentencing, according to Mueller. https://t.co/77lsUMRwvL reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 21:42 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Het punt is simpelweg dat ongelijkheid in de VS veel groter is dan hier. Het gat tussen een docent op de middelbare school en de gemiddelde tech employee is veel groter dan hier en dan nivelleren wij dat vervolgens ook nog eens een stuk verder.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 01:29:16 People realize this is one of the former finance chairs of the RNC, right? And that another former RNC finance chair is Michael Cohen, who's under federal investigation for financial crimes?And we wonder why Republicans won't support a full investigation of this administration? https://t.co/iGKa9G2jEN reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 09:21 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Een eerstegraads op de middelbare school verdient boven de 4000 euro bpm in zijn schaal. Dat moet de gemiddelde programmeur nog maar zien te pakken

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 09:28 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Ik kan je vertellen dat een gemiddelde beginnend programmeur dat zeker niet pakt. Ruim niet zelfs.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 09:29 schreef Ringo het volgende:

[..]

Een beginnende (eerstegraads) docent ook niet.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:13 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Hij zat in een hotel tussen een redelijk goede en een wat mindere buurt.

Het waren geen feestjes van Google en Facebook misschien, maar in ieder geval van tech bedrijven die daar zaten. Aan de ene kant feestende mensen, aan de andere kant sirenes. Hij kon dat vanaf het balkon zien en het was wel vaker raak in dat buurtje hoorde hij van de hotelmedewerker.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 10:13 schreef mcmlxiv het volgende:

[..]

Maar why the fuck ben je dan zo’n trump fan? Waar komt de waangedachte vandaan dat hij de gewone man gaat helpen?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 20:52 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Mijn broer was er niet zo lang geleden voor een conferentie en hij schrok van het grote verschil tussen arm en rijk in San Francisco.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 03:27 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
U.S. special counsel recommends six months in prison for Papadopoulos

[..]

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 02:59:04 "The defendant's lies undermined investigators' ability to challenge the Professor or potentially detain or arrest him while he was still in the United States." This is the professor who promised Papadopoulos dirt on Clinton. Mueller team asking Papadopoulos get six months https://t.co/erQWSGvySy reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 04:46:36 Papadopoulos received $10k in cash from a foreign national whom he believed was an Intel officer, then kept that cash in a safe pending his sentencing, according to Mueller. https://t.co/77lsUMRwvL reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 11:49 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Dus 6 maandjes en een boete van $10 000 wat precies het bedrag is dat hij kreeg van een agent uit een ander land dan Rusland.

Dat is nogal wat anders dan de doodstraf die Louise Mensch en Schindler voorspelde.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 01:13 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Hij zat in een hotel tussen een redelijk goede en een wat mindere buurt.

Het waren geen feestjes van Google en Facebook misschien, maar in ieder geval van tech bedrijven die daar zaten. Aan de ene kant feestende mensen, aan de andere kant sirenes. Hij kon dat vanaf het balkon zien en het was wel vaker raak in dat buurtje hoorde hij van de hotelmedewerker.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 11:49 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Dus 6 maandjes en een boete van $10 000 wat precies het bedrag is dat hij kreeg van een agent uit een ander land dan Rusland.

Dat is nogal wat anders dan de doodstraf die Louise Mensch en Schindler voorspelde.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 12:28 schreef Klaphark het volgende:

[..]

Ze vragen 6 maanden, zal wel lager uitvallen dus.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 00:36 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 23:25:20 https://t.co/TmICRUV9uo reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 15:06:30 https://t.co/5kIR5EggBp reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 13:23:00 Social Media is totally discriminating against Republican/Conservative voices. Speaking loudly and clearly for the Trump Administration, we won't let that happen. They are closing down the opinions of many people on the RIGHT, while at the same time doing nothing to others....... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 13:32:17 .....Censorship is a very dangerous thing & absolutely impossible to police. If you are weeding out Fake News, there is nothing so Fake as CNN & MSNBC, & yet I do not ask that their sick behavior be removed. I get used to it and watch with a grain of salt, or don't watch at all.. reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 13:40:11 ....Too many voices are being destroyed, some good & some bad, and that cannot be allowed to happen. Who is making the choices, because I can already tell you that too many mistakes are being made. Let everybody participate, good & bad, and we will all just have to figure it out! reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 15:45:00 “If you're not allowed legally to disparage the president ... why can we believe anything you say?"Trump reportedly locks ex-staffers into deals preventing them from publicly bashing him. Experts say it's dangerously unethical to give them punditry gigs.https://t.co/bm9X7xkXAN reageer retweet

quote:

“If you’re not allowed legally to disparage the president or his family or anything they have to do with, any company they have or asset they have, why can we believe anything you say?”

That was the incisive question MSNBC anchor Katy Tur asked former Trump campaign spokesman Marc Lotter on Wednesday, referring to the blanket non-disclosure agreement all Trump campaign and West Wing staffers are reportedly required to sign.

Leaked versions of that document contain a non-disparagement clause in which the signee agrees not to “demean or disparage publicly” President Trump, his family, their company, or any of the family’s assets.

SPOILER

As Tur suggested, that obligation diminishes the value in having ex-Trump staffers provide commentary for cable-news programs. After all, they are contractually bound to say nothing remotely negative about Trump or his family, even if they wanted to.

And Team Trump has shown a willingness to try to enforce that comically harsh agreement. On Tuesday, they filed an arbitration action against ex-aide Omarosa Manigault Newman for releasing recordings of her conversations with the president. And earlier this year, Trump threatened to sue former top strategist Steve Bannon for telling Fire & Fury author Michael Wolff that the president “won’t make it” beyond one term.

And yet, not only do former Trump staffers—bound by a draconian NDA—routinely appear as pundits across cable and broadcast news networks, but at least five ex-Trump staffers are paid by the networks:

• Jason Miller, a senior communications adviser for the 2016 campaign, is a paid CNN political contributor.

• Marc Short, who served in 2016 as vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence’s senior communications adviser before becoming White House director of legislative affairs, is a paid CNN political commentator.

• Tom Bossert, the president’s first homeland-security adviser, is ABC News’ homeland security analyst.

• Trump’s deputy campaign manager David Bossie is a paid Fox News contributor.

• Sebastian Gorka, who briefly worked as a Trump campaign consultant and then served as a White House strategist, is also a paid Fox News contributor.

Of course, TV news outlets routinely air commentary from people who are professionally partisan or obligated to not speak ill of certain people, businesses, or politics. But that obligation is easily disclosed in identifying the commentator as a spokesperson, attorney, or chief executive officer.

By contrast, the contractual duty of ex-Trump aides—both paid and unpaid—to avoid bad-mouthing their former boss and his family is almost never disclosed during their appearances.

And that’s dangerously unethical, according to media experts.

“If someone is bound by an NDA and that’s not disclosed, that’s journalistic malpractice,” Steven Roberts, a professor of media ethics at George Washington University, told The Daily Beast. “If you don’t disclose that someone is contractually obligated, that’s a huge ethical problem and a huge ethical mistake.”

The professor continued: “You’re deceiving your audience if you don’t disclose that. It’s a significant ethical breach because media ethics start with the principles of transparency: never confuse or deceive your audience.”

That sort of confusion has never been more clear than in the aforementioned Tur interview with Lotter. When confronted with the NDA-related question, “Why should we trust anything you say when you’re legally bound to say good things about the person you’re coming on to talk about?” the ex-Pence spokesman delivered a word-salad response that belied his usefulness as an independent commentator:

“Well, it’s my understanding, and I’m not a lawyer, so I, uh, so I, uh, feel free to correct me by scholars in that area. But it’s my understanding that if there was something that rose to a criminal level that I could communicate that with the proper authorities, those are not discovered under a nondisclosure agreement or if you are summoned to appear. There’s a difference between talking to investigators, talking to, uh, in those kind of settings, rather than going out and getting seven figures or more for a tell-all book where the allegations change by the hour. And that’s what we’re looking at right here.”

Similarly, after giving a forceful on-air denial that Trump would have ever said the “N-word,” as alleged by Omarosa, former Trump campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson awkwardly admitted that she, too, signed the president’s stringent NDA.

“So if you had heard him say the ‘N-word,’ you wouldn’t tell me about it anyway,” CNN anchor Erin Burnett correctly assessed. Pierson was left to claim that viewers should simply take her at her now-compromised word—contractual obligations be damned.

A hard-line ban on ex-Trump aides being employed by cable-news outlets, however, would be impractical, given just how many people have come in and out of the Trump orbit, and how few TV-ready talkers there are who can play the role of ardent Trump supporter.

And so, offers Julian Sanchez, a tech-focused senior fellow at the Cato Institute: “Anyone who’s booked on TV to discuss Trump after having worked for him should be asked if they’re bound by a non-disparagement clause. If they are, or won’t say, that needs to be the chyron on screen for the duration of the appearance.”

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 16:01 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Geen idee waar dat verhaal een reactie op is, maar het wel of niet hebben van een president zegt natuurlijk niet zoveel over de macht van een leider. Een minister-president kan net zoveel macht hebben. Bovendien is in een systeem zoals dat in Nederland de scheiding tussen regering en parlement veelal een formaliteit, waardoor er veel minder sprake is van een scheiding der machten om maar eens wat te noemen.

quote:

Looser financial conditions can stimulate growth in the near-term by increasing net worth and easing constraints on borrowers. But the analysis suggests there is an inter-temporal tradeoff: easy financial conditions that increase higher growth in the near term also increase the likelihood of a significant slowdown or even recession in the medium-term. This tradeoff is amplified when there is a credit boom. Moreover, greater downside risks to growth are not counterbalanced by higher expected growth. Financial conditions combined with high credit growth further skews the distribution of future GDP growth to the downside, more than offsetting the benefit of higher expected near-term growth.\

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 16:05 schreef SymbolicFrank het volgende:

[..]

Een stukje achtergrond, ook over de VVD commentaren. En Nintex.

quote:

Je hebt natuurlijk wel gelijk, dat de titel op zich niet zoveel zegt, en dat het ook heel belangrijk is wat de machtsbasis is: is er een meerderheid in de kamers die altijd achter je staat?

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 14:43 schreef Treinhomo het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 16:49 schreef SymbolicFrank het volgende:
Monolith: mee eens. Daarom ook de frustratie van de gemiddelde Amerikaanse kiezer, een echte keuze heb je niet.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 17:06 schreef SymbolicFrank het volgende:
Ok. Maar in de VS stemt er tijdens de echte verkiezingen bijna niemand op een andere partij dan de democraten of republikeinen, omdat ze vinden dat hun stem dan niet meetelt. Dat wordt uitgefilterd via de verdeling van de verkiezingsdistricten, de stemmen per staat en de voorverkiezingen. Allemaal drempels waar je als nieuwe partij overheen moet. De huidige partijen willen natuurlijk wel aan de macht blijven.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 17:16 schreef SymbolicFrank het volgende:
Terzijde: ik vind het nog steeds heel opvallend en toch wel ongeloofwaardig hoeveel corruptie er in de Amerikaanse politiek zit ingebakken. Zoals dat senators moeten bedelen voor geld.

Ik denk dat de geldschieters Trump vooral zagen als een zakenman, maar ik verwacht dat het nu met de senaat en het huis toch begint te wankelen. Slechte publiciteit, en je moet je geld besteden aan de winnaar om er voordeel aan te beleven.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 15:26 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:
Alleen randdebielen geloven je nog nintex hij spreekt zichzelf tegen in dezelfde week nog. Wat als er straks een journalist van cnn word neergeknald?

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2018 19:31 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op vrijdag 17-08-2018 om 17:09:17 NEW: "I think the whole Manafort trial is very sad," Pres. Trump says. "I think it's a very sad day for our country.""He happens to be a very good person, and I think it's very sad what they've done to Paul Manafort." https://t.co/4caphYyiaT https://t.co/HF9piSKJCv reageer retweet

#FreeManafort

quote:

It’s not just audiotapes.

Omarosa Manigault Newman has a stash of video, emails, text messages and other documentation supporting the claims in her tell-all book about her time in the Trump White House, a person with direct knowledge of the records told The Associated Press Friday.

Bron: AP

quote:

White House Counsel Has Cooperated Extensively With Mueller’s Obstruction Inquiry

WASHINGTON — The White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, has cooperated extensively in the special counsel investigation, sharing detailed accounts about the episodes at the heart of the inquiry into whether President Trump obstructed justice, including some that investigators would not have learned of otherwise, according to a dozen current and former White House officials and others briefed on the matter.

In at least three voluntary interviews with investigators that totaled 30 hours over the past nine months, Mr. McGahn described the president’s furor toward the Russia investigation and the ways in which he urged Mr. McGahn to respond to it. He provided the investigators examining whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice a clear view of the president’s most intimate moments with his lawyer.

Among them were Mr. Trump’s comments and actions during the firing of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and Mr. Trump’s obsession with putting a loyalist in charge of the inquiry, including his repeated urging of Attorney General Jeff Sessions to claim oversight of it. Mr. McGahn was also centrally involved in Mr. Trump’s attempts to fire the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, which investigators might not have discovered without him.

For a lawyer to share so much with investigators scrutinizing his client is unusual. Lawyers are rarely so open with investigators, not only because they are advocating on behalf of their clients but also because their conversations with clients are potentially shielded by attorney-client privilege, and in the case of presidents, executive privilege.

“A prosecutor would kill for that,” said Solomon L. Wisenberg, a deputy independent counsel in the Whitewater investigation, which did not have the same level of cooperation from President Bill Clinton’s lawyers. “Oh my God, it would have been phenomenally helpful to us. It would have been like having the keys to the kingdom.”

SPOILER

Mr. McGahn’s cooperation began in part as a result of a decision by Mr. Trump’s first team of criminal lawyers to collaborate fully with Mr. Mueller. The president’s lawyers have explained that they believed their client had nothing to hide and that they could bring the investigation to an end quickly.

Mr. McGahn and his lawyer, William A. Burck, could not understand why Mr. Trump was so willing to allow Mr. McGahn to speak freely to the special counsel and feared Mr. Trump was setting up Mr. McGahn to take the blame for any possible illegal acts of obstruction, according to people close to him. So he and Mr. Burck devised their own strategy to do as much as possible to cooperate with Mr. Mueller to demonstrate that Mr. McGahn did nothing wrong.

It is not clear that Mr. Trump appreciates the extent to which Mr. McGahn has cooperated with the special counsel. The president wrongly believed that Mr. McGahn would act as a personal lawyer would for clients and solely defend his interests to investigators, according to a person with knowledge of his thinking.

In fact, Mr. McGahn laid out how Mr. Trump tried to ensure control of the investigation, giving investigators a mix of information both potentially damaging and favorable to the president. Mr. McGahn cautioned to investigators that he never saw Mr. Trump go beyond his legal authorities, though the limits of executive power are murky.

Mr. McGahn’s role as a cooperating witness further strains his already complicated relationship with the president. Though Mr. Trump has fought with Mr. McGahn as much as with any of his top aides, White House advisers have said, both men have benefited significantly from their partnership.

Mr. McGahn has overseen two of Mr. Trump’s signature accomplishments — stocking the federal courts and cutting government regulations — and become a champion of conservatives in the process.

But the two rarely speak one on one — the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, and other advisers are usually present for their meetings — and Mr. Trump has questioned Mr. McGahn’s loyalty. In turn, Mr. Trump’s behavior has so exasperated Mr. McGahn that he has called the president “King Kong” behind his back, to connote his volcanic anger, people close to Mr. McGahn said.

This account is based on interviews with current and former White House officials and others who have spoken to both men, all of whom requested anonymity to discuss a sensitive investigation.

Through Mr. Burck, Mr. McGahn declined to comment. A spokesman for the special counsel’s office also declined to comment for this article.

Asked for comment, the White House sought to quell the sense of tension.

“The president and Don have a great relationship,” the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said in a statement. “He appreciates all the hard work he’s done, particularly his help and expertise with the judges, and the Supreme Court” nominees.

Mr. McGahn’s route from top White House lawyer to a central witness in the obstruction investigation of the president began around the time that Mr. Mueller took over the investigation into whether any Trump associates conspired with Russia’s interference in the presidential election.

When Mr. Mueller was appointed in May 2017, the lawyers surrounding the president realigned themselves. Mr. McGahn and other White House lawyers stopped dealing on a day-to-day basis with the investigation, as they realized they were potential witnesses in an obstruction case.

In the following weeks, Mr. Trump assembled a personal legal team to defend him. He wanted to take on Mr. Mueller directly, attacking his credibility and impeding investigators. But two of his newly hired lawyers, John M. Dowd and Ty Cobb, have said they took Mr. Trump at his word that he did nothing wrong and sold him on an open-book strategy. As long as Mr. Trump and the White House cooperated with Mr. Mueller, they told him, they could bring an end to the investigation within months.

Mr. McGahn, who had objected to Mr. Cobb’s hiring, was dubious, according to people he spoke to around that time. As White House counsel, not a personal lawyer, he viewed his role as protector of the presidency, not of Mr. Trump. Allowing a special counsel to root around the West Wing could set a precedent harmful to future administrations.

But he had little ability to intervene. His relationship with the president had soured as Mr. Trump blamed him for a number of fraught moments in his first months in office, including the chaotic, failed early attempts at a ban on travelers from some majority-Muslim countries and, in particular, the existence of Mr. Mueller’s investigation.

The son of a Treasury Department investigator, Mr. McGahn, 50, briefly attended the Naval Academy before transferring to Notre Dame, graduating in 1991. He attended Widener University’s Commonwealth Law School in Pennsylvania, then came to Washington and climbed the ranks of the Republican establishment, alternating between private firms and a stint on the Federal Election Commission.

Mr. McGahn joined the Trump team as an early hire said to like the candidate’s outsider position. His lack of a degree from a top law school bothered Mr. Trump, but the candidate saw that Mr. McGahn was respected by most of his peers, according to veteran party strategists.

Though he was a senior campaign aide, it is not clear whether Mr. Mueller’s investigators have questioned Mr. McGahn about whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia’s effort to influence the election.

Mr. McGahn’s decision to cooperate with the special counsel grew out of Mr. Dowd’s and Mr. Cobb’s game plan, now seen as misguided by some close to the president.

Last fall, Mr. Mueller’s office asked to interview Mr. McGahn. To the surprise of the White House Counsel’s Office, Mr. Trump and his lawyers signaled that they had no objection, without knowing the extent of what Mr. McGahn was going to tell investigators.

Mr. McGahn was stunned, as was Mr. Burck, whom he had recently hired out of concern that he needed help to stay out of legal jeopardy, according to people close to Mr. McGahn. Mr. Burck has explained to others that he told White House advisers that they did not appreciate the president’s legal exposure and that it was “insane” that Mr. Trump did not fight a McGahn interview in court.

Even if the president did nothing wrong, Mr. Burck told White House lawyers, the White House has to understand that a client like Mr. Trump probably made politically damaging statements to Mr. McGahn as he weighed whether to intervene in the Russia investigation.

Inside the counsel’s office, lawyers feared that on the recommendation of Mr. Dowd and Mr. Cobb, the White House was handing Mr. Mueller detailed instructions to take down the president and setting a troubling precedent for future administrations by giving up executive privilege.

At the same time, Mr. Trump was blaming Mr. McGahn for his legal woes, yet encouraging him to speak to investigators. Mr. McGahn and his lawyer grew suspicious. They began telling associates that they had concluded that the president had decided to let Mr. McGahn take the fall for decisions that could be construed as obstruction of justice, like the Comey firing, by telling the special counsel that he was only following shoddy legal advice from Mr. McGahn.

Worried that Mr. Trump would ultimately blame him in the inquiry, Mr. McGahn told people he was determined to avoid the fate of the White House counsel for President Richard M. Nixon, John W. Dean, who was imprisoned in the Watergate scandal.

Mr. McGahn decided to fully cooperate with Mr. Mueller. It was, he believed, the only choice he had to protect himself.

“This sure has echoes of Richard Nixon’s White House counsel, John Dean, who in 1973 feared that Nixon was setting him up as a fall guy for Watergate and secretly gave investigators crucial help while still in his job,” said the historian Michael Beschloss.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers still had a chance to keep Mr. McGahn’s insider knowledge from the special counsel. By exerting attorney-client privilege, which allows the president to legally withhold information, they would have gained the right to learn what Mr. McGahn planned to tell investigators and what he might reveal that could damage the president. But the president’s lawyers never went through that process, although they told people that they believed they still had the ability to stop Mr. Mueller from handing over to Congress the accounts of witnesses like Mr. McGahn and others.

Mr. Mueller has told the president’s lawyers that he will follow Justice Department guidance that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. Rather than charge Mr. Trump if he finds evidence of wrongdoing, he is more likely to write a report that can be sent to Congress for lawmakers to consider impeachment proceedings.

Unencumbered, Mr. Burck and Mr. McGahn met the special counsel team in November for the first time and shared all that Mr. McGahn knew.

To investigators, Mr. McGahn was a fruitful witness, people familiar with the investigation said. He had been directly involved in nearly every episode they are scrutinizing to determine whether the president obstructed justice. To make an obstruction case, prosecutors who lack a piece of slam-dunk evidence generally point to a range of actions that prove that the suspect tried to interfere with the inquiry.

Mr. McGahn gave to Mr. Mueller’s investigators, the people said, a sense of the president’s mind-set in the days leading to the firing of Mr. Comey; how the White House handled the firing of the former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn; and how Mr. Trump repeatedly berated Mr. Sessions, tried to get him to assert control over the investigation and threatened to fire him.

Despite the Trump lawyers’ insistence that cooperation would help end the inquiry, the investigation only intensified as last year came to a close. Mr. Mueller had charged Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman and his deputy and won guilty pleas and cooperation agreements from his first national security adviser and a campaign adviser.

Mr. Dowd said that cooperation was the right approach but that Mr. Mueller had “snookered” Mr. Trump’s legal team. The White House has handed over more than one million documents and allowed more than two dozen administration officials to meet with Mr. Mueller in the belief that he would be forced to conclude there was no obstruction case.

“It was an extraordinary cooperation — more cooperation than in any major case — no president has ever been more cooperative than this,” Mr. Dowd said, adding that Mr. Mueller knew as far back as October, when he received many White House documents, that the president did not break the law.

As the months passed on, it became apparent that Mr. McGahn and Mr. Burck overestimated the amount of thought that they believed the president put into his legal strategy. Rather than placing the blame on Mr. McGahn for possible acts of obstruction, Mr. Trump has yet to even meet with the special counsel, his lawyers resisting an invitation for an interview. Mr. McGahn is still the White House counsel, shepherding the president’s second Supreme Court nominee, Brett M. Kavanaugh, through the confirmation process.

Mr. Mueller, armed with Mr. McGahn’s account, is still trying to interview witnesses close to the president. But the White House has a new lawyer for the investigation, Emmet T. Flood, who has strong views on privilege issues. When the special counsel asked to interview Mr. Kelly, Mr. Flood contested the request, rather than fully cooperate.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 22:01 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Real blockbuster from @nytmike & @maggieNYT who report that Don McGahn:

(a) Is cooperating extensively with Mueller.
(b) Feared Trump was setting him up as a fall guy.
(c) Trump may not know how much McGahn has said.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1030878353664999426

Ter herinnering, McGahn is de advocaat van het Witte Huis... Artikel in kwestie:

[..]

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:15 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

McGahn werkt voor het Witte Huis, niet voor Trump.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:25 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:
Nou wanneer begint de twitterdiarree? Of wist Trump dit al?

twitter:

JohnWDean twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 21:47:53 McGahn is doing right! https://t.co/qqzhZRAFlY reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:19 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, dat zal hem mogelijk meer vrijheid geven in wat hij deelt denk je?

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:39 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
30 uur!

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:40 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

quote:

In at least three voluntary interviews with investigators that totaled 30 hours over the past nine months, Mr. McGahn described the president’s furor toward the Russia investigation and the ways in which he urged Mr. McGahn to respond to it. He provided the investigators examining whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice a clear view of the president’s most intimate moments with his lawyer.

twitter:

RudyGiuliani twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 20:12:49 Time for Mueller investigation to file report. We will release ours. Don’t interfere with election like Comey.The President had nothing to do with Russians. He didn’t obstruct an investigation. 1.4 million documents and 32 witnesses no privilege raised. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:44 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

RudyGiuliani twitterde op zaterdag 18-08-2018 om 20:12:49 Time for Mueller investigation to file report. We will release ours. Don’t interfere with election like Comey.The President had nothing to do with Russians. He didn’t obstruct an investigation. 1.4 million documents and 32 witnesses no privilege raised. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:40 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Nja, dat bepaalt in ieder geval dat zijn loyaliteit niet bij de persoon Trump ligt maar bij het instituut van het Witte Huis. Dat is anders bij iemand als Giuliani bv.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:51 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Interview met Dean op 4 min.

NYT: White House counsel McGahn cooperated 'extensively' with Mueller probe

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 23:48 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Oh ja, eens, al is hij wel daar neergezet door Trump... al kun je je wel dan weer afvragen hoe iemand uberhaupt aan dat soort mensen komt, want hij was kennelijk niet iemand in Trumps inner circle als ik het goed begrijp?

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 12:52 schreef FlipjeHolland het volgende:
Waar is de tweet van Trump wat betreft het overlijden van Kofi Annan?

Niet iets wat je zo maar kan negeren als president zijnde.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 augustus 2018 22:01 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Real blockbuster from @nytmike & @maggieNYT who report that Don McGahn:

(a) Is cooperating extensively with Mueller.
(b) Feared Trump was setting him up as a fall guy.
(c) Trump may not know how much McGahn has said.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1030878353664999426

Ter herinnering, McGahn is de advocaat van het Witte Huis... Artikel in kwestie:

[..]

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 11:12 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Hij zit er puur als stoorzender. Neem drie verschillende posities in elke dag en krijgt overal in elke media zijn kans om zijn lulverhaal te verkondigen. Leidt ontzettend de aandacht af omdat ie overal headlines creeert. control the narrative. Guliani is volgens mij echt een meesterzet geweest. Al heeft ie wel wat slippertjes gemaakt die juist backfiren. Het hoofddoel wordt nog prima bediend.

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 13:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Mueller denkt niet dat hij de mogelijkheid, het recht dus, heeft Trump aan te klagen, maar dat het Congres dat moet doen.
Dus een PR advocaat is niet echt onhandig.

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 12:52 schreef FlipjeHolland het volgende:
Waar is de tweet van Trump wat betreft het overlijden van Kofi Annan?

Niet iets wat je zo maar kan negeren als president zijnde.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 13:30:41 No Collusion and No Obstruction, except by Crooked Hillary and the Democrats. All of the resignations and corruption, yet heavily conflicted Bob Mueller refuses to even look in that direction. What about the Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok lies to Congress, or Crooked’s Emails! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 12:52 schreef FlipjeHolland het volgende:
Waar is de tweet van Trump wat betreft het overlijden van Kofi Annan?

Niet iets wat je zo maar kan negeren als president zijnde.

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 13:37 schreef Arcee het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 13:30:41 No Collusion and No Obstruction, except by Crooked Hillary and the Democrats. All of the resignations and corruption, yet heavily conflicted Bob Mueller refuses to even look in that direction. What about the Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok lies to Congress, or Crooked’s Emails! reageer retweet

Het gaat al weer over Hillary Clinton.

Gast.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:06:43 The Failing New York Times wrote a story that made it seem like the White House Councel had TURNED on the President, when in fact it is just the opposite - & the two Fake reporters knew this. This is why the Fake News Media has become the Enemy of the People. So bad for America! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:14:44 Some members of the media are very Angry at the Fake Story in the New York Times. They actually called to complain and apologize - a big step forward. From the day I announced, the Times has been Fake News, and with their disgusting new Board Member, it will only get worse! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:24:38 Study the late Joseph McCarthy, because we are now in period with Mueller and his gang that make Joseph McCarthy look like a baby! Rigged Witch Hunt! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 15:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Hij is helemaal niet blij met het artikel over McGahn

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:06:43 The Failing New York Times wrote a story that made it seem like the White House Councel had TURNED on the President, when in fact it is just the opposite - & the two Fake reporters knew this. This is why the Fake News Media has become the Enemy of the People. So bad for America! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:14:44 Some members of the media are very Angry at the Fake Story in the New York Times. They actually called to complain and apologize - a big step forward. From the day I announced, the Times has been Fake News, and with their disgusting new Board Member, it will only get worse! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 15:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Hij is helemaal niet blij met het artikel over McGahn

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:06:43 The Failing New York Times wrote a story that made it seem like the White House Councel had TURNED on the President, when in fact it is just the opposite - & the two Fake reporters knew this. This is why the Fake News Media has become the Enemy of the People. So bad for America! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 19-08-2018 om 14:14:44 Some members of the media are very Angry at the Fake Story in the New York Times. They actually called to complain and apologize - a big step forward. From the day I announced, the Times has been Fake News, and with their disgusting new Board Member, it will only get worse! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 15:51 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Wie is die disgusting boardmember?

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 15:51 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Wie is die disgusting boardmember?

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 15:54 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

Sarah Yeong.

quote:

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 16:00 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:
President van Amerika die zich druk maakt over een aanstelling bij het editorial board van een krant. Wat een wereld leven we in.