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: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER: 19 oktober

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER: 19 oktober

SPOILER: juni

SPOILER: 8 augustus

SPOILER: 14 september

SPOILER: 19 oktober

SPOILER

twitter:

big_cases twitterde op dinsdag 04-12-2018 om 21:20:59 New filing in United States v. Manafort: Transcript Doc. on PACER: https://t.co/xq9w5s7IL5 reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:12 schreef Arcee het volgende:
Haha, Dow Jones 800 punten onderuit (3%).

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:19 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:

[..]

Helemaal niet haha

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:12 schreef Arcee het volgende:
Haha, Dow Jones 800 punten onderuit (3%).

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:11 schreef Ringo het volgende:
Senatoren na CIA-briefing: kroonprins waarschijnlijk achter moord Khashoggi

Opvallend hoe exact Lindsey Graham het hyperbolische taalgebruik van Trump kopieert om het tegenovergestelde te beweren:
“Thereʼs no smoking gun, thereʼs a smoking saw”
“Mohammed bin Salman [MBS] is a wrecking ball”
“I think he [MBS] is crazy, I think heʼs dangerous”
“You must be willfully blind not to come to the conclusion that this was orchestrated and organised by people under the command of MBS”
“If we donʼt send this message, we are making the world into a more dangerous place”

https://nos.nl/video/2262(...)een-smoking-saw.html

Een dolkstoot in de rug van de oranje gek.

quote:

“I would imagine if they [Pompeo & Mattis] were in a Democratic administration I would be all over them for being in the pocket of Saudi Arabia,” Graham said of the secretaries, “but since I have such respect for them, I am going to assume that they are being good soldiers … I would really question somebody’s judgment if they couldn’t figure this out.”

https://www.washingtonpos(...)9db33382f_story.html

twitter:

SenFeinstein twitterde op dinsdag 04-12-2018 om 22:08:17 Roger Stone’s attorney sent a letter this week stating Stone won’t provide documents or appear for an interview before the committee. https://t.co/csC3TG1BPH https://t.co/oRbpE0qjEw reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:57 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

SenFeinstein twitterde op dinsdag 04-12-2018 om 22:08:17 Roger Stone’s attorney sent a letter this week stating Stone won’t provide documents or appear for an interview before the committee. https://t.co/csC3TG1BPH https://t.co/oRbpE0qjEw reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 23:09 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Een wijs man zei ooit: The mob takes the fifth.

twitter:

EricColumbus twitterde op dinsdag 04-12-2018 om 22:41:32 @NatashaBertrand Stone’s lawyer Invoking the Fifth Amendment seems like overkill in response to a request from a ranking member who, unlike a committee chair, has no subpoena power. He could just have said “thanks but no thanks.” reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 december 2018 22:24 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De beurzen zijn niet onder de indruk van Trump's pauze in de handelsoorlog.

https://edition.cnn.com/2(...)dow-jones/index.html

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 02:40 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:
Flynn memo is vrijgegeven; 13 pagina's, waarvan er 6 onleesbaar zijn gemaakt. Link: https://www.lawfareblog.c(...)lynn-sentencing-memo

"Given the defendant’s substantial assistance and other considerations set forth below, a sentence at the low end of the guideline range—including a sentence that does not impose a term of incarceration—is appropriate and warranted."

Sappig.
[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 02:38:31 17/ BREAKING: Robert Mueller says Flynn should get no jail-time because he provided the government with "substantial assistance." reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 02:39:29 18/ MUELLER: "Given the defendant’s substantial assistance and other considerations set forth below, a sentence at the low end of the guideline range—including a sentence that does not impose a term of incarceration—is appropriate and warranted."This is very bad news for Trump. reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 02:49:02 25/ Mueller confirms that Flynn aided the collusion investigation. And as I've said on the feed many times, those who said Flynn being sentenced meant no one else would be charged due to his cooperation were *wrong*. Mueller makes that perfectly clear. Glad that canard has ended. reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 02:50:13 26/ The redactions are EXTREME. There are MANY redactions. Whole paragraphs MISSING. And based upon what precedes them, those paragraphs would appear to be about (a) ongoing (b) collusion investigations (c) that could lead to further charges of other individuals down the line. reageer retweet

quote:

Michael T. Flynn, President Trump’s first national security adviser, helped substantially with the special counsel’s investigation and should receive little to no prison time for lying to federal investigators, prosecutors said on Tuesday.

Mr. Flynn was a key cooperator who helped the Justice Department with several investigations, prosecutors for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, said. He sat for 19 interviews with Mr. Mueller’s office and other prosecutors and handed over documents and communications, they said.

“His early cooperation was particularly valuable because he was one of the few people with long-term and firsthand insight” into the subject of Mr. Mueller’s investigation — Russia’s election interference and whether any Trump associates conspired, prosecutors wrote in a sentencing recommendation memorandum and an addendum that was heavily blacked out.

In particular, they wrote, he might have prompted others to cooperate with the inquiry. “The defendant’s decision to plead guilty and cooperate likely affected the decisions of related firsthand witnesses to be forthcoming,” prosecutors said.

They also indicated that Mr. Flynn helped with other investigations without revealing details about them.

SPOILER

Mr. Flynn, who served briefly as the president’s national security adviser, is the only White House aide and the first person from the president’s inner circle to strike a cooperation deal with the special counsel’s office in exchange for a more lenient penalty. He pleaded guilty a year ago to lying to the F.B.I. about conversations he had with the Russian ambassador to the United States at the time, Sergey I. Kislyak.

“The defendant deserves credit for accepting responsibility in a timely fashion and substantially assisting the government,” prosecutors wrote.

The cases of some other former Trump aides caught up in the special counsel investigation are also nearing resolution, marking an active week for Mr. Mueller’s inquiry. By Friday, Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors are due to enumerate how they believe Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman, violated a plea agreement and separately to outline the extent of cooperation by Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s longtime lawyer and fixer.

Another longtime Trump associate whom Mr. Mueller is scrutinizing, Roger J. Stone Jr., said on Tuesday that he had invoked his the Fifth Amendment rights in response to a request from Democratic investigators for the Senate Judiciary Committee to hand over documents and testimony relevant to their own Russia inquiry. Mr. Stone’s lawyer, Grant J. Smith, said the committee’s request was “overbroad” and stressed that Mr. Stone was “an innocent citizen who denounces secrecy.”

The letter was dated Monday, the same day that Mr. Trump praised Mr. Stone on Twitter for having the “guts” to stand up to Mr. Mueller. Mr. Stone’s lawyer said that the letter was sent before Mr. Trump’s tweet.

A grand jury in Washington has been investigating whether Mr. Stone had any advance knowledge of how WikiLeaks planned to use documents stolen from Democratic computers by Russian agents during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Prosecutors said Mr. Flynn’s more than 33 years of military service — he was a three-star Army general before being fired as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014 — should be taken into account when Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia sentences him on Dec. 18. But they also noted he should have known better than to lie to the F.B.I. “Senior government leaders should be held to the highest standards,” they wrote.

Close observers of Mr. Mueller’s investigation had hoped his team might provide revealing details about possible cooperation between Trump associates and Russia, but in typical fashion, the special counsel’s office kept its cards closely held.

Mr. Flynn, who gained notoriety after he left the military for his view of Islamic terrorism as an existential threat to the United States, began advising the Trump campaign in early 2016. About a week after his surprise election victory, Mr. Trump named Mr. Flynn as his future national security adviser.

During the presidential transition, Mr. Flynn discussed with Mr. Kislyak a coming United Nations Security Council vote on whether to condemn Israel’s building of settlements. At the time, the Obama administration was preparing to allow a Security Council vote on the matter.

The two men also spoke about sanctions imposed by the Obama administration on Russia over its election interference in December 2016. Mr. Flynn asked that Moscow refrain from escalating the situation, and Mr. Kislyak said Russia “had chosen to moderate its response.”

Just days after Mr. Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, Mr. Flynn was interviewed by the F.B.I. as part of the investigation into Russia’s influence campaign in the 2016 election. During the interview, Mr. Flynn lied to agents, a crime that carries up to five years in prison. At the time, the acting attorney general, Sally Q. Yates, warned the White House that Mr. Flynn might be compromised by the Russians.

Why Mr. Flynn chose to lie about his and Mr. Kislyak’s discussions remains a mystery to the F.B.I. officials who investigated the case. Before investigators interviewed Mr. Flynn at the White House, he had indicated to a senior F.B.I. official that he knew the United States had been listening to Mr. Kislyak’s calls, former law enforcement officials said.

Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors gave no indication about why he lied. Mr. Flynn’s own memo to seek a light sentence in the case is due by Dec. 11.

Mr. Flynn served only 24 days as national security adviser. He was forced to resign as the White House cited his failure to be forthcoming with Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Mr. Kislyak.

Mr. Flynn has largely remained out of news headlines since taking the plea deal a year ago. And Mr. Trump has said little about him since, even as he lashed out at other former aides who agreed to cooperate with investigators in exchange for lighter punishments.

“I’ve seen it many times,” the president told “Fox & Friends” in August after Mr. Manafort was convicted of financial fraud and Mr. Cohen agreed to cooperate with prosecutors. “I’ve had many friends involved in this stuff; it’s called flipping, and it almost ought to be illegal. It’s not a fair thing.”

After being fired by President Barack Obama in 2014 after repeated clashes with other administration officials about his job performance, Mr. Flynn went on to form his own consulting company.

Among his clients was Turkey, which paid him more than a half-million dollars to target Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish cleric who lives in Pennsylvania. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey believes that Mr. Gulen and his supporters were behind a failed coup attempt in 2016 and has repeatedly demanded the United States extradite Mr. Gulen, who fled Turkey 1999.

On Election Day in 2016, Mr. Flynn published an op-ed article in The Hill, a newspaper serving Congress, calling Mr. Gulen “a shady Islamic mullah” and a “radical Islamist.”

Prosecutors did not charge Mr. Flynn with crimes related to his work on behalf of the Turkish government. But in documents, they have made clear that they have evidence that Mr. Flynn “made materially false statements and omissions” in his federal filings about that lobbying work.

They admonished Mr. Flynn in Tuesday’s memo for concealing his work for Turkey, saying it kept the public in the dark about the extent of its efforts to influence public opinion about the failed coup.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 05:12:07 Trump has been urging his associates to have "guts" and not cooperate in the Russia probe. But Mueller sent a clear message tonight to current/future witnesses: testify honestly and completely, and you could be spared prison time. https://t.co/Wf9bCAjyA9 reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 03:27:23 Facing citizen votes to raise the minimum wage and expand sick leave, Michigan Republicans voted on the plans before the election, to take them off the ballot. Today, in lame-duck before the Dem governor comes in, they voted for a major weakening of both. https://t.co/BpvdJkdUJy reageer retweet

twitter:

sbauerAP twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 06:10:37 Update on Wisconsin:_ Assembly debating Medicaid bill Senate just passed_ Huge bill on governor and attorney general's powers, early voting, economic development power, remains to be debated_ Senate debate on pre-existing conditions coverage also pending reageer retweet

twitter:

sbauerAP twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 06:11:47 _ Senate Republicans are caucusing, working out agreement on what's left_ Debate/voting likely to go into Wednesday morning_ Once approved by both houses, bills go to @GovWalker for his signature. Walker has signaled support reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 07:27 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:
Even de donkere krochten van het internet afgestruind.
Blijkbaar zijn de MAGA’s er van overtuigd dat Flynn meewerkt aan een onderzoek naar Clinton, Obama en de rest van de ‘Deep state’.

Deze mensen...

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 07:27 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:
Even de donkere krochten van het internet afgestruind.
Blijkbaar zijn de MAGA’s er van overtuigd dat Flynn meewerkt aan een onderzoek naar Clinton, Obama en de rest van de ‘Deep state’.

Deze mensen...

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 05:22 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Flynn Was Key Cooperator and Deserves Little Prison Time, Mueller Team Says

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 05:22 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Flynn Was Key Cooperator and Deserves Little Prison Time, Mueller Team Says

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 09:39 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Vroeg me al af waarom onze vrienden in BNW uit het niets berichten begonnen te posten over dat Flynn onschuldig is (wat dan zou moeten bewijzen dat van collusion geen sprake was en dat het Mueller-onderzoek een dikke vette hoax is).

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 07:03 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:
Flynn werkt mee met Mueller.
Dat zal verwarrend zijn voor de MAGA’s die hem als een patriot beschouwden.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 10:10 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Als voormalig militair zal Flynn natuurlijk best wel geneigd zijn om met de FBI mee te werken. Vergeet niet dat hij indertijd niet kon bevroeden in welk wespennest hij zou belanden.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 10:19 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:

[..]

Flynn liet zich door Turkije betalen om Gülen uit te leveren en loog over contacten met Rusland over afschaffen sancties.

Wat mij betreft past hij helemaal in dit wespennest hoor.

https://www.theguardian.c(...)curity-adviser-trump

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 06:29 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 03:27:23 Facing citizen votes to raise the minimum wage and expand sick leave, Michigan Republicans voted on the plans before the election, to take them off the ballot. Today, in lame-duck before the Dem governor comes in, they voted for a major weakening of both. https://t.co/BpvdJkdUJy reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 10:22 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Zo zie je maar weer, je wordt besmet waar je mee om gaat.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 10:16 schreef archito het volgende:

Volgens een grove schatting zou een recessie mogelijk zijn nog voordat Trump uit het Witte Huis vertrekt. Niemand om dan de schuld te geven zou je zeggen.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 11:10 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

Natuurlijk wel, de Democraten in het Huis, de Fed, da's niet zo moeilijk.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 11:37 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Na twee jaar beschuldigingen van Trump aan het adres van alles en iedereen, is het de vraag of iemand hem nog geloofd.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 10:02 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Lijkt me echt een signaal aan anderen om toch maar onvoorwaardelijk mee te werken en niet te hopen op een pardon van Trump. Dit geeft aan dat Mueller nu ALLE Troeven in handen heeft.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 11:44 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:

[..]

35% van de Amerikaanse stemmers is all-in.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 11:45 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:

[..]

Mwa, er was ook weinig waarop men hem kon veroordelen, dacht ik. Herinner me twee zaken: Liegen tegen de FBI, maar dat had de FBI zelf reeds ondermijnd (met een verklaring die neerkwam op "hij dacht dat hij waarheidsgetrouw antwoordde"), en niet of laattijdig registreren als een "foreign agent", maar dat is iets waar heel wat mensen, oa leden van het congres, zich schuldig aan maken.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 12:07 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Really...in ieder geval het was een domme keus

Overigens vraag ik mij af of VP Pence vrijuit gaat in de eindfase?
Heeft iemand hier een vermoeden?

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 13:23 schreef Klaphark het volgende:
Seth heeft het voorlopig toch vaak bij het rechte eind gehad. Alles wat hij vorig jaar al zei is wel uitgekomen. Hij zegt ook regelmatig dat hij Pence verder niet op een verdachtenlijstje heeft staan.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 13:40 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:

[..]

Kweenie. Lijkt me dat je als running mate zodanig dicht bij het vuur zit dat je wel iets moet weten of tenminste kan vermoeden.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 13:45 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Hij heeft angstvallig geprobeerd om in de luwte te blijven, dat op zich is al verdacht.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 14:31 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:

[..]

Je hebt het over een man die niet alleen met een vrouw in een kamer durft te zijn, omdat hij zijn inner demon niet vertrouwt.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 16:00:01 The Wisconsin Senate voted just before sunrise this morning to pass a sweeping bill in a lame-duck session designed to empower the Republican-controlled Legislature and weaken the Democrat replacing Scott Walker and the incoming Democratic A.G.https://t.co/tnUePjqJPr reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 16:30 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 16:00:01 The Wisconsin Senate voted just before sunrise this morning to pass a sweeping bill in a lame-duck session designed to empower the Republican-controlled Legislature and weaken the Democrat replacing Scott Walker and the incoming Democratic A.G.https://t.co/tnUePjqJPr reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 16:30 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 05-12-2018 om 16:00:01 The Wisconsin Senate voted just before sunrise this morning to pass a sweeping bill in a lame-duck session designed to empower the Republican-controlled Legislature and weaken the Democrat replacing Scott Walker and the incoming Democratic A.G.https://t.co/tnUePjqJPr reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 18:57 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Wederom een hilarisch stukje hypocrisie van de partij die vindt dat "lame-ducks" geen belangrijke beslissingen mogen nemen.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 19:00 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ik vond het wel wat erger dan slechts hypocritie...

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 18:12 schreef DuizendGezichten het volgende:
Ik zit de uitvaartsdienst voor Bush te kijken. Alan Simpson is killing it.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 19:13 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Oh het is ook zeker een kwalijke zaak, maar in het gehele oeuvre van zaken die de GOP flikt valt dit nog wel mee. De hele reden dat de GOP daar een meerderheid heeft ondanks 190k minder stemmen is in dit plaatje treffend weergegeven:


[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 19:15 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Er is er één, die net zo lief was weggebleven.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 20:17 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, nee, natuurlijk ligt de gerrymandering daar aan ten grondslag (mooi grafiekje btw), wat het des te hemelschrijdender maakt om dan dit soort maatregelen te treffen. Het is ook hetgeen wat het uberhaupt mogelijk maakt. Echter, wat je zult gaan zien is dat nu het hek van de dam is. Wat zou democraten weerhouden als de republikeinen weer eens winnen in een andere staat niet hetzelfde te doen? Het kan het begin van het einde van democratie zijn. Je moet elkaar wel tijdelijk macht kunnen gunnen...

quote:

The U.S. has an extradition request over Iran sanctions violations; in addition to being CFO, Meng Wanzhou is also daughter of the company’s founder.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 18:12 schreef DuizendGezichten het volgende:
Ik zit de uitvaartsdienst voor Bush te kijken. Alan Simpson is killing it.

quote:

Op woensdag 5 december 2018 13:23 schreef Klaphark het volgende:
Seth heeft het voorlopig toch vaak bij het rechte eind gehad. Alles wat hij vorig jaar al zei is wel uitgekomen. Hij zegt ook regelmatig dat hij Pence verder niet op een verdachtenlijstje heeft staan.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 02:03 schreef TruusHenk het volgende:
Canadian Authorities Arrest CFO of Huawei Technologies at U.S. Request

[..]

Trump verhoogt de inzet nog eens?

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 09:59 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Ik las dit ook net en dacht, dit is geen toeval. Ben benieuwd hoe China reageert...

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 10:48 schreef Jellereppe het volgende:

[..]

Het Chinese internet reageert niet goed. Anti-westerse stijgt langzaam maar zeker onder de Chinese populatie naar talrijke anti-China incidenten en praktijken in bepaalde landen onder US-vassalage. En gelijk hebben ze. Het bedrijf is zo succesvol dat de Amerikanen overgaan tot het kidnappen van dochters van Chinese entrepreneurs om de opmars van succesvolle Chinese merken en daarmee Chinese innovatie in te dampen en natuurlijk haar kidnapping te gebruiken als leverage tijdens de onderhandelingen. Niet geheel onverwacht. Maffia-praktijken.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 11:00 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

In dit geval ja en nee. Meerdere Chinese bedrijven hebben idd Amerikaanse tech verkocht aan Iran en dus de sancties (wat je er ook van vindt) niet nageleefd. Tevens zijn het praktijken waar de Chinese politieke top ook niet vies van is. De vraag is echter of je je als westers land dit soort dingen moet gaan doen.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 11:02 schreef Jellereppe het volgende:

[..]

Sancties? De Amerikanen zijn unilateraal uit het Iran-verdrag gestapt. En verder gaat het niet om Iran-sancties maar omdat Huawei verder is met 5G dan Amerikaanse en andere bedrijven. De Amerikanen willen voorkomen dat zij dat gaan uitrollen en daarmee de standaard bepalen voor de toekomst. Mensen onderschatten hoe groot de impact gaat zijn van 5G op technologie.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 09:59 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Ik las dit ook net en dacht, dit is geen toeval. Ben benieuwd hoe China reageert...

quote:

Why did Canada arrest the CFO of Chinese tech giant Huawei?

Janus Dongye, Researcher at University of Cambridge (2012-present)

Answered 37m ago

Firstly the majority of Quorans would all agree that the domestic law in the US should not be enforced to other countries. For these patriotic Americans, we can easily debunk your thought by just giving you a counterexample.

Scenario:

China had enacted a domestic law on sanctioning Taiwan and banned all international companies trading with Taiwan. However, the Apple company still continues to sell iPhones in Taiwan. Then the Chinese government issues a ban on all Apple products selling in China due to security concerns. The management is not transparent in Apple and it might be related to the US military. And also, Tim Cook, the Apple CEO, having a flight transfer in Hong Kong, is arrested by the Hong Kong Police. The Hong Kong Authority said they are listening to the Chinese government to detain Cook until bail out. Tim Cook is suspected to trade with Taiwan.

Now switch the names and you can see how absurd it is.

What actually happened:

The US had enacted a domestic law on sanctioning Iran and banned all international companies trading with Iran. However, the Huawei company still continues to sell P20s in Iran. Then the US government issues a ban on all Huawei products selling in US due to security concerns. The management is not transparent in Huawei and it might be related to the Chinese military. And also, Meng Wanzhou, the Huawei CFO, having a flight transfer in Canada, is arrested by the Canadian Police. The Canadian Authority said they are listening to the US government to detain Meng until bail out. Meng Wanzhou is suspected to trade with Iran.

So why does Canada does this?

Through this deduction, we can conclude that

Hong Kong is to China is similar to Canada is to the US.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 11:06 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:

[..]

Niettemin hebben Amerikaanse bedrijven en verkopers van Amerikaanse technologie zich daar aan te houden. De 5g standaard is er al en wordt volop uitgerold komend jaar. Daar heeft het weinig mee van doen. Mocht ze het echt dwars zitten dan ontwikkelen de VS zelf een standaard. Ten tijde van GSM hadden ze dat ook.

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 11:42 schreef Jellereppe het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb het over de 5G standaard internationaal niet in de Amerikaanse markt.

https://www.wired.com/sto(...)-build-a-5g-network/

quote:

Huawei chief financial officer Sabrina Meng Wanzhou, who was arrested in Canada and is facing a US extradition request, had told employees in an internal talk on compliance that there are scenarios where the company can weigh the costs and accept the risks of not meeting the requirements of the law.

Meng took part in an internal question-and-answer session on October 29 with her father, Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei, where father and daughter shared their views on compliance.

Both executives made references to the need to control the costs of compliance and not to exceed what is legally required in individual jurisdictions, according to a transcript of their remarks distributed to employees and obtained by the Post.

Huawei declined to comment or verify the contents of the memo.

Huawei CFO arrested in Canada at US request ‘for violating Iran sanctions’

Meng spoke of the different types of external regulatory compliance, dividing them into “red” and “yellow” lines. The former referred to rules where there is “no bargaining and must be strictly complied with,” she said. The latter is where strict compliance is not operationally feasible and the company can build in the costs of flouting the rules as “sunk costs,” she said, citing examples such as labour risks.

“Of course, beyond the yellow and red lines, there may still be another scenario, and that is where the external rules are clear-cut and there’s no contention, but the company is totally unable to comply with in actual operations. In such cases, after a reasonable decision-making process, one may accept the risk of temporary non-compliance,” she said.

At the October talk, Ren told those gathered that compliance management in "sensitive countries" must also take into account the relevant laws of the US and European Union, without naming the countries.

"We must not bind ourselves up just because the US is attacking us," Ren said in response to a question. "If our hands and feet are bound, then we will not be able to continue producing, then what's the point of compliance?"

"The US has very strict compliance policies, but American companies are used to it," Ren said. "Nobody dares to flout the law, it has become a habit, and they can still achieve high speeds. Our company has not yet formed this habit, that is why communication costs are too high."

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 13:23 schreef Jellereppe het volgende:
Ze verzinnen wel een excuses. Dat is het probleem niet. De Amerikanen worden zenuwachtig van het land en de steeds sterkere bedrijven die daaruit ontspringen. Dat is waar het om draait. En dus tijd voor een handelsoorlog en als dat niet slaagt een koude oorlog zodat ze de topdog kunnen blijven. Foei, waarom blijf jullie niet kleding naaien en speelgoed produceren voor de Walmart zoals het geval was in de jaren 80 en 90. Hoe durven jullie spleetogen opmars te maken naar hogere technologie en zelfs serieus geld beginnen te steken in wetenschap/onderzoek en daarmee onze positie als '''City on the Hill'', Exceptionalisme, technologische leiderschap en hegemonie te bedreigen.

quote:

Eric Harwit, an Asian studies professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa who has written extensively on Chinese telecoms, said the arrest was not just about sanctions violations but the bigger picture of the US worrying about Chinese hi-tech firms becoming rivals to American companies in the future.

“It’s just an extension of American suspicions about the Chinese technology ambitions to spread around the world. Huawei of course is a global player, and has made major inroads in developing countries, and even developed countries,” Harwit said.

twitter:

sahilkapur twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 16:51:57 Dem leaders had been open to a DACA-for-wall deal earlier this year. It sounds like their price of negotiation is going up after the 2018 election. https://t.co/ZC08Dr0Ydd reageer retweet

twitter:

stevebenen twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 17:09:30 Trump last month: "I have answered [Mueller's questions] very easily."Giuliani this month: "Answering those questions was a nightmare." https://t.co/gTQwVAHGm5 reageer retweet

quote:

Giuliani said it’s been difficult in the last few months to even consider drafting response plans, or devote time to the “counter-report” he claimed they were working on this summer, as he and Trump confronted Mueller’s written questions about the 2016 campaign.

“Answering those questions was a nightmare,” he told me. “It took him about three weeks to do what would normally take two days.”

twitter:

AFP twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 17:45:23 #BREAKING: Conditions met for Assange to leave Ecuador embassy in London: Ecuador president https://t.co/Kl1yjK2MBV reageer retweet

quote:

Trump’s 2020 Campaign Has Reportedly Funneled Over $1 Million Into His Own Businesses

(..)

Per Forbes:

Leading up to the 2016 election, the president’s campaign paid an average of $2,700 in monthly Trump Tower rent for every person listed in campaign filings as receiving a “payroll” payment. The 2020 operation, by contrast, is shelling out an average of $6,300 in monthly rent for every such person.

(..)

The report goes on to speculate that it’s “unlikely” Trump’s 2020 campaign would simply hand cash over to the president for “nothing in return,” and cites an unnamed Trump 2016 staffer who said that Trump Plaza apartments would occasionally serve as crash pads for Trump campaign staff. If that’s the case, of course, it would be a lot cheaper to occasionally rent hotel rooms, but, Alexander notes, “that would not guarantee a steady stream of rent for the president.”

(..)

https://lawandcrime.com/h(...)inesses-report-says/

quote:

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) on Thursday morning managed to turn a Fox Business Network discussion about Google and China into a bizarre attack on the right’s favorite bogeyman George Soros.

Fox Business later apologized for the congressman’s comments.

“You mention Orwell, it also reminds me of another George—George Soros,” Gohmert said, making a clumsy transition during his segment. “Because Google is born in a free country and then they go over and help oppress another country.”

“George Soros is supposed to be Jewish, but you wouldn’t know it from the damage he’s inflicted on Israel and the fact that he turned on fellow Jews and helped take the property that they own.”

That wild accusation—or as Gohmert put it “fact”—went unchallenged by host Stuart Varney, who helped steer the conversation back to China.

Gohmert’s comments echo a common right-wing conspiracy theory that Soros—a liberal, billionaire philanthropist—was a Nazi sympathizer or worse during World War II.

[..]

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 21:35:17 Trump and the NRA used the same consultants to spearhead TV ad blitzes during the '16 election, possibly in violation of federal law, MoJo reports."This is very strong evidence, if not proof, of illegal coordination," said an ex-FEC general counsel. https://t.co/dIXBqiWuQX reageer retweet

quote:

Lobbyists representing the Saudi government reserved blocks of rooms at President Trump’s Washington, D.C., hotel within a month of Trump’s election in 2016 — paying for an estimated 500 nights at the luxury hotel in just three months, according to organizers of the trips and documents obtained by The Washington Post.

At the time, these lobbyists were reserving large numbers of D.C.-area hotel rooms as part of an unorthodox campaign that offered U.S. military veterans a free trip to Washington — then sent them to Capitol Hill to lobby against a law the Saudis opposed, according to veterans and organizers.

At first, lobbyists for the Saudis put the veterans up in Northern Virginia. Then, in December 2016, they switched most of their business to the Trump International Hotel in downtown Washington. In all, the lobbyists spent more than $270,000 to house six groups of visiting veterans at the Trump hotel, which Trump still owns.

Those bookings have fueled a pair of federal lawsuits alleging Trump violated the Constitution by taking improper payments from foreign governments.

During this period, records show, the average nightly rate at the hotel was $768. The lobbyists who ran the trips say they chose Trump’s hotel strictly because it offered a discount from that rate and had rooms available, not to curry favor with Trump.

“Absolutely not. It had nothing to do with that. Not one bit,” said Michael Gibson, a Maryland-based political operative who helped organize the trips.

Some of the veterans who stayed at Trump’s hotel say they were kept in the dark about the Saudis’ role in the trips. Now, they wonder if they were used twice over: not just to deliver someone else’s message to Congress, but also to deliver business to the Trump Organization.

“It made all the sense in the world, when we found out that the Saudis had paid for it,” said Henry Garcia, a Navy veteran from San Antonio who went on three trips. He said the organizers never said anything about Saudi Arabia when they invited him.

He believed the trips were organized by other veterans, but that puzzled him, because this group spent money like no veterans group he had ever worked with. There were private hotel rooms, open bars, free dinners. Then, Garcia said, one of the organizers who had been drinking minibar champagne mentioned a Saudi prince.

“I said, ‘Oh, we were just used to give Trump money,’ ” Garcia said.

SPOILER

The Washington firm Qorvis/MSLGroup, which has long represented the Saudi government in the United States, paid the organizers of the “veterans fly-in” trips, according to lobbying disclosure forms. The firm declined to comment.

The Saudi Embassy did not respond to questions for this report. Trump hotel executives, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss their clients, said they were unaware at the time that Saudi Arabia was ultimately footing the bill and declined to comment on the rates they offer to guests.

The existence of the Saudi-funded stays at Trump’s hotel was reported by several news outlets last year. But reviews of emails, agendas and disclosure forms from the Saudis’ lobbyists and interviews this fall with two dozen veterans provide far more detail about the extent of the trips and the organizers’ interactions with veterans than have previously been reported.

That reporting showed a total of six trips, during which the groups grew larger after the initial visit and the stays increased over time. The Post estimated the Saudi government paid for more than 500 nights in Trump hotel rooms, based on planning documents and agendas given to the veterans and conversations with organizers.

These transactions have become ammunition for plaintiffs in two lawsuits alleging that Trump violated the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause by taking payments from foreign governments. On Tuesday, the attorneys general in Maryland and the District subpoenaed 13 Trump business entities and 18 competing businesses, largely in search of records of foreign spending at the hotel.

Earlier this year, the Trump Organization donated about $151,000 to the U.S. Treasury, saying that was its amount of profit from foreign governments, without explaining how it arrived at that number. The Justice Department, defending Trump in the lawsuits, says the Constitution doesn’t bar routine business transactions.

Next year, the transactions will also face scrutiny from the House’s new Democratic majority. Democrats have said they want to understand Trump’s business connections with the Saudi government in the aftermath of the killing of Post contributing columnist Jamal Khashoggi at a Saudi consulate in Turkey.

“Foreign countries understand that they can curry favor with the president by patronizing his businesses,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), who will lead the House Intelligence Committee next year. “It presents a real problem, in that it may work.” The White House declined to comment.

When these trips began, in late 2016, the Saudi government was on a losing streak in Washington.

In late September, Congress had overridden a veto from President Barack Obama and passed a law the Saudis vehemently opposed: the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, called JASTA. The new law, backed by the families of Sept. 11 victims, opened the door to costly litigation alleging that the Saudi government bore some blame. Of the 19 hijackers involved in the attacks, 15 were Saudi citizens.

In response, the Saudis tried something new. To battle one of America’s most revered groups — the Sept. 11 families — they recruited allies from another.

They went looking for veterans.

“Welcome Home Brother!” wrote Jason E. Johns, an Army veteran and Wisconsin lobbyist, to several veterans in December 2016, according to identical emails two veterans shared with The Post. Johns invited the veterans, whom he did not know personally, on a trip to “storm the Hill” to lobby against the law.

“Lodging at the Trump International Hotel, all expense paid,” Johns wrote in the emails. Johns’s email signature said he was with “N.M.L.B. Veterans Advocacy Group,” which is Johns’s law firm in Madison, Wis.

According to filings with the Justice Department, Johns was actually making the overtures on behalf of the Saudi government. The Saudis’ longtime lobbyist, Qorvis, was paying Gibson, who in turn was paying Johns.

The first trip Johns organized, in mid-November 2016, was small and short: about 22 veterans, staying two nights at the Westin in Crystal City, Va. — on the other side of the Potomac River, separated from Capitol Hill by four miles and one big traffic jam. Gibson — who helped organized the trips — said another fly-in was held at the Westin later the same month.

Then, on Dec. 2, 2016, Gibson said he was told by Qorvis to organize another visit on very short notice — with the attendees to arrive in just a few days. Gibson said the Westin was booked. So were many other hotels he tried.

“I just out of the blue decided, ‘Why not call the Trump hotel?’ ” he said. “I said I was representing a client, a group of veterans . . . Did they offer any discounts for veterans? And they said yes, they did have availability.” They also offered a lower rate, he said.

After that trip, Gibson said, Qorvis asked him to schedule more trips for 2017. It didn’t tell him to go back to the Trump hotel. But the first trip had gone well. So he did.

In all, there were five more trips in January and February, according to documents and interviews. The number of attendees rose to 50 on one trip in late January, and the trips extended to three nights, according to agendas sent to veterans. That also was the clients’ call. Gibson said he never told any Trump hotel staff that the Saudis were paying: “I did all this on my corporate credit card for my client, who was Qorvis, and said I was bringing a group of veterans to work on legislation.”

Veterans who attended these trips said a few things surprised them.

One was how good their group seemed to be at spending money.

“We’ve done hundreds of veterans events, and we’ve stayed in Holiday Inns and eaten Ritz Crackers and lemonade. And we’re staying in this hotel that costs $500 a night,” said Dan Cord, a Marine veteran. “I’d never seen anything like this. They were like, ‘That’s what’s so cool! Drink on us.’ ”

Each trip included one, and sometimes two, dinners in a Trump hotel banquet room. There was usually an open bar in the room, veterans said, and it was always supposed to end at a certain hour — but often, they said, Johns would theatrically declare an extension.

“He’d be like, ‘You know what, just put it on for another hour!” said Scott Bartels, an Army veteran from Wisconsin who went on three trips.

Another surprise, veterans said, was how bad their group seemed to be at lobbying.

Veterans said they were told that the new law might cause other countries to retaliate and might lead to U.S. veterans being prosecuted overseas for what their units had done in war. They were given a few fact sheets — including one with small print at the bottom, reading “This is distributed by Qorvis MSLGROUP on behalf of the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia.”

But they said they weren’t given detailed briefings about how the law ought to be amended, or policy briefings to leave behind for legislators to study.

The timing also was odd. They returned five times in January and February, when the issue was largely dormant and Washington was distracted by a new president’s inauguration. They were sent, again and again, for dead-end meetings with legislators who had made up their minds.

“The fourth time I saw Grassley’s guy, he was like, ‘Hey, what [else] is going on?’ We didn’t even talk about the bill,” said Robert Suesakul, an Army veteran from Iowa, about his fourth visit to the office of Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa). It had been clear after the first trip that Grassley wasn’t interested in amending the bill. “It didn’t make sense hitting these guys a fourth time.”

Another problem: In some cases, congressional staffers confronted them because they knew who was funding these trips.

Even if the veterans did not.

“We’d walk in there, and they’d go, ‘Are you the veterans that are getting bribed?’ ” Suesakul said.

In a phone interview, Johns said it was disappointing to hear veterans say they were “duped” and that he had always made clear, at the opening night’s dinner, that the Saudi government was paying. He said the veterans in attendance were all told that if they didn’t like it, they could go home.

“I said, ‘Look, I’m a fellow vet, and I am working with a PR firm here, and Saudi Arabia funded” the trip, Johns said.

But another organizer, Army veteran Dustin Tinsley, didn’t remember Johns telling everyone about the Saudi involvement. He did say he felt veterans should have done their own research or asked.

“When I was asked directly, ‘Is Saudi Arabia paying for this?’ I would say yes, and out of [all of them] not a single one of them said, ‘I don’t want to be a part of this,’ ” Tinsley said.

Several veterans disputed Johns’s account, saying they were not told of the source of the funding — or that the news had only slipped out later, after repeated questioning or strong drink.

“One of the guys had a little too much to drink,” said Gary Ard, a Navy veteran from Texas, describing an encounter with one of Johns’s aides after the aide had been drinking at the Trump hotel. “He kind of raises up his hands, and he says, ‘Thank you, Saudi prince!’ ”

Ard quit going after two trips. He said he felt guilty, for having unwittingly gathered political intelligence for a foreign power.

“We’re taking that heart-to-heart conversation [with legislators], writing it down, and giving it to a group of people whom I don’t know,” Ard said. “And my fear in that is we’re going to create a pool of insight to what congressmen, what senators can be approached, and what their mind-sets are. And that’s completely wrong.”

The last trip to the Trump hotel was in mid-February 2017, after the first news reports outed Johns as a Saudi contractor. Johns himself said he wasn’t sure how much the trips had cost: The bills for the hotel rooms didn’t go to him, and he never saw how much the rooms cost.

In a filing with the Justice Department — required of U.S. firms working as agents for foreign powers — Qorvis said it had spent $190,000 on lodging at the Trump hotel, and another $82,000 on catering and parking.

The figure for lodging works out to about $360 per person per night, which is far below the Trump hotel’s average rate for the same period. In financial records accidentally released last year by the General Services Administration, which owns the building, the Trump Organization said it received an average nightly rate for January and February of $768.67 — a price inflated by high demand around the inauguration.

Since February 2017, Saudi customers have boosted the bottom line at two other Trump hotels. In Chicago, the Trump hotel’s internal statistics showed a sharp uptick in customers from Saudi Arabia after Trump took office. In New York this year, the general manager of Trump’s hotel at Central Park said a single stay by some Saudi customers — who were traveling with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman — was so lucrative it helped the hotel turn a profit for the quarter.

twitter:

NBCPolitics twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 22:54:11 JUST IN: TJ Cox (D) is apparent winner of California House 21, @NBCNews projects -- a Democrat gain.The results for the new US House are now Democrats 235 and Republicans 200.This is a net gain of 40 seats for the Democrats. reageer retweet

twitter:

JoeBrunoWSOC9 twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 23:13:32 BREAKING: Dan McCready tells me he is officially withdrawing his concession.In an exclusive interview, he tells me he thinks Mark Harris knew what McCrae Dowless was doing and that Harris bankrolled "criminal activity." #ncpol #NC09 @wsoctv https://t.co/m7LhB2vGnM reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 23:26 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

JoeBrunoWSOC9 twitterde op donderdag 06-12-2018 om 23:13:32 BREAKING: Dan McCready tells me he is officially withdrawing his concession.In an exclusive interview, he tells me he thinks Mark Harris knew what McCrae Dowless was doing and that Harris bankrolled "criminal activity." #ncpol #NC09 @wsoctv https://t.co/m7LhB2vGnM reageer retweet

quote:

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi cast doubt Thursday on the likelihood that the new North American trade pact could win congressional approval without changes to bolster its labor and environmental protections.

President Donald Trump’s top trade negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, met with Pelosi for just over 30 minutes Thursday to discuss the new agreement, which will need Democratic support to give Trump a chance to sign it into law. The pact is already expected to face a fiery debate as some Democrats are already coming out in opposition to its labor and environmental provisions.

“While there are positive things in this proposed trade agreement, it is just a list without real enforcement of the labor and environmental protections,” Pelosi, who is expected to become House speaker in the next Congress, said in a statement after the meeting.

The Pelosi-Lighthizer session comes as Trump has stepped up his pressure to get the new agreement turned into law, telling reporters on Saturday that he would formally notify Mexico and Canada of his intention to withdraw from the existing North American Free Trade Agreement in six months. There is debate as to whether Trump has the legal authority to take such a step, but the move could force lawmakers to act on the new deal, which Trump is calling the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA.

SPOILER

A spokesperson for Pelosi said it was “disappointing but not surprising” that Trump would try to force Congress’ hand “instead of working constructively with Congress to improve his proposed agreement to actually protect and strengthen American workers.”

U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer declined to offer details following the meeting. He has previously indicated that the administration could make certain changes to the agreement's text through implementing legislation that would address lawmakers’ concerns and win their support.

"I’ve been in discussions with a variety of Democratic leaders on those points and they’ll be very much involved in the process moving forward and will have an influence, a strong influence," Lighthizer told reporters at the USMCA signing ceremony last week. "I want them not only to vote for it, I want them to be happy with the agreement.”

Lawmakers are also waiting “for Mexico to pass its promised law on the wages and working conditions of Mexican workers competing with American workers,” Pelosi said in the statement.

It remains far from certain that the agreement in its current form could pass both chambers. House Republicans have also criticized the deal for its inclusion of new provisions that aim to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex.

If the agreement remains on track, it will go to Congress next year for a simple up or down vote, with no amendments allowed under the fast-track law governing trade deals.

But House Democrats could also forgo fast-track rules to force changes to the deal. In 2008, House Democrats led by Pelosi voted to suspend the fast-track timeline on the U.S. trade deal with Colombia over lingering concerns about labor standards and violence in the South American country.

quote:

Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson set straight any misinformation concerning his views on President Trump: “I don’t think he’s capable,” he said during an interview on Tuesday.

Urs Gehriger, an editor at “Die Weltwoche,” the country’s leading German-language opinion weekly, noted that Carlson’s new book, “Ship of Fools,” is silent on Trump but comments on his critics. And so, Gehriger jump-started the conversation by asking what Carlson thought of Trump’s first two years in office.

Carlson said he cannot stand Trump’s self-aggrandizement and boasting. Then, when asked whether Trump has kept his promises, the usually quick-witted and long-winded Carlson had just one word: “No.”

Although it has a variety of voices, Fox News Channel has become the outlet often aligned with the current administration.

Hosts such as Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro have taken near-unequivocal positions in support of Trump and against “the liberal left.” Hannity has even joined Trump on the campaign stage.

Though often a measured Trump supporter, Tuesday’s interview was not Carlson’s first verbal-lashing of the president; he called Trump’s attacks on then-attorney general Jeff Sessions, following his recusal from the Russia investigation, a “useless, self-destructive act.”

This week, he continued to disparage the president when Gehriger probed for more.

SPOILER

“His chief promises were that he would build the wall, defund Planned Parenthood and repeal Obamacare, and he hasn’t done any of those things,” Carlson said, adding that those goals were probably lost causes. Trump, he said, doesn’t understand the system, and his own agencies don’t support him.

“He knows very little about the legislative process, hasn’t learned anything, hasn’t surrounded himself with people that can get it done, hasn’t done all the things you need to do, so it’s mostly his fault that he hasn’t achieved those things,” he added.

He has come to believe that Trump’s role is not as a conventional president who promises to achieve certain things and then does. Instead, it’s to “begin the conversation about what actually matters.”

For the Fox News host, that issue is immigration.

The Washington Post’s Philip Bump previously reported that since taking over the prime-time slot left vacant by Greta Van Susteren when she departed the network shortly before the 2016 election, Carlson has been “a fervent advocate for Trump’s hard-right position on immigration.”

The interview, which ran 45 minutes past its allotted time, covered wide-ranging discussion points, some as striking as Carlson’s outspoken comments about the president.

For starters, he called Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and her socialist group “the future.” He also criticized the Republican Party, suggesting that it “will die” if it doesn’t begin to fairly represent middle-class American voters.

“The elite in our country is physically separated in a way that’s very unhealthy for a democracy,” he said. Rural America is “really falling apart,” he said, adding that “if you’re running the country, you should have a sense of that."

Gehriger said Carlson sounded like a “renegade.”

“He was so tough” on Trump, he told The Post. “He was nobody’s cheerleader. For a person who is so successful on Fox News, I didn’t expect him to be so outspoken."

quote:

During more than five years as a housekeeper at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., Victorina Morales has made Donald J. Trump’s bed, cleaned his toilet and dusted his crystal golf trophies. When he visited as president, she was directed to wear a pin in the shape of the American flag adorned with a Secret Service logo.

Because of the “outstanding” support she has provided during Mr. Trump’s visits, Ms. Morales in July was given a certificate from the White House Communications Agency inscribed with her name.

Quite an achievement for an undocumented immigrant housekeeper.

Ms. Morales’s journey from cultivating corn in rural Guatemala to fluffing pillows at an exclusive golf resort took her from the southwest border, where she said she crossed illegally in 1999, to the horse country of New Jersey, where she was hired at the Trump property in 2013 with documents she said were phony.

She said she was not the only worker at the club who was in the country illegally.

Sandra Diaz, 46, a native of Costa Rica who is now a legal resident of the United States, said she, too, was undocumented when she worked at Bedminster between 2010 and 2013. The two women said they worked for years as part of a group of housekeeping, maintenance and landscaping employees at the golf club that included a number of undocumented workers, though they could not say precisely how many. There is no evidence that Mr. Trump or Trump Organization executives knew of their immigration status. But at least two supervisors at the club were aware of it, the women said, and took steps to help workers evade detection and keep their jobs.

“There are many people without papers,” said Ms. Diaz, who said she witnessed several people being hired whom she knew to be undocumented.

SPOILER

Mr. Trump has made border security and the fight to protect jobs for Americans a cornerstone of his presidency, from the border wall he has pledged to build to the workplace raids and payroll audits that his administration has carried out.

During the presidential campaign, when the Trump International Hotel opened for business in Washington, Mr. Trump boasted that he had used an electronic verification system, E-Verify, to ensure that only those legally entitled to work were hired.

“We didn’t have one illegal immigrant on the job,” Mr. Trump said then.

But throughout his campaign and his administration, Ms. Morales, 45, has been reporting for work at Mr. Trump’s golf course in Bedminster, where she is still on the payroll. An employee of the golf course drives her and a group of others to work every day, she says, because it is known that they cannot legally obtain driver’s licenses.

A diminutive woman with only two years of education who came to the United States speaking no English, Ms. Morales has had an unusual window into one of the president’s favorite retreats: She has cleaned the president’s villa while he watched television nearby; she stood on the sidelines when potential cabinet members were brought in for interviews and when the White House chief of staff, John Kelly, arrived to confer with the president.

“I never imagined, as an immigrant from the countryside in Guatemala, that I would see such important people close up,” she said.

But Ms. Morales said she has been hurt by Mr. Trump’s public comments since he became president, including equating Latin American immigrants with violent criminals. It was that, she said, along with abusive comments from a supervisor at work about her intelligence and immigration status, that made her feel that she could no longer keep silent.

“We are tired of the abuse, the insults, the way he talks about us when he knows that we are here helping him make money,” she said. “We sweat it out to attend to his every need and have to put up with his humiliation.”

Ms. Morales and Ms. Diaz approached The New York Times through their New Jersey lawyer, Anibal Romero, who is representing them on immigration matters. Ms. Morales said that she understood she could be fired or deported as a result of coming forward, though she has applied for protection under the asylum laws. She is also exploring a lawsuit claiming workplace abuse and discrimination.

In separate, hourslong interviews in Spanish, Ms. Morales and Ms. Diaz provided detailed accounts of their work at the club and their interactions with management, including Mr. Trump. Both women described the president as demanding but kind, sometimes offering hefty tips.

While they were often unclear on precise dates of when events occurred, they appeared to recollect key events and conversations with precision.

Ms. Morales has had dealings with Mr. Trump that go back years, and her husband has confirmed that she would on occasion come home jubilant because the club owner had paid her a compliment, or bestowed on her a $50 or sometimes a $100 tip.

To ascertain that she was in fact an employee of the club, The Times reviewed Ms. Morales’s pay stubs and W-2 forms, which list the golf course as her employer. She also made available her Individual Taxpayer Identification, a nine-digit number that is issued by the Internal Revenue Service to foreigners to enable them to file taxes without being permanent residents of the United States. Having a number does not confer eligibility to work.

The Times also examined the documents Ms. Morales presented as proof that she was entitled to work — a permanent resident card, or green card, and a Social Security card, both of which she said she purchased from someone in New Jersey who produced counterfeit documents for immigrants.

The Times ran Ms. Morales’s purported Social Security number through several public records databases and none produced a match, which is often an indication that the number is not valid. The number on the back of the green card that Ms. Morales has on file at the golf course does not correspond to the format of numbers used on most legitimate resident cards. For example, it includes initials that do not match those of any immigration service centers that issue the cards.

Ms. Diaz produced similar documents, though since she has gained legal residence she has been issued a genuine Social Security card and green card.

The Trump Organization, which owns the golf course, did not comment specifically on Ms. Morales or Ms. Diaz. “We have tens of thousands of employees across our properties and have very strict hiring practices,” Amanda Miller, the company’s senior vice president for marketing and corporate communications, said in a statement. “If an employee submitted false documentation in an attempt to circumvent the law, they will be terminated immediately.”

The White House declined to comment.

That Ms. Morales appeared able to secure employment with what she said were fake documents is not surprising: An estimated eight million unauthorized immigrants are in the labor force, and it is an open secret that many businesses, especially in the service sector, hire them.

Mr. Trump has a long history of relying on immigrants at his golf and hotel properties. Though he signed a “Buy American, Hire American” executive order in 2017 tightening the conditions for visas for foreign workers, his companies have hired hundreds of foreigners on guest-worker visas.

In hiring workers who are already in the United States, employers are required to examine identity and work authorization documents and record them on an employment eligibility form. But companies are not required in most cases to take additional steps to verify the authenticity of documents. Because falsifying these documents is so easy, E-Verify, which is required in 22 states, goes the extra step of checking them against records kept by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security.

The federal list posted online of employers who use the E-Verify system includes Mr. Trump’s golf club in North Carolina, a state that requires it, but the Bedminster club in New Jersey, where it is not required under state law, does not appear on the list.

During his campaign, Mr. Trump called for expanding the program to workplaces around the country. So far, that has not happened.

Mr. Trump opened his trophy club in the affluent horse country of Somerset County, N.J., in 2004. After buying the 504-acre property from a group of investors in 2002, Mr. Trump planted a sweeping colonnade of maple trees at the entrance and built two 18-hole golf courses, their design inspired by the gardens of Versailles. The membership initiation fee is more than $100,000.

The property has an estimated 40 to 80 employees, depending on the season; the bulk of the basic service workers are foreign-born. Immigrants keep the greens watered and manicured. They clean and maintain the cottages and suites that surround the junior Olympic-size heated pool.

The president has spent all or part of about 70 days at Bedminster since taking office. He has a two-story residence on the property; his daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, were married at the club in 2009, and also have a cottage.

The job at Bedminster, at which Ms. Morales earns $13 an hour, is one of several she said she has held since arriving in the United States in 1999, crossing undetected into California after a journey of nearly six weeks by bus and on foot.

After she first arrived in Los Angeles, a contact provided her with a false Social Security number and an identification card that she was told would enable her to secure employment. She then flew to New Jersey, where she joined her husband, who had arrived months earlier.

In early 2013, a friend who worked at the Trump golf club told her that management was looking for housekeepers.

Ms. Morales was keen: The pay would be $10 an hour, higher than the $8.25 that she was earning cleaning guest rooms at a hotel.

According to her account, when she arrived for her interview, the housekeeping supervisor showed her around and asked her to demonstrate how she cleaned. The supervisor asked her to report to work the next morning at 6 a.m. — with her documents.

Ms. Morales said she told her she had no legal working documents. “I told her I don’t have good papers. She told me to bring what I used at the hotel,” Ms. Morales recalled.

By the time Ms. Morales was hired, Ms. Diaz had been working at the club since 2010 and had the job of cleaning Mr. Trump’s residence.

She said she washed and ironed Mr. Trump’s white boxers, golf shirts and khaki trousers, as well as his sheets and towels. Everything belonging to Mr. Trump, his wife, Melania, and their son, Barron, was washed with special detergent in a smaller, separate washing machine, she said.

“He is extremely meticulous about everything. If he arrives suddenly, everyone runs around like crazy” because Mr. Trump inspects everything closely, Ms. Diaz said.

She recalled a nervous moment in 2012, when Mr. Trump approached her and asked her to follow him to the clubhouse, a renovated 1930s Georgian manor, where he proceeded to run his fingers around the edges of frames on the wall and over table surfaces to check for dust.

“You did a really great job,” she said he told her, and handed her a $100 bill.

That same year, she said, Mr. Trump had an outburst over some orange stains on the collar of his white golf shirt, which Ms. Diaz described as stubborn remnants of his makeup, which she had difficulty removing.

When Ms. Morales joined the housekeeping team in 2013, Ms. Diaz was in charge of training her, and began to take her to tend to Mr. Trump’s house. In November of that year, when Ms. Diaz quit, Ms. Morales and the housekeeping supervisor took on the job of cleaning Mr. Trump’s house together.

Ms. Morales said she will never forget the day Mr. Trump pulled up to the pro shop in his cart as she was washing its large, arched windows. Noticing that Ms. Morales, who is shy of five feet tall, could not reach the top, he said, “Excuse me,” grabbed her rag and wiped the upper portion of the glass.

Mr. Trump then asked Ms. Morales her name and where she was from, she recalled. “I said, ‘I am from Guatemala.’ He said, ‘Guatemalans are hard-working people.’” The president then reached into his pocket and handed her a $50 bill.

“I told myself, ‘God bless him.’ I thought, he’s a good person,” Ms. Morales recalled.

Soon after Mr. Trump launched his campaign for the presidency, in June 2015, Ms. Morales recalled, one of the managers summoned her to tell her that she could no longer work inside Mr. Trump’s house.

Around the same time, she said, several workers, who she said were also working illegally, had their work days shaved from five days to three days. “The workers panicked. A lot of people just left,” she said.

Two months after Mr. Trump’s inauguration, in March 2017, Ms. Morales said that she and other workers received a new employee handbook.

Under a section titled “Immigration Compliance,” the handbook stated that employees were required to present documents specified by the federal government. “Those that are found to have falsified information will not be eligible for employment,” the handbook stated.

Ms. Morales said she was given a new employment form to sign. She could not understand the form, she said, but her lawyer, Mr. Romero, said it was likely an updated I-9 employment eligibility document — a form that, like the previous one, referenced her falsified documents.

Sometime last year, she said, one of the managers told her she must get both a new green card and new Social Security card because there were problems with her current ones.

Ms. Morales provided a detailed account of what transpired, but it was not possible to independently confirm what happened. According to her recollection, she told the manager that she did not know how to obtain new forgeries.

“I don’t know where to get them,’ ” she said she told him.

The manager, she said, suggested she speak with a maintenance employee who he said knew where to acquire new documents. When the maintenance employee told her that the new papers would cost $165, Ms. Morales told the manager that she did not have the money. “He said, ‘don’t worry. I will lend you the money,’” she said.

Ms. Morales said the maintenance worker drove her to a house in Plainfield, N.J., where she waited in his car while he met with someone inside. Ms. Morales said that she had no record or recollection of the address.

The next day, she said, the maintenance worker brought her a new Social Security card and a realistic-looking green card to replace the one that had “expired.” She said the manager made copies of them for files kept at the club’s administrative headquarters.

Now that Mr. Trump was president, there was more than the usual excitement whenever he arrived. Ms. Morales was still asked to clean Mr. Trump’s residence on occasion, and had to wear a Secret Service pin whenever the president was on site, she said, most likely identifying her as an employee.

As the months went on, she and other employees at the golf club became increasingly disturbed about Mr. Trump’s comments, which they felt demeaned immigrants from Mexico and Central America. The president’s tone seemed to embolden others to make negative comments, Ms. Morales said. The housekeeping supervisor frequently made remarks about the employees’ vulnerable legal status when critiquing their work, she said, sometimes calling them “stupid illegal immigrants” with less intelligence than a dog.

Ms. Morales expects she will have to leave her job as soon as her name and work status are made public. She understands she could be deported. On Thursday, she spent the day with her lawyer, and as news of her disclosures spread, she did not answer a phone call from her supervisor at the golf course. She said she did not expect to return to work.

She said she is certain that her employers — perhaps even Mr. Trump — knew of her unlawful status all along.

“I ask myself, is it possible that this seńor thinks we have papers? He knows we don’t speak English,” Ms. Morales said. “Why wouldn’t he figure it out?”

quote:

Op donderdag 6 december 2018 23:28 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Wat daar gebeurd is kan echt niet. Gewoon nieuwe verkiezingen uitschrijven.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 02:05:17 House Democrats are threatening not to seat Mark Harris over the fraud allegations in NC-09.Pelosi said the House "retains the right to decide who is seated" and could take the "extraordinary step" of calling for a new election if the winner isn't clear. https://t.co/7CAQx7k2Ib reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 02:08:06 Andrew McCabe, who was targeted by Trump relentlessly until Sessions fired him earlier this year just days before he was set to retire/eligible to receive a pension, opened an obstruction of justice investigation into Trump after Comey's firing, per @CNN. reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 05:10:01 Half-dozen current and former W.H. officials tell The Atlantic that the Trump admin has no plans in place for responding to the final Mueller report--save for expecting a Twitter spree."It's like, 'Jesus, take the wheel,'" one source said, "but scarier."https://t.co/TTzBco0yNd reageer retweet

quote:

Nobody knows how the White House plans to respond to the Mueller report—including the people who work at the White House.

The special counsel is reportedly nearing the end of his probe. Sentencing memos are dropping. Plea deals are being struck. The president’s legal team expects a response to his written interview “soon.”

When the report will hit is the question. That it will hit, and that it will contain at least some new problems for President Donald Trump and those close to him—especially as House Democrats take the majority—seem certain.

But while most organizations, political or otherwise, might take the time to prepare for this kind of slow-moving train, the Trump White House is all but winging it. According to a half-dozen current and former White House officials, the administration has no plans in place for responding to the special counsel’s findings—save for expecting a Twitter spree.

The one thing they do know, Rudy Giuliani told me, is that they’re going to fight.

If Robert Mueller’s team tries to subpoena the president, “we’re ready to resist that,” Trump’s attorney said.

Giuliani said it’s been difficult in the past few months to even consider drafting response plans, or devote time to the “counter-report” he claimed they were working on this summer as he and Trump confronted Mueller’s written questions about the 2016 campaign.

“Answering those questions was a nightmare,” he told me. “It took him about three weeks to do what would normally take two days.”

SPOILER

There are numerous other reasons no response plan has been produced, White House sources said, including the futility of crafting a strategy that Trump will likely ignore anyway. There have also been few frank conversations within the White House about the potential costs of Mueller’s findings, which could include impeachment of the president or the incrimination of his inner circle. Those close to Trump have either doubled down on the “witch hunt” narrative, they said—refusing to entertain the possibility of wrongdoing—or decided to focus on other issues entirely. Former Press Secretary Sean Spicer has even taken to treating the probe like a game: On Wednesday he tweeted a (quickly deleted) link where followers could place bets on “how many tweets containing #mueller” the president will send “before the investigation is up.”

Attempting to plan “would mean you would have to have an honest conversation about what might be coming,” a former senior White House official, who requested anonymity to speak freely, told me.

The lack of planning for potential outcomes of one of the highest-stakes investigations of the past two years illuminates many of the key operating principles of this White House—a follow-the-leader approach, a frequent resort to denial, and a staff constantly in flux. Many of those tactics have allowed Trump to maintain favor with his base, but Mueller’s report will represent the biggest test yet of how they fare against legal, rather than political, challenges. And that test was likely sharpened on Tuesday night, when Mueller revealed in a court filing that former National-Security Adviser Michael Flynn had cooperated extensively with his investigation.

It’s not that White House officials are altogether unwilling to confront the topic. But many current and former White House staffers I spoke to stressed the problem that has plagued them since the beginning of Trump’s presidency: making plans and sticking to them when the “communicator in chief” will, inevitably, prefer his own approach.

“We would always put together plans with the knowledge that he wouldn’t use them or they’d go off the rails,” one recently departed official told me. “And at this point, with Mueller, they’ve decided they’re not even going to do that.”

“It’s like, ‘Jesus, take the wheel,’” the source added, “but scarier.”

Nevertheless, the thinking is that it’s “safer to follow potus’s lead,” the former senior official said. This has allowed staffers to “focus on other pressing matters,” the official allowed, “but leaves you naked when it comes to the final scene of this play.”

Giuliani initially pushed back on the prediction that Trump would take center stage after the report drops. “I don’t think following his lead is the right thing. He’s the client,” he told me. “The more controlled a person is, the more intelligent they are, the more they can make the decision. But he’s just like every other client. He’s not more … you know, controlled than any other client. In fact, he’s a little less.”

For Giuliani, letting Trump guide the response post-report may not be ideal, but “I don’t think there’s anyone in the world that can stop Donald Trump from tweeting,” he acknowledged. “I’ve tried.”

The dearth of communication about the probe has left the president’s top lieutenants on Capitol Hill anxious about the fallout, according to multiple congressional GOP sources. “We haven’t heard from the White House at all on this. You’d think there’d be more of an effort to have a coordinated response,” one senior Republican aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to damage the aide’s relationship with the White House, told me. “Members want to help, but can’t if they’re not getting any information.”

There was the sheer problem of finding time—Giuliani recalled one instance when they were working on the list and Chief of Staff John Kelly broke in to tell Trump about the migrant caravan, which grabbed the president’s attention immediately. And there was the specificity of the questions themselves: “He’s got a great memory,” Giuliani said. “However, basically we were answering questions about 2016, the busiest year of his life. It’s a real job to remember.”

The president has also devoted much of his energy to following Paul Manafort’s case rather than prepping for the full report. “The thing that upsets potus the most is the treatment of Manafort,” Giuliani said. When Trump learned that the former campaign chairman was in solitary confinement, Giuliani said, “he said to me, ‘Don’t they realize we’re America?’”

Throughout it all, West Wing officials have been hamstrung by a vacant White House counsel’s office. In October, Trump appointed Pat Cipollone to replace Don McGahn for the top post. But according to Politico, a “longer-than-expected security clearance process” has prevented Cipollone from taking over and building out his team over the past two months, a frustrating situation as the Mueller report nears and House Democrats prepare their oversight demands. Yet even with McGahn, who focused the bulk of his tenure on shuttling through Trump’s judicial picks, prepping for the Mueller probe was not top of mind.

The Trump team’s strategy in advance of the Mueller report is a far cry, for instance, from how the Clinton White House prepped for the Starr Report. “I’m not trying to argue retroactively that we were geniuses,” former Clinton Press Secretary Joe Lockhart told me. “But our strategy was very clear: We were never going to have the president talk about the investigation, ever. He was never going to portray himself as a victim, that he was being treated unfairly, even though, yes, he thought that privately.”

Lockhart said the team focused extensively on a counter-report so that it could deliver a robust rebuttal immediately. “We wanted people to look at the reports side by side, as a he-said-she-said, instead of have just one bombshell, unrefuted report.”

Yet Lockhart and a former George W. Bush communications official, who asked for anonymity to speak freely, both suggested that the Trump White House may struggle more with a variable that they, in their respective administrations, didn’t: honesty. “We would’ve been able to make some set of contingency plans,” the former Bush official told me, “because there at least would have been a circle of people who knew what was possibly coming.”

“If there’s no sense in the White House and legal team of what really happened [during the election],” Lockhart echoed, “you have to have maximum flexibility in your response.”

Perhaps, he suggested, leaving it to Trump—and his Twitter feed—is the best way to accomplish that.

And for now Trump’s allies, even those caught up in the investigation themselves, are fine with that. With this president, there’s “not really” a need for a plan, Roger Stone told me. “Trump holds all the cards.”

Asked whether the White House had a plan in place for when Mueller closes in, the spokesman Hogan Gidley declined to comment.

quote:

The U.S. trade deficit in October soared to $55.5 billion, one of the highest levels in a decade, including the largest-ever deficits with China and Europe, according to a Commerce Department report released today.

President Donald Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and a wide range of Chinese goods have not narrowed the gap between imports and exports this year. The trade deficit in goods and services since January is $51 billion higher than over the same period in 2017, an 11 percent increase, the report showed.

The monthly deficits with China ($43.1 billion) and the EU ($17.6 billion) are the highest on record. And the October deficit specifically in goods (not including services) was $77 billion, also the largest ever recorded.

Soybean exports dropped nearly 47 percent from September to October. China appears to be moving toward restarting purchases of U.S. soybeans and other agricultural commodities as part of the short-term trade agreement that Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping struck last weekend at the G-20 meeting in Argentina.

Trump has long vowed to close the gap between how much the U.S. buys from and sells to other countries. Narrowing the trade deficit with China is one of the administration's objectives for trade talks with Beijing over the next three months.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:06 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:42 schreef Szura het volgende:
Word je dan als doorgewinterd diplomaat in New York opgezadeld met een of andere Trump-supporter van de tv

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 02:12 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 02:08:06 Andrew McCabe, who was targeted by Trump relentlessly until Sessions fired him earlier this year just days before he was set to retire/eligible to receive a pension, opened an obstruction of justice investigation into Trump after Comey's firing, per @CNN. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:42 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Een of ander blondje met de looks van een overdreven hard schreeuwende Amerikaanse pornoster met plastic tieten. Verrassend.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 08:57 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:

[..]

De eerste vrouwvriendelijke Fok-liberal is ontwaakt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:06 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:42 schreef Szura het volgende:
Word je dan als doorgewinterd diplomaat in New York opgezadeld met een of andere Trump-supporter van de tv

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 09:13 schreef Ringo het volgende:

[..]

Haar voorganger Nikki Haley, ook door Trump benoemd, was toch geen slechte keuze.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 07:42 schreef Szura het volgende:
Word je dan als doorgewinterd diplomaat in New York opgezadeld met een of andere Trump-supporter van de tv

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 09:05 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Mueller zou toch eens een onderzoek moeten doen naar de banden van de Trump administratie met al die Fox news idioten. Of misschien doet hij dit al. Want er is een reden voor de aanvallen van Trump op andere mediaorganisaties. Hoeveel invloed een president heeft op vrije media is vastgelegd in de constitutie en is eigenlijk een middel om controle uit te oefenen op een regerende macht. Nu gaat het andersom. Een grote mediaorganisatie die maar AL te veel controle/invloed uitoefent op een president. Een bizarre vorm van omgekeerde propaganda.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 09:53 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

We hebben het er al vaker over gehad maar Mueller is niet Trump's oppas ofzo. Of een soort algemene politieagent voor alles gerelateerd aan Trump. Hij onderzoekt de connectie Trump-Rusland en dat is het. Hij verliest geloofwaardigheid als je allerlei gekkigheid waar je het niet mee eens bent in zijn schoenen gaat schuiven.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 10:17 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Als een organisatie als Fox direct betrokken is met het gedrag van Trump kan dit beschouwd worden als hinderen van de rechtsgang door een mediabedrijf. Zo gek is dit niet..

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 10:18 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Dit lijkt mij juridisch een bijzonder twijfelachtig statement. Zelfs dan nog is het niet Muellers verantwoordelijkheid als het niets met Rusland te maken heeft.

Hannity: Mueller and his witch hunters need to be disbanded

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:18:59 Robert Mueller and Leakin’ Lyin’ James Comey are Best Friends, just one of many Mueller Conflicts of Interest. And bye the way, wasn’t the woman in charge of prosecuting Jerome Corsi (who I do not know) in charge of “legal” at the corrupt Clinton Foundation? A total Witch Hunt... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:28:50 ....Will Robert Mueller’s big time conflicts of interest be listed at the top of his Republicans only Report. Will Andrew Weissman’s horrible and vicious prosecutorial past be listed in the Report. He wrongly destroyed people’s lives, took down great companies, only to be........ reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:40:53 .....overturned, 9-0, in the United States Supreme Court. Doing same thing to people now. Will all of the substantial & many contributions made by the 17 Angry Democrats to the Campaign of Crooked Hillary be listed in top of Report. Will the people that worked for the Clinton.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:53:34 ....Foundation be listed at the top of the Report? Will the scathing document written about Lyin’ James Comey, by the man in charge of the case, Rod Rosenstein (who also signed the FISA Warrant), be a big part of the Report? Isn’t Rod therefore totally conflicted? Will all of.... reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 12:57 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Hij is weer wakker:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:18:59 Robert Mueller and Leakin’ Lyin’ James Comey are Best Friends, just one of many Mueller Conflicts of Interest. And bye the way, wasn’t the woman in charge of prosecuting Jerome Corsi (who I do not know) in charge of “legal” at the corrupt Clinton Foundation? A total Witch Hunt... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:28:50 ....Will Robert Mueller’s big time conflicts of interest be listed at the top of his Republicans only Report. Will Andrew Weissman’s horrible and vicious prosecutorial past be listed in the Report. He wrongly destroyed people’s lives, took down great companies, only to be........ reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:40:53 .....overturned, 9-0, in the United States Supreme Court. Doing same thing to people now. Will all of the substantial & many contributions made by the 17 Angry Democrats to the Campaign of Crooked Hillary be listed in top of Report. Will the people that worked for the Clinton.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:53:34 ....Foundation be listed at the top of the Report? Will the scathing document written about Lyin’ James Comey, by the man in charge of the case, Rod Rosenstein (who also signed the FISA Warrant), be a big part of the Report? Isn’t Rod therefore totally conflicted? Will all of.... reageer retweet

Boze democraten, Clinton, Mueller, naar het zich doet aanzien een Enron zaak die overturned werd ... het is allemaal wat.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:05 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Mooiste is dat hij het telkens heeft over 'Mueller's conflicts of interest', maar dat hij niet in staat is voorbeelden daarvan te geven. Waarschijnlijk omdat die er simpelweg niet zijn.

Maar dergelijk gelul doet het natuurlijk goed bij z'n achterban, die daardoor nog meer reden ziet om de toekomstige resultaten van het Mueller-onderzoek in twijfel te trekken.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 10:21 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

nogmaals:

Hannity: Mueller and his witch hunters need to be disbanded

En Trump volgt de lijn van door dit soort relschoppers. Vaak tweet hij de dag daarop hetzelfde wat deze roeptoeter uit.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 12:57 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Hij is weer wakker:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:18:59 Robert Mueller and Leakin’ Lyin’ James Comey are Best Friends, just one of many Mueller Conflicts of Interest. And bye the way, wasn’t the woman in charge of prosecuting Jerome Corsi (who I do not know) in charge of “legal” at the corrupt Clinton Foundation? A total Witch Hunt... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:28:50 ....Will Robert Mueller’s big time conflicts of interest be listed at the top of his Republicans only Report. Will Andrew Weissman’s horrible and vicious prosecutorial past be listed in the Report. He wrongly destroyed people’s lives, took down great companies, only to be........ reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:40:53 .....overturned, 9-0, in the United States Supreme Court. Doing same thing to people now. Will all of the substantial & many contributions made by the 17 Angry Democrats to the Campaign of Crooked Hillary be listed in top of Report. Will the people that worked for the Clinton.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:53:34 ....Foundation be listed at the top of the Report? Will the scathing document written about Lyin’ James Comey, by the man in charge of the case, Rod Rosenstein (who also signed the FISA Warrant), be a big part of the Report? Isn’t Rod therefore totally conflicted? Will all of.... reageer retweet

Boze democraten, Clinton, Mueller, naar het zich doet aanzien een Enron zaak die overturned werd ... het is allemaal wat.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:59 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:
Volgens CNN stapt Kelly op.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:43 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Dit heet vrijheid van meningsuiting.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 14:13 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Jamal Khashoggi dacht ook dat hij vrijheid van meningsuiting had. maar blijkbaar is er groen licht gegeven om hem tóch het zwijgen op te leggen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:43 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Aan Trumps feed te zien heeft hij een rotdag.

quote:

Reminder of today's events:

* Mueller and SDNY prosecutors detail Michael Cohen's cooperation

* Mueller outlines Manafort's "crimes and lies" that led to the cancellation of his cooperation agreement

* Comey goes behind closed doors with the Judiciary and Oversight Committees

https://mobile.twitter.co(...)/1071011443934355458

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:43 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:

[..]

Trump die het over conflicts of interest heeft bij anderen..

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 13:43 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:

[..]

Trump die het over conflicts of interest heeft bij anderen..

twitter:

AP twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 15:43:24 BREAKING: Trump says he will nominate William Barr, attorney general under President George HW Bush, as his next attorney general. Trump is also nominating State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert to be US ambassador to the United Nations. reageer retweet

Trump to nominate William Barr as his next AG

SPOILER

twitter:

AaronBlake twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 15:56:34 NYT says Trump repeatedly asked Barr whether he would recuse from Russia probe.If he kept asking, it suggests Barr didn't give him a firm answer. But expect a grilling on this at his confirmation hearing.https://t.co/62G94PUCq3 https://t.co/hbvXdhxKua reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 16:20:01 Mazie Hirono, before Trump's announcement, said she would have a hard time supporting William Barr "because here's another person who auditioned for the job ... by talking about how Hillary Clinton should continue to be investigated and questioning the Mueller investigation." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 16:40:05 Blumenthal: "I will demand that Mr. Barr make a firm and specific commitment to protect the Mueller investigation ... particularly in light of past comments suggesting Mr. Barr was more interested in currying favor with Pres. Trump. than objectively ... analyzing law and facts." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 17:00:01 DOJ still hasn't told the federal accountability office that Jeff Sessions quit, according to BuzzFeed.Federal law requires the vacancy and any acting appointment to be reported "immediately" to GAO. A month after the shakeup, GAO hasn't been informed. https://t.co/DnoQG1DKOc reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 16:03:28 I think you'll hear many analysts say today that Trump announced his new Attorney General pick today to distract slightly from what is likely to be a moderately damaging news cycle for him, possibly an exceedingly damaging one. It's also a Friday news dump (so, harder to cover). reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 16:12 schreef Re het volgende:
verder vindt hij blijkbaar Enron een fantastisch bedrijf, figures

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 16:04:19 Rex Tillerson: “So often, the president would say, ‘Here’s what I want to do, and here’s how I want to do it.' And I would have to say to him, 'Mr. President, I understand what you want to do, but you can’t do it that way. It violates the law.'” https://t.co/B7yC5ZrYQu reageer retweet

quote:

Rex Tillerson came a little bit closer Thursday to saying what he actually thinks of President Trump.

The fired secretary of state, who while in office reportedly called Trump a “moron” (and declined to deny it), expounded on his thoughts on the president in a rare interview with CBS News’s Bob Schieffer in Houston.

It wasn’t difficult to read between the lines. Tillerson said Trump is “pretty undisciplined, doesn’t like to read,” and repeatedly attempted to do illegal things. He didn’t call Trump a “moron,” but he didn’t exactly suggest Trump was a scholar — or even just a steady leader.

“What was challenging for me coming from the disciplined, highly process-oriented Exxon Mobil corporation,” Tillerson said, was “to go to work for a man who is pretty undisciplined, doesn’t like to read, doesn’t read briefing reports, doesn’t like to get into the details of a lot of things, but rather just kind of says, ‘This is what I believe.’ ”

twitter:

CBSThisMorning twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 14:07:49 WATCH: Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is speaking publicly about what led to his firing in March by President Trump.CBS News political contributor @bobschieffer interviewed Tillerson in Houston last night, at a dinner to benefit MD Anderson Cancer Center. https://t.co/47qDqcsrMs reageer retweet

SPOILER

Tillerson said Trump believes he is acting on his instincts rather than relying on facts. But Tillerson seemed to suggest that it resulted in impulsiveness.

“He acts on his instincts; in some respects, that looks like impulsiveness,” Tillerson said. “But it’s not his intent to act on impulse. I think he really is trying to act on his instincts.”

(Notice Tillerson doesn’t say Trump isn’t being impulsive; he’s saying he isn’t trying to be impulsive.)

Perhaps the most damning quote came when Tillerson talked about how Trump as president regularly attempted to do things that violated the law.

“So often, the president would say, ‘Here’s what I want to do, and here’s how I want to do it,’ " Tillerson said, according to the Houston Chronicle, “and I would have to say to him, ‘Mr. President, I understand what you want to do, but you can’t do it that way. It violates the law.’ ”

Tillerson also appeared to take a shot at Trump’s chief method of communication, Twitter.

“I will be honest with you: It troubles me that the American people seem to want to know so little about issues — that they are satisfied with a 128 characters,” Tillerson said.

He was quick to say that that wasn’t meant as a shot at Trump but our political system more broadly. Next to his other comments, though, it wasn’t difficult to see he was lumping Trump with all those Americans who aren’t intellectually curious enough about policy and the actual details of U.S. government.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 12:57 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Hij is weer wakker:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:18:59 Robert Mueller and Leakin’ Lyin’ James Comey are Best Friends, just one of many Mueller Conflicts of Interest. And bye the way, wasn’t the woman in charge of prosecuting Jerome Corsi (who I do not know) in charge of “legal” at the corrupt Clinton Foundation? A total Witch Hunt... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:28:50 ....Will Robert Mueller’s big time conflicts of interest be listed at the top of his Republicans only Report. Will Andrew Weissman’s horrible and vicious prosecutorial past be listed in the Report. He wrongly destroyed people’s lives, took down great companies, only to be........ reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:40:53 .....overturned, 9-0, in the United States Supreme Court. Doing same thing to people now. Will all of the substantial & many contributions made by the 17 Angry Democrats to the Campaign of Crooked Hillary be listed in top of Report. Will the people that worked for the Clinton.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 12:53:34 ....Foundation be listed at the top of the Report? Will the scathing document written about Lyin’ James Comey, by the man in charge of the case, Rod Rosenstein (who also signed the FISA Warrant), be a big part of the Report? Isn’t Rod therefore totally conflicted? Will all of.... reageer retweet

Boze democraten, Clinton, Mueller, naar het zich doet aanzien een Enron zaak die overturned werd ... het is allemaal wat.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 10-01-2012 om 21:07:42 3 Chief of Staffs in less than 3 years of being President: Part of the reason why @BarackObama can't manage to pass his agenda. reageer retweet

quote:

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Pushing back against criticism of her lack of diplomatic experience, Donald J. Trump’s choice to be the next United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Heather Nauert, said on Friday that a memorable visit to the “It’s a Small World” ride at Disney World made her eminently qualified for the U.N. post.

“When people look at me, they think Heather Nauert, former Fox News anchor,” Nauert told reporters at the State Department. “What they don’t realize is I’m also Heather Nauert, who went on ‘It’s a Small World’ three times when she was nine.”

Nauert said that, while career diplomats might spend twenty to thirty years learning about only one country, “I learned about twenty-five countries in fifteen minutes.” Laying out her objectives for her tenure at the United Nations, the prospective Ambassador said, “Right now I’m just looking forward to seeing all of the other Ambassadors wearing their festive costumes and doing their dances. That’s going to be amazing, I think.”

Nauert bristled when a reporter asked about her controversial comment that D Day was evidence of the long-standing bond between Germany and the United States. “At the end of the day, there is just one moon and one golden sun, and a smile means friendship to everyone,” she said.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:02:34 Mike Pompeo is doing a great job, I am very proud of him. His predecessor, Rex Tillerson, didn’t have the mental capacity needed. He was dumb as a rock and I couldn’t get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy as hell. Now it is a whole new ballgame, great spirit at State! reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 21:21 schreef nostra het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:02:34 Mike Pompeo is doing a great job, I am very proud of him. His predecessor, Rex Tillerson, didn’t have the mental capacity needed. He was dumb as a rock and I couldn’t get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy as hell. Now it is a whole new ballgame, great spirit at State! reageer retweet

Op hoeveel vlakken dit achterlijk is echt.

Rex Tillerson opens up on Trump and his firing: "We did not have a common value system"

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:56:17 Hopefully Mitch McConnell will ask for a VOTE on Criminal Justice Reform. It is extremely popular and has strong bipartisan support. It will also help a lot of people, save taxpayer dollars, and keep our communities safe. Go for it Mitch! reageer retweet

SPOILER

twitter:

JeffreyGuterman twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:57:01 @realDonaldTrump Real criminal justice reform would put you behind bars. For life. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 22:10 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:56:17 Hopefully Mitch McConnell will ask for a VOTE on Criminal Justice Reform. It is extremely popular and has strong bipartisan support. It will also help a lot of people, save taxpayer dollars, and keep our communities safe. Go for it Mitch! reageer retweet

Weet iemand waar die reform uit bestaat?

De eerste reply kon ik overigens ook wel waarderen:

SPOILER

twitter:

JeffreyGuterman twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:57:01 @realDonaldTrump Real criminal justice reform would put you behind bars. For life. reageer retweet

quote:

Our president is a moron as best, a malicious, narcissistic asshole at worst. But that doesn’t mean he can’t stumble ass-first into a good idea every once in awhile. The criminal justice reform bill is just that: one of those rare cases that falls into the minuscule overlap on the Venn diagram between “Trump” and “OK policies.”

Of course, Trump’s fellow Republican leaders want the bill dead. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is close to killing any hope it has to pass during the lame duck session, according to Politico.

[..]

The bill would, according to the New York Times, “[provide] incentives for some people in federal prison to participate in educational, vocational and therapeutic programs by awarding them time-reducing credits for completing them. It also increases the use of home detention, post-release transitional programs and electronic monitoring.”

It would retroactively put into effect reforms passed in the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010, closing the gap between sentences for crack and cocaine, which have led to racial disparities in sentences. It would also give judges more leeway when it comes to mandatory minimum sentences, and ban practices like shackling incarcerated women during childbirth, according to Vox.

Of course, the bipartisan bill is far from perfect—one of its major flaws is that though it may help vocational and therapeutic programs in prisons flourish, it would also prevent many violent offenders from decreasing their sentences through those very programs, “perpetuat[ing] the false narrative that people who commit violent crimes are fundamentally different from those who commit nonviolent crimes,” the Times writes. And the reforms would only impact the federal prison system, which houses only 181,000 of the 2.1 million incarcerated people in the U.S., according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 21:21 schreef nostra het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:02:34 Mike Pompeo is doing a great job, I am very proud of him. His predecessor, Rex Tillerson, didn’t have the mental capacity needed. He was dumb as a rock and I couldn’t get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy as hell. Now it is a whole new ballgame, great spirit at State! reageer retweet

Op hoeveel vlakken dit achterlijk is echt.

twitter:

ABCInvestigates twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:53:47 BREAKING: Feds recommend 'substantial term of imprisonment' for Michael Cohen, Trump's former fixer and attorney - ABC News - https://t.co/cBE9xjpTRb via @ABC reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:56:11 SDNY filing: "Cohen repeatedly declined to provide full information about the scope of any additional criminal conduct in which he may have engaged in or had knowledge."Prosecutors say they won't offer a 5K filing or a notice of substantial cooperation and neither will Mueller. reageer retweet

twitter:

MichaelAvenatti twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:56:49 We are happy to see Michael Cohen is in a lot of trouble re sentencing. We agree with the govt that he should serve a substantial term of imprisonment. He lied to my client, the American people and investigators for years. He is a thug and deserves to be severely punished. #Basta reageer retweet

twitter:

maggieNYT twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:55:57 SDNY prosecutors argue Cohen cooperation was limited and “rose-colored” https://t.co/42XDzGh6tp reageer retweet

twitter:

maggieNYT twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:58:18 ...but suggest that his assistance to SCO was significant reageer retweet

twitter:

emptywheel twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 22:58:19 Here's the Mueller one, which notes that Cohen released his false story publicly so other witnesses could coordinate, something I wrote 1000000 words on today. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 22:10 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:56:17 Hopefully Mitch McConnell will ask for a VOTE on Criminal Justice Reform. It is extremely popular and has strong bipartisan support. It will also help a lot of people, save taxpayer dollars, and keep our communities safe. Go for it Mitch! reageer retweet

Weet iemand waar die reform uit bestaat?

De eerste reply kon ik overigens ook wel waarderen:

SPOILER

twitter:

JeffreyGuterman twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:57:01 @realDonaldTrump Real criminal justice reform would put you behind bars. For life. reageer retweet

Jared Kushner on Trump, Mideast policy (Full interview) | CITIZEN by CNN

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:10 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Als je tijd hebt; hier is een interview van Van Jones met Jared Kushner dat onder andere over prison reform gaat. Een onderwerp waar Van Jones zich hard voor maakt en wat Jared in zijn portefeuille heeft (wat niet )
Ik vond het de moeite van het luisteren waard.

Jared Kushner on Trump, Mideast policy (Full interview) | CITIZEN by CNN

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:11 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ehm, ik ben op zich wel geďnteresseerd, maar Jared Kushner... ? Echt?

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 21:21 schreef nostra het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 21:02:34 Mike Pompeo is doing a great job, I am very proud of him. His predecessor, Rex Tillerson, didn’t have the mental capacity needed. He was dumb as a rock and I couldn’t get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy as hell. Now it is a whole new ballgame, great spirit at State! reageer retweet

Op hoeveel vlakken dit achterlijk is echt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:12 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Ja, echt
Maar je moet het zelf kijken om het te geloven. Ik had het ook niet verwacht. En wellicht denk jij er natuurlijk heel anders over.

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 23:20:16 Notice how Mueller nails Cohen for repeatedly lying to THE PUBLIC as relevant to seriousness of offense (and using public statements to signal other witnesses). Should send shivers up the spine of Pres. Trump, Roger Stone, Erik Prince, Don Jr, and others.#CohenSentencingMemo https://t.co/vJyM8vvMiK reageer retweet

SPOILER

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op vrijdag 07-12-2018 om 23:29:23 Cohen fingers Trump in Russia investigation. #CohenSentencingMemofootnote 2: Cohen now admits he "conferred" with Trump "about contacting the Russian government" before Cohen used a radio interview to suggest meeting with Trump and Putin. https://t.co/zTm35TbODq reageer retweet

SPOILER

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:37 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ik moet toegeven dat het interessant is om hem eens te horen spreken. Er staat wel tegenover dat er wel veel slap geouwehoer bij zit .... over een proces met 3 stappen (ja, natuurlijk vergaart iemand eerst informatie voordat hij met een plan komt en uitvoert) of bv. rondom minuut 10, waar hij zwak ouwehoert dat hij de president van alle informatie voorziet en dat hij dan de beslissingen neemt ... we kunnen met alles wat we weten best veronderstellen dat dat niet helemaal is hoe het werkt, toch?

Je ziet verder dat hij ook gebriefed is door zogenaamd, terwijl het niet heel relevant is, even tussen neus en lippen door te zeggen van "the president is tough on crime".

Ik ga nu verder luisteren.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:44 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Ja, het blijft Jared Kushner natuurlijk. Maar zo vaak hebben we hem nog niet gehoord. Het is niet zo dat ik na dit interview een fan ben, maar ik vond het wel eens goed om hem te horen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:53 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Ja, best goed idd. Buiten dat fijn dat het effect lijkt te hebben dat Trump publiekelijk McConnel een tik op de vingers geeft omdat hij het om een of andere reden niet in stemming wil brengen.

Wat anders, ligt het nou aan mij of is deze man dodelijk saai? Dat kan toch bijna niet waar zijn gezien de Trumps zelf nogal alles doen om niet saai te zijn, maar ook Ivanka die er toch genoeg in ziet klaarblijkelijk.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:57 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Ivanka lijkt me dan ook dodelijk saai eigenlijk. Ze praten ook allebei op dezelfde manier; alsof over elk woord apart wordt nagedacht voordat het uitgesproken wordt.
Schril contrast met Trump wat dat betreft.

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:57 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Ivanka lijkt me dan ook dodelijk saai eigenlijk. Ze praten ook allebei op dezelfde manier; alsof over elk woord apart wordt nagedacht voordat het uitgesproken wordt.
Schril contrast met Trump wat dat betreft.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:00:21 Totally clears the President. Thank you! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 00:21 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:00:21 Totally clears the President. Thank you! reageer retweet

Tot zover vandaag een topshow

twitter:

AP_Politics twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:11:01 READ: Special Counsel Robert Mueller's filing detailing allegations against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort https://t.co/Xc1x4hExBh reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:18:35 Mueller's says Manafort lied about:* Interactions with Konstantin Kilimnik* Kilimnik's participation in count two of superseding information* A wire-transfer to a firm working for Manafort* Info pertaining to another DOJ investigation* Manafort's contact with admin officials reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:23:03 Interesting. Under the heading "Another DOj Investigation," Mueller's Manafort filing says that Manafort provided information about [REDACTED] that was "pertinent to an investigation in another district." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:26:32 New Mueller filing says that Manafort lied about contacts that he had with the Trump administration *this* year."Manafort said in February 2018 that Manafort had been in communication with a senior Administration official up through February 2018." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 23:35 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Deze man is zo makkelijk uit de tent te lokken.

twitter:

robreiner twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:48:02 Donald Trump is not only a criminal, he’s a delusional criminal. Only a sick fuck could read a legal filing that states he’s committed a federal crime and say he’s been totally cleared. Oh I forgot, the sick delusional criminal fuck can’t read. reageer retweet

twitter:

tribelaw twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 00:35:03 This unambiguously *condemns* the President. If Trump truly feels “cleared” by it, either he just can’t read or he’s totally delusional. https://t.co/CfftRTV7Al reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 00:42 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

De MSM loopt er weer achteraan, vast in hun feedback loopje.
Trump tweet wat, libs triggeren, MSM rapporteren erover en ondertussen sneeuwt het onder wat werkelijk gebeurt achter de schermen, want oepsies, daar is het volgende tweetje alweer.

Er is inmiddels al een dusdanig sterke feedbackloop ontstaan, dat de gemiddelde Amerikaan en de MSM niet meer weten wat ze moeten doen als Trump ineens weg is.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 00:42 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

De MSM loopt er weer achteraan, vast in hun feedback loopje.
Trump tweet wat, libs triggeren, MSM rapporteren erover en ondertussen sneeuwt het onder wat werkelijk gebeurt achter de schermen, want oepsies, daar is het volgende tweetje alweer.

Er is inmiddels al een dusdanig sterke feedbackloop ontstaan, dat de gemiddelde Amerikaan en de MSM niet meer weten wat ze moeten doen als Trump ineens weg is.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 00:55 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Waar komen dit soort fantasieën over de "mainstream media" toch vandaan? Lees je de Times, the Atlantic of the Economist bijvoorbeeld? Hoeveel artikelen gaan er over tweets van Trump?

quote:

Taken alone, these are each serious crimes worthy of meaningful punishment. Taken together, these offenses reveal a man who knowingly sought to undermine core institutions of our democracy. His motivation to do so was not borne from naiveté, carelessness, misplaced loyalty, or political ideology. Rather, these were knowing and calculated acts – acts Cohen executed in order to profit personally, build his own power, and enhance his level of influence. The nature and seriousness of each of Cohen’s crimes warrant a substantial sentence in this case.

twitter:

Comey twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 01:25:30 Today wasn’t a search for truth, but a desperate attempt to find anything that can be used to attack the institutions of justice investigating this president. They came up empty today but will try again. In the long run, it'll make no difference because facts are stubborn things. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 22:47 schreef monkyyy het volgende:

[..]

Schiet me opeens te binnen, hoe zou het gaan met Melania's anti cyberbully campagne?

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 07:44 schreef Montov het volgende:
Belastingontduiking door Cohen? Illegale betalingen?
Oef, Trump zal zo kwaad worden dat hij als onschuldig persoon in zee is gegaan met een crimineel als advocaat. En criminele campagneleider. En criminele adviseurs. En criminele University. En criminele Foundation. ...

De enige reden dat Trump nog niet aangeklaagd is is omdat hij president is. Maar daarvoor heb je dus impeachment. Het is goed om te wachten op het totale plaatje in een eindrapport, maar wat we nu allemaal al weten is al meer dan genoeg voor impeachment.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 08:56 schreef Freak188 het volgende:

[..]

De informatie die gister is gepubliceerd zal ook betekenen dat zijn eindrapport een echte klapper gaat worden. Sommigen twijfelen daar nog over, ik niet meer.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 00:55 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Waar komen dit soort fantasieën over de "mainstream media" toch vandaan? Lees je de Times, the Atlantic of the Economist bijvoorbeeld? Hoeveel artikelen gaan er over tweets van Trump?

quote:

This is the problem with a lot of journalism, especially liberal journalism at the moment. It’s locked together with those people in the theatre. If you look at the New York Times, for example, it’s continually about that feedback loop between what Trump has said and the reaction of liberal elements in the society. It’s led to a great narrowing of journalism. So in a way, he is part of the hypernormal situation because it’s a politics of pantomime locked together with its critics. And it becomes a perpetual, infernal motion system, which is a distraction. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s a distraction from what’s really happening in the world. I would argue that there is a sense—in a lot of liberal journalism—of unreality. They’re locked into describing the pantomime politics and they’re not looking to what Mr Michael Pence is really up to, and what’s really happening outside the theatre.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 10:36 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:
liberal journalism

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 12:21 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Klopt, maar dat is een interview met een documentairemaker die dat in mijn ogen onterecht stelt. Als je vandaag op de site kijkt, dan zie je welgeteld één artikeltje over Trumps Twittergedrag waarin hij Tillerson een domme idioot noemt. Verder van alles over de economie, klimaatverandering, het onderzoek van Mueller en ga zo maar door. Het leidt dus alleen af van wat er 'echt gebeurt' als je de vele andere artikelen even over het hoofd ziet en je enkel richt op dat éne artikeltje.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 12:24 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Maar dat doet het gros. Op social media worden de tweets besproken, hier gaat het 90% over de tweets en artikelen over Trump. Over de economische artikelen is het (over het algemeen) stil. Net als aan de overzijde het enige wat telt een transgender wc, een paar vervelende immigranten en Cortez lijkt te zijn.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 12:59 schreef rockstah het volgende:
Je zag een vergelijkbaar verwijt bij de opkomst van Wilders. Het punt is een beetje dat in ieder geval tijdens verkiezingen er rijen met kandidaten en independents zijn met verder doodnormale politieke standpunten die geen enkele noemenswaardige aandacht krijgen. Het argument is dan dat ze toch kansloos zijn, maar ondertussen werden we wel begraven onder bergen aan berichten over wat Trump nou weer voor geks op twitter heeft geroepen en dat terwijl aanvankelijk ook niemand geloofde dat hij een serieuze kandidaat was. Er is ook het idee dat Trump ook de serieuzere journalistiek weet te bespelen door in te spelen op hun arrogantie. Door continu bronnen als de NYT en WaPo te bestempelen als fake news en vijanden van het volk bereik je uiteindelijk ook dat ze over je gaan schrijven, niet in een positief licht weliswaar maar aandacht is aandacht.

Dan kun je dus best van een negatieve feedbackloop spreken waarin ze onbedoeld demagogisch gedrag beloont wordt.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 12:49 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Erger mij vooral aan nieuwssites zoals The Hill, die zich puur en alleen opwerpen als doorgeefluik. Berichten melden dat Trump zus of zo heeft getweet en dat dat weer een reactie was op dit of dat. Geen duiding, niks.

Als ik alleen wil weten wat Trump tweet, dan kan ik ook gewoon zelf naar Twitter surfen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 13:14 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Het verwijt in het verleden met betrekking tot Wilders was net als het verwijt in campagnetijd ook wel terecht.

In Nederland heeft de media wel geleerd dat juist moreel verontwaardigde artikeltjes over de zoveelste hersenscheet van een anti-migratie / -moslim populist averechts werkt. Je ziet Wilders vandaag de dag ook steeds weer krampachtig zoeken naar mediahypes, maar daar vrijwel niet in slagen. Ook Baudet probeert het vrij wanhopig.

In de VS was Trump in verkiezingstijd een relatief nieuw fenomeen, al broeide het met de Tea Party al veel langer natuurlijk. Het type populist met schofferende aandachtstrekkerij kenden ze daar nog niet echt.
Daar dacht de (liberale) media dat ze gematigde Republikeinen wel weg zouden kunnen jagen bij Trump waardoor hij de verkiezingen ruim zou verliezen.
Ik had ook een hogere pet op van die kiezersdemografie, maar dat vertrouwen bleek in 2016 misplaatst. Dit jaar zag je wel dat die groep belangrijk was voor de Democratische golf.
In mijn ogen speelt het daarbij ook een rol dat het Trump niet meer lukt om de nieuwscyclus te domineren met boze tweetjes.

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 14:27 schreef Freak188 het volgende:

[..]

In de VS is, ttt Nederland, alles extreem. Trump is in zekere zin een extreme showman en de media smult erop los. Op CNN zijn er standaard 5 “attributors” in een panel die per segment alles herkauwen. In Nederland is toch meer plaats voor iets meer terughoudendheid. En trump gebruikt die extremen superhandig want Fox blijft op die manier geloofwaardig. Want CNN en MSNBC zijn net zo hysterisch.

SPOILER

1. SDNY Prosecutors named the President of the United States as a direct participant, if not the principal, in felonies

“The Department of Justice today, in the most explicit terms, said the President of the United States committed two felonies. Just said it. Came out and said it. Campaign violations. … It’s just plain as day,” Jeffrey Toobin said live on CNN. Toobin is basically right, and that’s the legal, political, and ethical bombshell of this day in history.

More specifically, the flagship U.S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York walked right up to the line of accusing Donald Trump (identified as “Individual 1”) in a federal court filing of complicity and conspiracy in Cohen’s felony campaign finance crimes related to the payment of hush money to women to squash sex stories. Specifically, the SDNY states:

During the campaign, Cohen played a central role in two similar schemes to purchase the rights -to stories – each from women who claimed to have had an affair with Individual-1 – so as to suppress the stories and thereby prevent them from influencing the election. With respect to both payments, Cohen acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election. Cohen coordinated his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1. As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election.

(emphasis added and presentence report citations omitted).

Trump is no mere accomplice, but is alleged to have directed the criminal activity. And this is no minor crime. The SDNY submitted to the court that “the nature and seriousness of the offenses” should “weigh heavily in favor of a substantial term of imprisonment.” And as though they were speaking about Trump himself, the prosecutors state that the “two campaign finance crimes on the eve of the 2016 election for President of the United States struck a blow to one of the core goals of the federal campaign finance laws: transparency,” “deceived the voting public by hiding alleged facts that he believed would have had a substantial effect on the election,” and should be met with a stiff penalty “to counter the public cynicism that may arise when individuals like Cohen act as if the political process belongs to the rich and powerful.“ That language is not reserved for Cohen, but presumably applies to the individual who directed Cohen’s activities as well if not more so.

All that said, there’s an important footnote: something is still missing before being able to make claims as bold as Toobin’s, that is, before being able to say the Justice Department actually crossed the line of accusing the President of committing a felony. That’s the element of a knowing violation of the law.

Cohen had been charged with “knowingly and willfully” causing excessive campaign contributions to a candidate for President of the United States in violation of 52 U.S.C. §§ 30118(a) & 30109(d)(l)(A), and 18 U.S.C. § 2(b). However, a willful violation requires knowing wrongdoing, so prosecutors would have to demonstrate that someone in Trump’s shoes, like Cohen, knew what he was doing was illegal.

Notwithstanding the legal debate about a sitting president’s indictability, it won’t happen as a practical matter. Nonetheless, after these filings, Trump faces meaningful criminal exposure upon the end of his term in office. What’s more, the fact that these alleged crimes related to his election to office, they would clear a potential hurdle for impeachment purposes. That is, some impeachment scholars, like Cass Sunstein, take the view that the Impeachment Clause applies only to acts committed in office or in the course of getting elected. These allegations meet the Sunstein test for what falls inside the scope of impeachment, were the question ever to be considered by Congress.

2. Other Trump Campaign and Trump Organization officials may face criminal charges for the hush money scheme

The key allegation against the President also refers to “one or more members of the campaign,” which suggests more indictments for the hush money scheme may still be in the offing. This also raises the prospect that we may soon see the prosecution of the campaign itself as an organization — “United States vs. Trump Campaign” — even if a sitting president (United States vs. Donald J. Trump) cannot be indicted. Something similar holds true for other executives in the Trump Organization and the company itself. The SDNY memo states that executives engaged in a scheme to create fraudulent payments to reimburse Cohen for his payoffs for the two women. It states, for example, that “Executives of the Company agreed to reimburse Cohen … the Company then falsely accounted for these payments as ‘legal expenses.’ In fact, no such retainer agreement existed and these payments were not ‘legal expenses’ – Cohen in fact provided negligible legal services to Individual-1 or the Company in 2017.”

3. The Special Counsel ties Trump directly to possible Russia collusion

The Special Counsel’s sentencing memorandum for Cohen very deliberately tells the public that Trump himself was caught up in the connections to and embrace with Russia, and some of those actions were in fact the candidate’s idea. The Special Counsel’s memo says that it was Trump’s idea to initiate contact with the Kremlin in the early stages of the campaign, and that he tasked his fixer, Cohen, to begin that process as early as September 2015. This information should now inform how we think about other subsequent events in the Trump-Russia timeline. At least some Russian overtures should be seen as a potential second step (a receptive response) in the two side’s engagement, not the first step (an initial overture or invitation).

This is likely just the tip of the iceberg. Mueller specifically refers to “examples” of Cohen’s and Trump’s actions, indicating these instances are representative of a broader set of cases. Mueller’s brief states that Cohen “corrected other false and misleading statements that he had made concerning his outreach to and contacts with Russian officials during the course of the campaign. For example, in a radio interview ….” And the brief states that: “the defendant provided information about his own contacts with Russian interests during the campaign and discussions with others in the course of making those contacts. For example, and as described above, the defendant provided a detailed account of his involvement and the involvement of others in the Moscow Project …”

4. Russian contacts began during the GOP Primary

As one of us has written previously, a key question is not just whether the Russians interfered in the GOP primary, but whether any collusion with the Trump campaign began back then. Mueller’s sentencing memorandum for Cohen adds significant evidence to suggest that’s what happened. Two of the examples Mueller chooses to include in the document occurred early in the primaries. By September 2015, Cohen publicly suggested a meeting between Putin and Trump after having “conferred with Individual 1 about contacting the Russian government before reaching out to gauge Russia’s interest in such a meeting.” In November 2015, a Russian national who identified themselves as a “trusted person” in the Russian Federation reached out to Cohen proposing such a meeting with Putin and offering the campaign support in the form of “political synergy.” The only reason Cohen declined is because already by then he considered Felix Sater, with whom he was arrange the Moscow Trump Tower project, provided sufficient “connections to the Russian government.”

What’s more, these interactions may also shed light on other aspects of the publicly known timeline. First, when senior campaign officials appeared to brush away some overtures by Russian agents (think: Kushner at the time of the NRA convention), it may have been because they considered other established connections with the Kremlin sufficient. Second, these earlier interactions with Trump and Cohen may also shed light on Rob Goldstone’s email to Donald Trump Jr. In the first email on June 3, 2016, Goldstone’s message appeared to pick up mid-conversation and assume Trump Jr. already knew about Kremlin efforts to help Trump get elected. “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” Goldstone wrote.

5. The Special Counsel targets many Manafort lies but is silent on the infamous Trump Tower meeting with Russians

In the Special Counsel’s memorandum alleging Manafort’s breach of the plea agreement, there’s a conspicuous silence on whether Manafort lied about direct Russia-Trump Campaign activities. Did Manafort lie, for example, about whether Trump had advance knowledge of the June 9 meeting with the Russians? The memo does not say.

Despite White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders boasting that the Manafort filing “says absolutely nothing about the President,” that may actually be quite worrisome for Trump. The president may need to be most concerned that Manafort was candid about what he knew of Russia-Trump Campaign activities. Put another way, Manafort may have testified before the grand jury that Trump did know about the nature of the Trump Tower meeting in real time.

That said, we do not read too much into the absence of allegations. Mueller may have decided to focus on a tidy set of slam dunk examples in which Manafort not only clearly lied, but even acknowledged the falsehood. These cases were so overwhelming that the Special Counsel wrote, “In none of the communications with Manafort’s counsel was any factual or legal argument made as to why the government’s assessment of Manafort’s credibility was erroneous…”

6. Some potential hints of obstruction and suborning perjury

The Special Counsel documents on Manafort and Cohen also contain hints of obstruction of justice and suborning perjury. Why was Manafort secretly in contact with Administration officials, and as late as May 26, 2018, long after his indictment and being confined to his home under court order? Why did, as the Special Counsel accuses “Manafort authorize[] a person to speak with an Administration official on Manafort’s behalf”? And why did Manafort deny all this to federal investigators after signing the plea agreement?

For his part, Cohen implicated members of the White House and Trump’s lawyers in his sentencing memorandum submitted last week. The brief on behalf of Cohen stated, “in the weeks during which his [Cohen’s] then counsel prepared his written response to the Congressional Committees, Michael remained in close and regular contact with White House-based staff and legal counsel to Client-1 [Trump].” This statement clearly suggested those individuals were in the loop when Cohen prepared his false written testimony. Now, the Special Counsel’s brief added to that picture. It states, “Cohen provided relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the White House during the 2017–2018 time period” and “Cohen described the circumstances of preparing and circulating his response to the congressional inquiries, while continuing to accept responsibility for the false statements contained within it.” If indeed White House staff and any of Trump’s legal counsel were involved in preparing or encouraging Cohen’s false testimony to Congress, they should be worried about their personal liability. Mueller may well have the evidence to prove it.

7. Mueller’s M.O.: What he’ll do with lying to the public (and lies in writing)

The Special Counsel’s documents on Manfort and Cohen provide insight into Mueller’s approach to these cases.

In terms of perjury and false statements, Mueller seizes on fact that Cohen lies were in written testimony rather than arising “spontaneously from a line of examination or heated colloquy.” That’s a danger sign for people like Trump, who may have thought they had greater safety in written responses to Mueller, and people like Roger Stone, whose apparent lies to Congress are on the face of his written testimony.

Another important insight is how Mueller seizes on Cohen’s lies made to the public.

First, Mueller’s theory of the case recognizes that public statements are methods of communication with other witnesses. That’s important for potential conspiracies to commit perjury or otherwise obstruct justice. This also increases the likelihood that Mueller will regard public statements by President Trump and his lawyers as signals to other witnesses–such as publicly dangling pardons and favoring the “strength” of uncooperative witnesses.

Second, Mueller considers lies to the public can be an attempt to undermine the investigation. The memo states, “By publicly presenting this false narrative, the defendant deliberately shifted the timeline of what had occurred in the hopes of limiting the investigations into possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.” That sounds awfully similar to the creation of a cover story about the June 9 Trump Tower meeting, which the President himself reportedly directed from aboard Airforce One.

Third, Mueller considers Cohen’s false statements to be even more significant because he “amplified” them by “by releasing and repeating his lies to the public.” That approach spells trouble for several Trump campaign associates including Roger Stone, Donald Trump Jr., Erik Prince, and Michael Caputo.

8. Why Cohen was more forthcoming with Mueller than SDNY, and SDNY wants him to serve a significant prison sentence

Back in August, Cohen agreed to plead guilty but did so without a cooperation agreement. At the time, Alex Whiting and Andy Wright puzzled over that sequence of events, wondering whether the non-agreement was driven by Cohen’s refusal to agree to cooperate, or by SDNY’s lack of interest — or confidence — in his testimony. In this filing SDNY argues the prosecutors wanted Cohen to be a “traditional cooperating witness” but Cohen made an “affirmative decision not to become one.” Per SDNY, Cohen had valuable information: “Had Cohen actually cooperated, it could have been fruitful: He did provide what could have been useful information about matters relating to ongoing investigations being carried out by this Office.”

In contrast, Cohen provided more fulsome information to the Special Counsel, which SDNY suggests deserves a variance from the normal sentencing guidelines range but not the kind of substantial assistance reduction Michael Flynn received. Unlike SDNY, Mueller describes Cohen’s assistance as “substantial.”

Why the discrepancy? One theory is that Mueller’s investigation is focused on the Trump orbit, whereas the SDNY is much more focused on Cohen’s. Cohen may be reticent to cooperate fully with SDNY because it might implicate his own family and non-Trump business associates.

* * *

The SDNY and Mueller’s filings — rather than a political communications operation and media strategy — speak to the law and the facts. Within the procedural rules of these criminal cases, the sequence and nature of the information they provide drip with intention. As Preet Bharara discussed Friday night, there was no apparent need for the SDNY to mention that Cohen acted “in coordination with and at the direction of” the President.” But the SDNY did, and speaks volumes. This week we have seen a tale of three witnesses: Michael Flynn received a no-sentence recommendation for substantial cooperation in several ongoing investigations; Cohen got an SDNY recommendation of a “substantial” period of incarceration for his half-hearted cooperation, and Manafort got not just the book, but the whole library, thrown at him by prosecutors for allegedly breaking his plea agreement. The message there is not subtle either. And other witnesses and potential targets of these wide-ranging investigations will surely hear it.

twitter:

maxwelltani twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 04:17:45 Anthony Scaramucci basically told a couple attending the American Priority Conference today that QAnon is real: “When you find out who he is, you’re not going to believe it.”https://t.co/s772Nxlxb5 https://t.co/RSDpHGgvmy reageer retweet

twitter:

NBCNews twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 19:25:08 JUST IN: President Trump says Chief of Staff Kelly will leave at the end of the year. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 18:58 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

maxwelltani twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 04:17:45 Anthony Scaramucci basically told a couple attending the American Priority Conference today that QAnon is real: “When you find out who he is, you’re not going to believe it.”https://t.co/s772Nxlxb5 https://t.co/RSDpHGgvmy reageer retweet

The Mooch weet wie Q is.

twitter:

NBCNews twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 19:25:08 JUST IN: President Trump says Chief of Staff Kelly will leave at the end of the year. reageer retweet

Kelly weg

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 19:32 schreef trein2000 het volgende:

[..]

Kelly ook al de laan uit, wat een grapjas is het toch

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 20:26 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trump:"Based on what everybody's telling me, there's no collusion."

Dat stelt me gerust.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 19:58:13 Watched Da Nang Dick Blumenthal on television spewing facts almost as accurate as his bravery in Vietnam (which he never saw). As the bullets whizzed by Da Nang Dicks head, as he was saving soldiers.... reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 7 december 2018 20:21 schreef Montov het volgende:
Alvast deze tweet uit het archief halen voor het geval dat Kelly weg gaat.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 10-01-2012 om 21:07:42 3 Chief of Staffs in less than 3 years of being President: Part of the reason why @BarackObama can't manage to pass his agenda. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 22:26 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Een kleine beeldende samenvatting van de samenwerking Trump-Kelly:

[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 22:26 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Een kleine beeldende samenvatting van de samenwerking Trump-Kelly:

[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 8 december 2018 20:46 schreef Montov het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 19:58:13 Watched Da Nang Dick Blumenthal on television spewing facts almost as accurate as his bravery in Vietnam (which he never saw). As the bullets whizzed by Da Nang Dicks head, as he was saving soldiers.... reageer retweet

De kat in het nauw ziet kennelijk in Blumenthal een gevaar. Zou hij wat sappige documenten hebben/openbaren?

twitter:

SenBlumenthal twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 05:33:54 As the walls close in on Trump, risk is high that he will become more desperate & destructive & potentially more damaging. I will demand AG nominee William Barr commit to unequivocally protecting the integrity & independence of the Special Counsel. reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 23:30:05 COMEY: "Mid October, maybe a little bit later, Mr. Giuliani was making statements that appeared to be based on his knowledge of workings inside the FBI New York ... that gave me a general concern that we may have a leak problem ... and so I asked that it be investigated." P. 152 reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 08-12-2018 om 23:35:11 Comey says here that he ordered an investigation into leaks from the FBI field office based on public statements from Rudy Giuliani. https://t.co/Tyn2AzOiUr reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 00:51 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Hahahah geeft die Comey gewoon toe dat Trump en Rudy de FBI onder de neus van Obama wegkaapten nog voor Trump President was?

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 00:59:49 Just got home, and plan to scour this transcript for signs it was indeed, as I wrote in December '16, the "Trumplandia" cabal in the NYC field office of the FBI that deliberately leaked info about the Clinton case to force Comey to reopen it and thereby give Trump the White House https://t.co/2L3BuAEe9J reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:24 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]

Goed, nog voor het Steele dossier had de FBI dus onderzoek naar 4 mensen in de Trump campagne.

En echt Nintex, het was allang bekend dat een onderdeel van de FBI Trump geholpen had ... het zou alleen goed zijn als daar ook strafrechtelijk eens wat mee zou gebeuren.

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:24 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]

Goed, nog voor het Steele dossier had de FBI dus onderzoek naar 4 mensen in de Trump campagne.

En echt Nintex, het was allang bekend dat een onderdeel van de FBI Trump geholpen had ... het zou alleen goed zijn als daar ook strafrechtelijk eens wat mee zou gebeuren.

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:31 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:

[..]

Screenshots van text? Is redpilled terug ?

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:35 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Sowieso, wat is er met hem en bv. mensen als zomerindebol gebeurd?

Je ziet trouwens ook mensen als Nintex en Refragmental minder posten hier na de midterms.

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 01:28:53 1/ Comey said clearly that he "saw no evidence of [personal or political] bias" in the work of those assigned to the Trump counterintel investigation. We'll see if he's able to say the same thing about the NYC field office of the FBI and its investigation of Hillary Clinton. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:38 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Druk, druk, druk met de zaken zo aan het einde van het jaar. Heeft niets met de midterms van doen.

twitter:

Isikoff twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 00:57:16 Exclusive: Before Trump tapped Bill Barr to be his new AG, he reached out to him for another job: his defense lawyer. @SkullduggeryPod @YahooNews @dklaidman https://t.co/kY9z41rJAf reageer retweet

quote:

On top of this, roughly half a million comments were filed from Russian e-mail addresses.

quote:

The Most Damaging Election Disinformation Campaign Came From Donald Trump, Not Russia

[..]

However, global adversaries like the Russians aren't the only actors who can use flooding and confidence attacks. US actors can use just the same techniques. Indeed, they can arguably use them better, since they have a better understanding of US politics, more resources, and are far more difficult for the government to counter without raising First Amendment issues.

For example, when the Federal Communication Commission asked for comments on its proposal to get rid of "net neutrality," it was flooded by fake comments supporting the proposal. Nearly every real person who commented was in favor of net neutrality, but their arguments were drowned out by a flood of spurious comments purportedly made by identities stolen from porn sites, by people whose names and email addresses had been harvested without their permission, and, in some cases, from dead people. This was done not just to generate fake support for the FCC's controversial proposal. It was to devalue public comments in general, making the general public's support for net neutrality politically irrelevant. FCC decision making on issues like net neutrality used to be dominated by industry insiders, and many would like to go back to the old regime.

[..]

twitter:

emptywheel twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 00:46:56 Comey makes a point virtually everyone gets wrong: there was an investigation into RU, and an investigation into Trump's folks. https://t.co/NCochrUgHf https://t.co/PQaxnpeGCM reageer retweet

twitter:

vermontgmg twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 01:06:05 This is a really important point by @emptywheel, often overlooked by GOP critics. The original FBI Russia probe was meant to *PROTECT* the Trump campaign, to protect against Russians trying to penetrate it. The horror arrived when the FBI realized Trump wanted the help. https://t.co/tHensH1K24 reageer retweet

quote:

As reporters pored over the transcript on Saturday, seemingly bizarre exchanges emerged.

Sixty pages into Friday’s hearing, New York congressman and the likely judiciary chairman Jerrold Nadler raised a striking claim made by Trump about Comey’s relationship with Mueller, his predecessor as FBI director.

“On 5 September,” Nadler said, “President Trump brought up special counsel Mueller in an interview with the Daily Caller, stating: ‘And he’s Comey’s best friend, and I could give you a hundred pictures of him and Comey hugging and kissing each other. You know he’s Comey’s best friend.’”

Nadler asked: “Are you best friends with Robert Mueller?”

Comey replied that though he admired “the heck out of the man”, he did not know his phone number or the names of his children.

“I think I had a meal once alone with him in a restaurant,” he said. “I like him … I’m an associate of his who admires him greatly. We’re not friends in any social sense.”

Nadler said he would not “ask whether you’ve ever hugged and kissed him”.

“A relief to my wife,” Comey said.

In the very first line of questioning, about text messages between two now former FBI staffers, which Republicans have said portray anti-Trump bias, the oversight chairman, Trey Gowdy, quoted a message about the margin an agent said Hillary Clinton “should win by” and asked: “In the course of human history, has anyone won an election 100 million to zero, to your knowledge?”

Comey replied: “I don’t mean to be facetious. I can’t speak to Stalin’s re-election or Mao Tse-tung re-election campaigns.”

Gowdy said: “100 million to zero is a lot.”

“Sure,” said Comey. “I’m not trying to be facetious, but I remember as a student the vote in Soviet Russia was 99.9% to …”

Interrupting, Gowdy said: “We are going to get to Russia in a little bit. We’ll get to Russia in a little bit.”

Bron

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 01:24 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]

Goed, nog voor het Steele dossier had de FBI dus onderzoek naar 4 mensen in de Trump campagne.

En echt Nintex, het was allang bekend dat een onderdeel van de FBI Trump geholpen had ... het zou alleen goed zijn als daar ook strafrechtelijk eens wat mee zou gebeuren.

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 05:06:25 38/ So all that said, I'll make a somewhat controversial point: that we may not have heard the end of this, because when IG Horowitz said he was going to deal with Giuliani in a separate report that report never happened. Do I think he was lying? No. What I *wonder* is whether... reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 05:07:34 39/ ...Mueller or Rosenstein or someone else asked Horowitz to *hold off* on issuing a report for the same reason Comey can't talk about certain things: because it could negatively impact the Mueller investigation. IOW, we don't *know* Giuliani won't be in Mueller's final report. reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op zondag 09-12-2018 om 05:08:42 40/ I've already said that *4 people* involved in the Trumplandia conspiracy—Prince, Trump Jr., Flynn, and Bannon—are also involved in the Russia investigation, so isn't it actually pretty reasonable to think that Mueller asked Horowitz to stand down? I guess we'll find out. /end reageer retweet

quote:

The U.S. Is Paying More Than It Bargained for in the Yemen War
The Pentagon says that “errors in accounting” mean Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have not been properly charged for refueling.

President Donald Trump, who repeatedly complains that the United States is paying too much for the defense of its allies, has praised Saudi Arabia for ostensibly taking on Iran in the Yemen war. It turns out, however, that U.S. taxpayers have been footing the bill for a major part of the Saudi-led campaign, possibly to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. (Atlantic).

quote:

Op zondag 9 december 2018 23:19 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
Dat is echt een volslagen idioot, nog erger dan die Nunes .

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 00:28 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Ayers is ook weg inderdaad. Tja wie nu, Mark Meadows, Hope Hicks, Sean Hannity?
Misschien iemand die er al werkt promoveren. Wie zal het zeggen.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 03:29 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
Hope Hicks .

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 00:28 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Ayers is ook weg inderdaad. Tja wie nu, Mark Meadows, Hope Hicks, Sean Hannity?
Misschien iemand die er al werkt promoveren. Wie zal het zeggen.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 12:46:11 “Democrats can’t find a Smocking Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun...No Collusion.” @FoxNews That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 13:00:00 ....which it was not (but even if it was, it is only a CIVIL CASE, like Obama’s - but it was done correctly by a lawyer and there would not even be a fine. Lawyer’s liability if he made a mistake, not me). Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced. WITCH HUNT! reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 13:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 12:46:11 “Democrats can’t find a Smocking Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun...No Collusion.” @FoxNews That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 13:00:00 ....which it was not (but even if it was, it is only a CIVIL CASE, like Obama’s - but it was done correctly by a lawyer and there would not even be a fine. Lawyer’s liability if he made a mistake, not me). Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced. WITCH HUNT! reageer retweet

What did Trump smocke this morning?

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 13:57 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Trump heeft dit vaker zo gespeld, hij denkt echt dat je smoking als smocking spelt.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 14:00 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Hij spelt het ook twee keer zo in 1 tweet. De man heeft gewoon niet zulke goede woorden.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 14:02 schreef heywoodu het volgende:

[..]

Dat is niet waar, hij heeft de beste worden.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 13:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 12:46:11 “Democrats can’t find a Smocking Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun...No Collusion.” @FoxNews That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 13:00:00 ....which it was not (but even if it was, it is only a CIVIL CASE, like Obama’s - but it was done correctly by a lawyer and there would not even be a fine. Lawyer’s liability if he made a mistake, not me). Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced. WITCH HUNT! reageer retweet

What did Trump smocke this morning?

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 13:57 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Trump heeft dit vaker zo gespeld, hij denkt echt dat je smoking als smocking spelt.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 15:40 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Misschien heeft hij het gewoon over geweren met wat tierelantijntjes.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 14:14 schreef Montov het volgende:

[..]

Bijna de hele Narcissist Prayer in 1 tweet.

twitter:

AliceOllstein twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 16:21:11 BREAKING: The Supreme Court just rejected a case that could have allowed states to cut Planned Parenthood out of their Medicaid programs. Justices ROBERTS and KAVANAUGH joined with the court's progressives to preserve @PPFA's public funding https://t.co/3WvqJHOXva reageer retweet

twitter:

cryanbarber twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 16:47:07 New filing: Accused Russian spy Maria Butina wants to change her plea to guilty. It's been widely reported that she has been in in talks with prosecutors about a plea deal. https://t.co/HPzjUy3X9V reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 15:40 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Misschien heeft hij het gewoon over geweren met wat tierelantijntjes.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 17:27 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Volgens de Q mongolen is het niet zomaar een spelfout, maar zit er een diepere laag onder. Trump maakt namelijk NOOIT spelfouten, maar communiceert zo stiekem met Mueller om Clinton en Obama ten val te brengen.

[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 17:30 schreef heywoodu het volgende:

[..]

Ik weiger te geloven dat mensen zo raar zijn dat ze dit serieus menen en nemen.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 17:30 schreef heywoodu het volgende:
Ik weiger te geloven dat mensen zo raar zijn dat ze dit serieus menen en nemen.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 17:30 schreef heywoodu het volgende:

[..]

Ik weiger te geloven dat mensen zo raar zijn dat ze dit serieus menen en nemen.

quote:

De informatie toont wederom hoe dicht de Russen Trump genaderd waren terwijl ze tegelijkertijd via sociale media probeerden de uitkomst van de Amerikaanse verkiezingen te beďnvloeden. Hoe groots de vergezichten bij sommige betrokkenen waren bleek ook uit een e-mail van de Russische contactpersoon van Cohen, Felix Sater, die al eerder bekend werd via The New York Times. Op 3 november 2015 mailde Sater aan Cohen: „Makker, onze jongen kan president van de VS worden en wij kunnen dat voor elkaar krijgen. Ik zal heel Poetins team aan boord krijgen, ik ga dit managen.”

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 19:37 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:

[..]

Het is ook een businessmodel, als mensen dit soort gekkigheid geloven dan heb je een markt te pakken voor spullen voor preppers, anti vaccers, gasmaskers en goudstaven.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 19:38 schreef Brave_Sir_Robin het volgende:
De pitbull die zich tegen het baasje keerde
Trumps ex-advocaat hoort deze week hoelang hij de cel in moet. Het liefst zou hij de president meesleuren in zijn val.

[..]

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws(...)asje-keerde-a3060062

Als Mueller dit soort mailtjes heeft, en kan laten zien dat Trump er vanaf wist...

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 17:34 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Dan maar niet in BNW kijken...

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 13:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 12:46:11 “Democrats can’t find a Smocking Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun...No Collusion.” @FoxNews That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 13:00:00 ....which it was not (but even if it was, it is only a CIVIL CASE, like Obama’s - but it was done correctly by a lawyer and there would not even be a fine. Lawyer’s liability if he made a mistake, not me). Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced. WITCH HUNT! reageer retweet

What did Trump smocke this morning?

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 21:46 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:

[..]

Maar hij geeft hier dus wel toe dat het hele Stormy Daniels verhaal echt gebeurd is. Minder dan een jaar geleden waren het allemaal nog keiharde leugens. De huidige president heeft dus een affaire met een porno actrice gehad, terwijl zn vrouw net een kind had gekregen. En heel conservatief Amerika loopt weg met deze man

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op dinsdag 11-12-2018 om 00:25:42 ABC got a copy of the Maria Butina plea agreement, which says she and an unnamed “person 1” (likely Erickson) conspired with a Russian government official —and at least one other person—for Butina to act” as a Russian agent. https://t.co/UOiCpkHZPO reageer retweet

The Rachel Maddow Show 9PM 12/10/18 | Rachel Maddow MSNBC BREAKING NEWS TODAY December 10, 2018

twitter:

nycsouthpaw twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 22:01:50 Paul Manafort does not want to come to court tomorrow to answer for his alleged "crimes and lies" in Mueller's Friday evening filing. He cites the "time involved in having the U.S. Marshal Service transport me to and from the courthouse." https://t.co/2SEbHCYWDv reageer retweet

quote:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s reluctance to take up new cases on volatile social issues is putting it on a collision course with President Donald Trump, whose Justice Department is trying to rush such disputes through the appeals system to get them before the nine justices as quickly as possible.

That tension could come to head in 2019 if the court continues to avoid cases that the Republican president’s lawyers are aggressively trying to bring to the justices. The court’s 5-4 conservative majority includes Trump appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

While Trump has suffered a series of setbacks in lower federal courts since taking office last year, he has collected major victories at the Supreme Court. Most notably, the court in June upheld in a 5-4 ruling Trump’s travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority countries, with Gorsuch casting a pivotal vote, after lower courts had blocked the policy.

But since Kavanaugh joined the bench in October after a bitter Senate confirmation fight, the court has declined to take up appeals by conservative-leaning states seeking to deny public funds to women’s healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, while postponing action on a dispute over federal employment protections opposed by Trump’s administration for gay and transgender people.

At the same time, the administration has been seeking to leap-frog more liberal-leaning lower courts to get cases on divisive questions over immigration, transgender rights and the U.S. census before the justices more rapidly.

“The court seems to be in go-slow mode at the moment when it comes to big cases. The court appears content to focus on meat-and-potatoes cases rather than blockbuster ones,” said Kannon Shanmugam, a lawyer who regularly argues cases before the justices.

Trump has frequently railed against the lower courts, especially the liberal-leaning San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, that have ruled against him in some major cases including the travel ban.

SPOILER

In a setback to social and religious conservatives who strongly support Trump, the high court on Monday declined to take up appeals by Kansas and Louisiana to deny Planned Parenthood public funds under the Medicaid health insurance program for the poor.

Three of the court’s five conservatives voted to hear the matter, but with conservatives Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts declining to join them they fell a vote short of the required four needed to take up a case.

Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas accused his colleagues of ducking the case because of its controversial nature.

Last week, the court put off action in another divisive case involving whether federal employment law outlaws discrimination against gay and transgender people. There are three appeals on the issue begging attention from the court, but the justices have not yet acted.

The court also has delayed action in a case concerning Republican-drawn U.S. congressional districts in North Carolina that were struck down by a lower court that found the boundaries were drawn to ensure lopsided electoral victories for their party against rival Democrats.

‘BEING VERY CAREFUL’

“It does appear they are being very careful based on their actions so far. They don’t seem eager to take on avoidable, potentially controversial cases. It may be that they have a heightened sensitivity right now,” Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights advocacy group, said of the justices.

The court early next year must decide whether to hear two high-profile appeals by Trump’s administration. One involves the president’s bid to end deportation protections for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants known as “Dreamers” who were brought into the United States as children. The other involves his proposed limits on transgender people serving in the military.

Both policies were blocked by lower courts.

In an unusually aggressive strategy, Solicitor General Noel Francisco, a conservative lawyer who is Trump’s top Supreme Court advocate, sought to bypass lower appeals courts by asking the justices to take up both cases early in the appellate process.

Of the two cases, the court may be more likely to hear the immigration dispute, according to Nicole Saharsky, a former Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The transgender case “seems like more of a reach,” Saharsky added.

Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, said Trump’s lawyers are in a delicate position.

“On the one hand, if they overplay their hand on a regular basis, they risk alienating the justices. On the other hand, there are some cases ... in which they have legitimate complaints. In a sense, they don’t want to cry wolf, but there are wolves out there,” Adler said.

The justices have agreed to hear an administration appeal in a case in which a group of states has challenged the Commerce Department’s decision to add a contentious citizenship question to the census to be conducted in 2020.

But in doing so, the justices sent mixed messages by refusing to block a trial on the issue in New York, as the administration requested. The case will be argued before the justices on Feb. 19. [L2N1XR19N]

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 22:38:27 Hatch dismisses allegations of Trump crimes over hush money.Asked if he had any concerns, Hatch said: “The Democrats will do anything to hurt this president.” Told it was alleged by SDNY, Hatch told me: “Okay but I don’t care; all I can say is he’s doing a good job as President” reageer retweet

SPOILER

twitter:

BrendanNyhan twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 22:46:36 Orrin Hatch 2018: I don't care if the President's own DOJ has implicated him in felonies. What is a "crime" anyway? Orrin Hatch 1999: "crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office" https://t.co/8K8NVZSntj reageer retweet

twitter:

OrrinHatch twitterde op vrijdag 19-11-2010 om 00:22:38 "We conservatives. . . believe in the rule of law, the enforcement of our law, and the Constitution as written." http://is.gd/hnxGx reageer retweet

quote:

The Trump administration is expected on Tuesday to unveil a plan that would weaken federal clean water rules designed to protect millions of acres of wetlands and thousands of miles of streams nationwide from pesticide runoff and other pollutants.

Environmentalists say the proposal represents a historic assault on wetlands regulation at a moment when Mr. Trump has repeatedly voiced a commitment to “crystal-clean water.” The proposed new rule would chip away at safeguards put in place a quarter century ago, during the administration of President George H.W. Bush, who implemented a policy designed to ensure that no wetlands lost federal protection.

“They’re definitely rolling things back to the pre-George H.W. Bush era,” said Blan Holman, who works on water regulations with the Southern Environmental Law Center. Wetlands play key roles in filtering surface water and protecting against floods, while also providing wildlife habitat.

President Trump, who made a pledge of weakening a 2015 Obama-era rule one of his central campaign pledges, is expected to tout his plan as ending a federal land grab that impinged on the rights of farmers, rural landowners and real estate developers to use their property as they see fit.

Under the Obama rule, farmers using land near streams and wetlands were restricted from doing certain kinds of plowing and planting certain crops, and would have been required to apply for permits from the Environmental Protection Agency in order to use chemical pesticides and fertilizers that could have run off into those water bodies. Under the new Trump plan, which lifts federal protections from many of those streams and wetlands, those requirements will also be lifted.

A spokesman for the Environmental Protection Agency, John Konkus, declined to comment on the plan.

SPOILER

The clean water rollback is the latest in a series of actions by the Trump administration to weaken or undo major environmental rules, including proposals to weaken regulations on planet-warming emissions from cars, power plants and oil and gas drilling rigs, a series of moves designed to speed new drilling in the vast Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and efforts to weaken protections under the Endangered Species Act. This week in Katowice, Poland, at an annual United Nations conference on mitigating global warming, Trump administration officials held an event touting the benefits of fossil fuels.

The proposed water rule, scheduled to be announced Tuesday morning at the Environmental Protection Agency, is designed to replace an Obama-era regulation known as Waters of the United States. Tuesday’s unveiling of the proposal is expected to coincide with its publication in the federal register. After that, the administration will take comment on the plan for 60 days, and it could then revise the plan before finalizing it next year.

The Obama rule, developed jointly by the E.P.A. and the Army Corps of Engineers under the authority of the 1972 Clean Water Act, was designed to limit pollution in about 60 percent of the nation’s bodies of water, protecting sources of drinking water for about a third of the United States. It extended existing federal authority to limit pollution in large bodies of water, like the Chesapeake Bay and Puget Sound, to smaller bodies that drain into them, such as tributaries, streams and wetlands.

But it became a target for rural landowners, an important part of President Trump’s political base, since it could have restricted how much pollution from chemical fertilizers and pesticides could seep into water on their property.

The new Trump water rule will retain federal protections for those larger bodies of water, the rivers that drain into them, and wetlands that are directly adjacent to those bodies of water, according to a detailed eight-page fact sheet prepared by the administration ahead of the unveiling of the rule and reviewed by The New York Times.

But it will strip away protections of so-called “ephemeral” streams, in which water runs only during or after rainfalls, and of wetlands that are not adjacent to major bodies of water, or connected to such bodies of water by a surface channel of water. Those changes represent a victory for farmers and rural landowners, who lobbied the Trump administration aggressively to make them.

“The Obama administration led with the premise that all water is connected, all water runs downhill, and the federal government could control all water,” said Don Parrish, director of regulatory relations with the American Farm Bureau Federation, who met with White House officials over the summer to press the case for those changes.

“If they can control the water that falls out of the sky, they control the land that it falls on,” he said.

Mr. Parrish also said the Obama rule chafed its detractors because of the perception it was written by bureaucrats who did not understand the daily reality of farmers’ livelihoods. “The last administration called our concerns silly and ludicrous, and this administration took us seriously. They listened to us,” he said.

In particular, he cited a social media campaign run by the Obama administration, “Ditch the myth,” which challenged the claim that the rule would have regulated water in ditches. “With that campaign, they were laughing at us,” he said.

Mr. Trump won cheers from rural audiences on the presidential campaign trail when he vowed to roll back the Obama rule. Real estate developers and golf course owners (industries in which Mr. Trump worked for decades) were also among the chief opponents of the earlier rule. One of Mr. Trump’s first actions in office was to sign an executive order directing his E.P.A. chief to repeal and replace the rule.

To environmentalists, however, the proposed rule change “upends the core mission of the E.P.A., which is to protect human health and the environment,” said Bart Johnsen-Harris, who works on water policy at the Environment America, an advocacy group.

While the Obama rule would have applied federal protections to wetlands that are not adjacent to major bodies of water, or do not directly drain into them via a surface water channel, the new rule will strip away that protection. That potentially opens millions of acres of pristine wetlands to more pollution, according to Mr. Holman of the Southern Environmental Law Center.

“For wetlands, this is an absolute disaster, compared to the Obama plan,” he said. While such wetlands may not be physically next to major bodies of water, they can still drain into such larger bodies through underground networks, Mr. Holman said.

Stripping away those protections would still allow pollution to seep into the nation’s broader waterways, he said. It would also make it easier for developers to pave over such wetlands.

Federal courts had already halted the implementation of the 2015 Obama-era rules in 28 states after opponents sued to block them. However, in recent months the rules had taken effect in the other 22 states.

The wetland protection policies put in place decades ago by the first President Bush, an avid fisherman, followed on his own campaign pledge to save wetlands, saying, “all wetlands, no matter how small, should be preserved,” and proposing a “no net loss” policy. That initial policy was later weakened by Mr. Bush’s own E.P.A., but environmentalists have credited him for elevating the issue.

Fifteen years later, the second President Bush gave regulatory teeth to his father’s proposal, implementing an E.P.A. rule requiring stronger wetlands protection that his father had once envisioned.

quote:

Federal government scientists raised red flags last year about President Trump's proposed wall for the U.S.-Mexico border, suggesting that it could harm the habitats of imperiled species living in the ecologically diverse region. Constructing a physical barrier in southern Texas, some said, should be avoided if possible.

But a number of those concerns did not make it to border officials considering the wall's construction.

Interior Department officials stripped from a key letter to U.S. Customs and Border Protection a number of warnings by career biologists and wildlife managers about the potential impacts of the border wall on the area's rare cats and other animals, according to new documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The deletions from a letter that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ultimately sent in 2017, shown in documents provided to the environmental group Defenders of Wildlife, are the latest example of the Trump administration brushing aside career wildlife officials' recommendations when their conclusions clash with political priorities.

In emails months before the letter was crafted, a key Interior Department official made it clear to Fish and Wildlife Service officials that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke "has indicated we are to support the border security mission."

SPOILER

The construction of a wall along the entire southern border ranks among Trump's highest priorities, dating to his 2016 campaign. The president is threatening to partially shut down the federal government before Christmas in a bid to extract more funding from Democrats for the wall. House and Senate Democratic leaders are set to sit down with Trump on Tuesday to discuss border wall funding and the federal budget.

But the Trump administration has been preparing to build the border wall well before securing all the money. In August 2017, CBP asked the Fish and Wildlife Service for its input on how animals would be affected by the construction of 60 miles of levee and bollard wall in Hidalgo and Starr counties, near the southern tip of Texas, the documents show. Construction on an eight-mile section of the wall there is set to begin in February.

Jonathan Andrew, a borderlands coordinator at the Interior Department, had previously told Fish and Wildlife officials that the department should be backing Trump's border wall effort, according to the documents. "The Secretary has indicated we are to support the border security mission so make sure you get any correspondence on this topic cleared up the food chain," he wrote in a March 2017 email.

Months later, by September, wildlife biologists and managers at Fish and Wildlife, which is part of the Interior Department, penned a list of "informal comments" on the possible impacts. In a draft letter prepared that month, career wildlife employees wrote that they were concerned the border wall would reduce "habitat connectivity" for rare ocelots and jaguarundi that roam the Santa Ana and Lower Rio Grande Valley national wildlife refuges.

While some fencing already exists in the two Texas counties, officials wrote that erecting more border wall in the region may limit animals' access to drinking water and the intermingling within the cats' populations. If the cats' choice of mates narrowed, it could raise the risk of inbreeding.

These experts voiced concerns about the wall "leaving terrestrial wildlife trapped behind the levee wall to drown or starve" during floods. Fish and Wildlife suggested constructing berms south of the levee to give animals a path to flee from the flood-prone river valley.

Wildlife officials also suggested in the draft letter that CBP cap large holes dug for fencing posts, so wildlife would not get trapped in them. They also warned that an expanded border wall would make it difficult to fight wildfires on the tracts of U.S. territory that end up south of the wall.

"In general, the Service recommends considering technology, additional border patrol agents and other mechanisms, when possible, instead of installation of levee or bollard walls," the agency concluded in the draft letter.

That line and other sentences specifically outlining the risk from floods, fires and the severing of habitat did not make it into the final letter that Amy Lueders, director of Fish and Wildlife's Southwest Region, ultimately sent CBP on Oct. 13.

The revelation is not sitting well with environmental groups. "This administration has already demonstrated that it will cast aside the law, reject scientific evidence, risk local economies and threaten community security to build this boondoggle," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and chief executive of Defenders of Wildlife. "But we won't stand for it, and neither should Congress."

A review by Defenders of Wildlife found that the new wall segments would end up "destroying, fragmenting and/or effectively severing more than 2,750? acres of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge in Hidalgo County.

The Fish and Wildlife Service referred questions about the documents to Zinke's office. When reached for comment about why the edits were made, Zinke spokeswoman Heather Swift said the department "doesn't comment on leaked draft documents."

The documents were not leaked to reporters; they were released under public-records law and provided to The Washington Post.

Scientists outside the federal government said the points raised by career wildlife officials in the draft letter are worth considering while erecting the wall.

"All of the recommendations by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection are important and are based on valid environmental and wildlife science," said William Ripple, a professor of ecology at Oregon State University. The point about habitat connectivity, he added, is "compelling and should be taken seriously."

Kenneth Madsen, an associate geography professor at Ohio State University who studies international borders, said the sort of concerns outlined in the draft letter are no secret within the scientific community. The concerns "are all the types of things that people are talking about," he said.

The final letter did include one key objection raised by career officials -- concern about how the project would affect the economic livelihood of a region that depends on tourism. The construction of a border wall in Santa Ana, as proposed last year, would have cut off the main visitors center from almost all of the rest of the refuge.

"This could result in a reduction in visitation due to a perceived unsafe and unwelcoming atmosphere, which in turn could impact local economies," the final letter read.

The Fish and Wildlife Service also did ultimately warn border officials that lighting along the wall may disturb nocturnal animals, including ocelots, and that a 150-foot enforcement zone around the wall that usually includes patrol roads, lights and surveillance technology diminished the amount of dense brush through which the cats travel.

While CBP, a division of the Department of Homeland Security, sought comment from federal wildlife professionals about the border wall, it has the authority under anti-terrorism law to suspend dozens of environmental-protection laws to quickly build the wall. Just last month, the government awarded a $167 million contract to build eight more miles of border wall in southern Texas.

Elsewhere in the country, Trump administration officials have pursued more energy development and other goals despite the concerns of on-the-ground wildlife officials.

In January, Zinke signed off on a land swap with the tiny Alaskan village of King Cove to allow the construction of a road through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, a critical feeding ground for migratory birds as well as caribou and other species. All but 15,000 of the refuge's 315,000-acre expanse is wilderness, and Fish and Wildlife officials had warned that the town's plan to bisect it with a 12-mile road could undermine the refuge's integrity.

Last spring, Fish and Wildlife officials produced an analysis of the two routes Alaska is contemplating through the refuge. It concluded that both would have "major" impacts on brants, tundra swans, emperor geese, bears, fish and, potentially, caribou.

Similarly, service officials have cautioned in recent months that seismic testing for oil and natural gas farther north in Alaska in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could harm imperiled species there, such as polar bears.

quote:

On a July evening, Trump administration officials and allies, including the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, gathered with investors atop the Hay-Adams hotel overlooking the White House for a cocktail reception featuring a short presentation by the Democratic Republic of Congo’s special envoy to the United States.

An invitation for the reception billed it as an opportunity to learn about “the role Africa plays in gaining access to critical minerals, such as cobalt” and to discuss “the strategic relationship” between the United States and the nations of Africa.

In fact, the reception was part of an aggressive $8 million lobbying and public relations campaign that used lobbyists with ties to the Trump administration to try to ease concerns about the Congolese president, Joseph Kabila, whose government was facing threats of additional sanctions from the Trump administration for human rights abuses and corruption.

The lavish cocktail party was one example of a lucrative and expanding niche within Washington’s influence industry. As President Trump’s administration has increasingly turned to sanctions, travel restrictions and tariffs to punish foreign governments as well as people and companies from abroad, targets of those measures have turned for assistance to Washington’s K Street corridor of law, lobbying and public relations firms.

The work can carry reputational and legal risks, since clients often come with toxic baggage and the United States Treasury Department restricts transactions with entities under sanctions. As a result, it commands some of the biggest fees of any sector in the influence industry. And some of the biggest payments have been going to lobbyists, lawyers and consultants with connections to Mr. Trump or his administration.

“People overseas often want to hear that you know so-and-so, and can make a call to solve their problem,” said Erich Ferrari, a leading Washington sanctions lawyer who said he has tried to disabuse prospective clients of such notions.

It is a perception that matches up with the pay-to-play mind-set that defines politics in many parts of Africa, Asia, the Middle East and the former Soviet states. As politicians and executives from those regions have increasingly been targeted by sanctions, they have sought to apply that approach — backed by huge sums of cash — to navigating Washington, lobbyists and former government officials say.

This has been encouraged, they say, by the willingness projected by Mr. Trump and his team to make deals around sanctions and tariffs exemptions. Previous administrations had worked to wall off politics from those processes, which are supposed to be overseen primarily by career officials and governed by strict legal analyses.

SPOILER

In June, after a personal intervention by Mr. Trump, the Commerce Department rescinded sanctions that could have crippled the Chinese technology giant ZTE, which had fought the sanctions through an intense three-month lobbying push that cost $1.4 million.

A $108,500-a-month lobbying campaign has helped delay the imposition of sanctions against an industrial conglomerate owned by the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Among the leaders of the lobbying efforts for both ZTE and Mr. Deripaska’s companies was Bryan Lanza, a former Trump campaign aide who maintains close ties to administration officials.

His firm, Mercury Public Affairs, has signed other clients facing punitive measures from the United States government, including the United States subsidiary of Hikvision, a company owned by the Chinese government.

The company, according to lobbying filings, paid a Mercury team including Mr. Lanza a fee that started at $70,000 a month to lobby on the carrying out of a military-spending bill. The bill bars the United States government from purchasing video surveillance products made by a handful of Chinese companies, including Hikvision, ZTE and Huawei, whose chief financial officer was arrested in Canada at the request of the United States government, apparently on suspicion of violating sanctions against Iran.

Sanctions targets who had not previously tried to win reprieve are sensing an opening. Viktor F. Yanukovych, the former president of Ukraine, who had sanctions levied against him in 2014, has discussed a push to win relief and refurbish his image with well-connected law and lobbying firms including Greenberg Traurig.

Among the other Trump-linked lobbyists who have received big contracts from targets of sanctions and tariffs is Brian Ballard, a top fund-raiser for Mr. Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee.

His firm signed a $125,000-a-month contract in August 2017 to represent the Turkish-state-owned bank Halkbank, which has been working to avoid punishment for its role in a billion-dollar scheme to evade sanctions on Iran. The representation brought Mr. Ballard into discussions with Mr. Giuliani, who represented a gold trader charged in the scheme.

Then there is the lawyer Alan Dershowitz. His criticism of the special counsel’s investigation of Mr. Trump has endeared him to the president. But Mr. Dershowitz also has a long history of representing clients in transnational legal matters, including sanctions.

Mr. Dershowitz is advising Dan Gertler, an Israeli billionaire who was the target of sanctions by Washington last year for using his connections to Mr. Kabila, the Congolese president, to facilitate what the Treasury Department called “opaque and corrupt mining and oil deals.”

Mr. Dershowitz called Mr. Gertler “a very good person” who is “being targeted primarily because of the actions of other people.”

While Mr. Trump has invited Mr. Dershowitz to the White House to discuss Middle East issues on multiple occasions, Mr. Dershowitz said he had not used his access to lobby on behalf of Mr. Gertler.

“I would never raise an issue like this,” he said.

Mr. Kabila’s government has stocked up on consultants who have cast themselves as able to broker access at the highest levels of the administration. It has paid $8 million to its security contractor, an Israeli firm called Mer Security and Communication Systems, to hire American lobbyists, according to lobbying filings.

Mer paid $500,000 in April 2017 to Alston & Bird, the firm of former Senator Bob Dole. Mr. Dole’s team indicated that it could secure a meeting between Mr. Kabila and Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the relationship. The meeting never happened, and Mer ended the subcontract in frustration.

Mer proceeded to invest millions more in lobbying and public relations firms with lower profiles but closer ties to the Trump team.

Lobbying filings show $360,000 paid by Mer to Adnan Jalil, a former congressional liaison for Mr. Trump’s campaign; $250,000 to the firm of Nancye Miller, the wife of the Trump campaign adviser and former C.I.A. chief R. James Woolsey Jr.; $680,000 to the firm of former Representative Robert L. Livingston, an early Trump endorser; and $598,000 to the firm of Brian Glicklich, who has represented Trump allies such as Breitbart News and Rush Limbaugh.

Mer also agreed to pay $1.25 million to the firm of Robert Stryk, who had worked with Trump campaign officials, to organize the Hay-Adams event and meetings around it for Mr. Kabila’s special envoy to the United States. (Mr. Stryk’s firm, Sonoran Policy Group, also signed a $100,000-a-month contract in August to represent Somalia in its bid for increased military aid from the Trump administration and removal from its travel ban list. And Sonoran registered as a subcontractor for a law firm to lobby for a notorious Serbian arms dealer who was hit with sanctions for selling weapons to Liberia).

At the time of the Congolese reception, the Trump administration and the international community were pressuring Mr. Kabila to step down, partly by intimating that his allies might face additional sanctions. Not only had he been accused of violent repression of dissent and looting millions, but he had overstayed the country’s constitutionally mandated term limits by nearly two years.

The Congolese officials at the reception posed for photos with Mr. Giuliani, and afterward there was some confusion about his connection to the lobbying effort.

Francois Balumuene, the Congolese ambassador to the United States, suggested in an interview in September that his country was working with Mr. Giuliani to figure out the administration’s position on an upcoming presidential election called by Mr. Kabila to avoid threatened sanctions.

“What I know is that it is possible that Giuliani will let us know how to go ahead,” Mr. Balumuene said. He referred additional questions about Mr. Giuliani’s role to the country’s special envoy to Washington, Raymond Tshibanda, who could not be reached for comment.

Mr. Giuliani said he was not serving as an intermediary between the Democratic Republic of Congo and the administration. In an interview in September, he initially said he stopped by the reception for a half-hour to “say hello to people” and to impress a woman with whom he had been dining by taking her “to the top of the Hay-Adams to see a Washington party” with a “great view.”

But he later suggested that he attended at least partly because he was interested in exploring business opportunities, adding, “We’ve always wanted to see what’s Africa all about.”

And someone familiar with Mr. Giuliani’s business affairs said that one of his companies has recently been negotiating a consulting deal to work in the Democratic Republic of Congo, possibly through Mer.

In text messages on Sunday, Mr. Giuliani said that “if I do it, it would only be security consulting” similar to what he does in other countries, not lobbying. “Beyond that, I can’t say anything other than you can assume if we are working in a foreign country, we are doing security — physical and cyber, antiterrorism, emergency management.”

It is not clear whether the lobbying overseen by Mer had much effect, and several of Mer’s subcontracts with Trump-linked lobbyists have expired.

Less than a month after the Hay-Adams event, Mr. Kabila announced that he would not seek a third term in presidential elections scheduled for this month. While some Trump administration officials are concerned that the elections are being tilted in favor of Mr. Kabila’s chosen successor, the United States has not leveled additional sanctions against the country since Mr. Kabila’s announcement — an outcome some lobbyists on the account are privately claiming as a victory.

In October, Mer signed a new $200,000 contract with a public relations firm called Sanitas International that was co-founded by Christopher Harvin, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign who had worked in President George W. Bush’s administration. The firm is seeking to demonstrate to the news media that Mr. Kabila does, in fact, intend to step down and hold free and fair elections.

quote:

The FBI is in violation of the law for failing to turn over documents related to the FBI’s investigation into the leak of information to Rudy Giuliani in October 2016 that then-FBI Director James Comey was going to reopen the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email system, according to a lawsuit filed today by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

Two days before Comey announced that the FBI was reopening its investigation into Clinton’s emails, Giuliani went on Fox News and said, “I do think that all of these revelations about Hillary Clinton are beginning to have an impact. He’s got a surprise or two that you’re going to hear about in the next two days.” He later admitted to getting advanced information about the FBI, saying, “Did I hear about it? You’re darn right I heard about it. And I can’t even repeat the language that I heard.”

An investigation was later launched into who leaked the information to Giuliani, which would violate the law. In April, CREW requested copies of all records of the investigation into the source of the leak, but has yet to receive any.

“The FBI legally has to give us these records or explain why they cannot,” CREW Executive Director Noah Bookbinder said. “It is important for the public to have all of the information that the law requires be made available.”

Last week, Comey testified before Congress that an investigation was started into the leak after Giuliani’s comments, which appeared to stem from his communications with people in the FBI’s New York field office.

“The American people should have the information they need to evaluate whether there was wrongdoing before the presidential election,” Bookbinder said. “The FBI must live up to its legal obligations.”

quote:

Jared Kushner, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, his father-in-law, said on Monday that the American intelligence community was still “making their assessments” regarding the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, but that the administration was “focused now on the broader region” in the Middle East.

“I think our intelligence agencies are making their assessments, and we’re hoping to make sure that there’s justice brought where that should be,” Kushner said during an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News. “We’re focused now on the broader region, which is hopefully figuring out how to bring a deal together between the Israelis and the Palestinians.”

Following the October killing of Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist, at the Saudi Arabian Consulate in Istanbul, by a team of Saudi operatives, Kushner has come under increased scrutiny for his close relationship with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is widely believed to have directed the assassination.

Kushner’s comments on Monday followed a report by The New York Times over the weekend that he has “continued to chat informally” with the crown prince since Khashoggi’s death, and has even advised the young royal on how best to “weather the storm” of international condemnation bearing down on Riyadh.

Kushner also told Hannity that the administration was hopeful that its Israeli-Palestinian peace plan would be released “in the next couple of months,” but cautioned that “not every side is going to love” the proposed agreement.

“There’s enough in it and enough reasons why people should take it and move forward,” Kushner said. “And this plan will keep the Israeli people safe and give them a good future, but also give a real opportunity and hope for the Palestinian people so that they can live much better lives.”

Jared Kushner goes one-on-one with Hannity

quote:

The family of Trump senior advisor Jared Kushner could possibly be benefiting from the Trump tax law that was designed to encourage investment in poor neighborhoods. Stephanie Ruhle and Bloomberg News financial investigator Caleb Melby break down how the Kushners might be profiting.

How The Kushners Are Using A Law To Help Economically Distressed Areas | Velshi & Ruhle | MSNBC

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 00:33 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op dinsdag 11-12-2018 om 00:25:42 ABC got a copy of the Maria Butina plea agreement, which says she and an unnamed “person 1” (likely Erickson) conspired with a Russian government official —and at least one other person—for Butina to act” as a Russian agent. https://t.co/UOiCpkHZPO reageer retweet

Duidelijke uitleg Maddow mbt de plea deal Maria Butina:

The Rachel Maddow Show 9PM 12/10/18 | Rachel Maddow MSNBC BREAKING NEWS TODAY December 10, 2018

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 04:28 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 22:38:27 Hatch dismisses allegations of Trump crimes over hush money.Asked if he had any concerns, Hatch said: “The Democrats will do anything to hurt this president.” Told it was alleged by SDNY, Hatch told me: “Okay but I don’t care; all I can say is he’s doing a good job as President” reageer retweet

SPOILER

twitter:

BrendanNyhan twitterde op maandag 10-12-2018 om 22:46:36 Orrin Hatch 2018: I don't care if the President's own DOJ has implicated him in felonies. What is a "crime" anyway? Orrin Hatch 1999: "crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office" https://t.co/8K8NVZSntj reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

OrrinHatch twitterde op vrijdag 19-11-2010 om 00:22:38 "We conservatives. . . believe in the rule of law, the enforcement of our law, and the Constitution as written." http://is.gd/hnxGx reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 08:53 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dan zit Mueller eigenlijk aardig op schema. Trump loopt nu gevaar dat hij voor zowel hinderen van de rechtsgang, invloed van buitenlandse inmenging in de campagnes, maar nu ook hoogverraad kan worden aangeklaagd. Ik hoop het laatste, daar hebben ze in de VS nog de doodstraf op. Het is het beste dat het kwaad volledig uitgeroeid wordt..

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:11 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Ach, lul toch niet zo slap man.
Het zal hooguit leiden tot een impeachment die nergens heengaat vanwege de GOP, maar afgezien daarvan kun je toch niet met droge ogen beweren dat je de doodstraf voor zoiets acceptabel zou vinden?

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:19 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Nog geen maand geleden waren ze ( en jij ook) er hier net zo zeker van dat Mueller niks zou vinden.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:28 schreef chibibo het volgende:

[..]

Huh? De enigen die ik hier heb zien beweren dat Mueller niks zou vinden zijn Nintex, Refragmental en de stoelendans aan alt-rechtsgekkies die hier bij de en wijle de kop opsteekt.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:15 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
Goed verhaal over het sektegedrag binnen de GOP, trumpisten en natuurlijk Drumpf zelf:

Chris Hedges On The Cult Of Trump

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 08:53 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dan zit Mueller eigenlijk aardig op schema. Trump loopt nu gevaar dat hij voor zowel hinderen van de rechtsgang, invloed van buitenlandse inmenging in de campagnes, maar nu ook hoogverraad kan worden aangeklaagd. Ik hoop het laatste, daar hebben ze in de VS nog de doodstraf op. Het is het beste dat het kwaad volledig uitgeroeid wordt..

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:53 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Je gedraagt je net zo extremistisch als nintex, refragmental en consorte.
Het zo voor de VS en de wereld goed zijn als Trump geen president is, en als hij iets strafbaars heeft gedaan dan moet hij daarvoor berecht worden. Maar de doodstraf wensen gaat wel even 10 stappen te ver wat mij betreft.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:53 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Je gedraagt je net zo extremistisch als nintex, refragmental en consorte.
Het zo voor de VS en de wereld goed zijn als Trump geen president is, en als hij iets strafbaars heeft gedaan dan moet hij daarvoor berecht worden. Maar de doodstraf wensen gaat wel even 10 stappen te ver wat mij betreft.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 10:15 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:

[..]

Iedereen kan leven met levenslang voor hem op een golf-resort. Zelfs Trump zelf.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 10:00 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
Wat zijn die Republikeinen trouwens stil over dat verhoor van Comey afgelopen vrijdag.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 00:33 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op dinsdag 11-12-2018 om 00:25:42 ABC got a copy of the Maria Butina plea agreement, which says she and an unnamed “person 1” (likely Erickson) conspired with a Russian government official —and at least one other person—for Butina to act” as a Russian agent. https://t.co/UOiCpkHZPO reageer retweet

Duidelijke uitleg Maddow mbt de plea deal Maria Butina:

The Rachel Maddow Show 9PM 12/10/18 | Rachel Maddow MSNBC BREAKING NEWS TODAY December 10, 2018

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 12:44 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:

[..]

Jammer dat je alleen maar stukjes van de website kan kijken, ik irriteer me altijd mateloos aan die vietnamees die spelletjes speelt op de achtergrond.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 14:37 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 09:19 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

ja.

Nog geen maand geleden waren ze ( en jij ook) er hier net zo zeker van dat Mueller niks zou vinden.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 14:45 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Sorry, maar dan heb je toch echt niet goed gelezen. Ik heb hier altijd gezegd dat ongeacht wat Mueller vindt, de GOP in de senaat nooit een impeachment van hun eigen president gaat steunen en het me daarnaast vrijwel ondenkbaar lijkt dat er een poging gedaan gaat worden om een zittende president strafrechtelijk te vervolgen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 14:43 schreef thesiren.nl het volgende:

[..]

Als je die link kijkt dan hoor je de hele tijd bliepjes van een of ander spelletje.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 21:46 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:

[..]

Maar hij geeft hier dus wel toe dat het hele Stormy Daniels verhaal echt gebeurd is. Minder dan een jaar geleden waren het allemaal nog keiharde leugens. De huidige president heeft dus een affaire met een porno actrice gehad, terwijl zn vrouw net een kind had gekregen. En heel conservatief Amerika loopt weg met deze man

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 08:53 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dan zit Mueller eigenlijk aardig op schema. Trump loopt nu gevaar dat hij voor zowel hinderen van de rechtsgang, invloed van buitenlandse inmenging in de campagnes, maar nu ook hoogverraad kan worden aangeklaagd. Ik hoop het laatste, daar hebben ze in de VS nog de doodstraf op. Het is het beste dat het kwaad volledig uitgeroeid wordt..

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:16 schreef Toby56 het volgende:

[..]

Heel conservatief Amerika, dat weet ik niet.

Als je verwijst naar de die-hard conservatieve Christenen... het maakt hen het niet uit dat Trump zelf een zwaar zondig mens is. In hun visie is ieder mens zwaar zondig. Dus Trump is daarop geen uitzondering.
Wat voor hen wel uitmaakt is of een president beleid uitvoert c.q. probeert uit te voeren waar zij zich in kunnen vinden. En daar lijken ze dik tevreden mee te zijn.
Dus bidden ze voor het zieleheil van Trump, dat God hem wil vergeven, en dat hij maar zo lang mogelijk president mag blijven.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:20 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Ow, nu begrijp ik het.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:20 schreef Toby56 het volgende:

[..]

Met de doodstraf voor Trump is 'het kwaad' (whatever de fok dat is) niet uitgeroeid. (En wel integendeel zelfs.)

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:16 schreef Toby56 het volgende:

[..]

Heel conservatief Amerika, dat weet ik niet.

Als je verwijst naar de die-hard conservatieve Christenen... het maakt hen het niet uit dat Trump zelf een zwaar zondig mens is. In hun visie is ieder mens zwaar zondig. Dus Trump is daarop geen uitzondering.
Wat voor hen wel uitmaakt is of een president beleid uitvoert c.q. probeert uit te voeren waar zij zich in kunnen vinden. En daar lijken ze dik tevreden mee te zijn.
Dus bidden ze voor het zieleheil van Trump, dat God hem wil vergeven, en dat hij maar zo lang mogelijk president mag blijven.

quote:

Op maandag 10 december 2018 21:08 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Trending op Twitter, sluit die dan ook maar.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:42 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ze zijn er beter af als ze Trump lozen, zodat de echte grefo (Pence) het heilige stokje kan overnemen. Hoewel: Pence profiteerde nét als Trump tijdens de laatste presidentsverkiezingen, en hij zat bij Team Trump.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:55 schreef Toby56 het volgende:

[..]

Pence is helemaal geen grefo. Hij zit bij de Grace Evangelical Church (Pinkstergemeente).

Los daarvan: inhoudelijk steunt hij Trump, en was hij als fervent verdediger van de Christelijke waarden van groot belang om de 'Evangelicals' aan Trumps treintje te kunnen haken. Dat is (voorlopig) voldoende. Maar Pence zelf zal nooit zoveel stemmen kunnen genereren als Trump.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:38 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Het zal in elk geval een waarschuwing zijn aan het adres van andere would-be despoten. Per slot van rekening denkt de achterban van Trump dat dit soort draconische maatregelen wél werkt bij (meestal afro-amerikaanse) misdadigers. Want die krijgen sneller zware straffen dan een willekeurige politicus.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:57 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Hij wacht als een gier geduldig tot het rijpe lijk van de galg valt.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:58 schreef Toby56 het volgende:

[..]

Dan kan hij hooguit de termijn van Trump verder uitdienen. Maar ik zie hem geen presidentsverkiezingen winnen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 16:01 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Daar zal hij zelf DIK tevreden mee zijn. Sommige Dems vinden het wel wenselijk dat Trump blijft zitten waar hij zit. Trump brengt namelijk de GOP meer schade aan dan ze ooit voor mogelijk hebben gehouden. Pence kan de schade weer herstellen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 december 2018 15:08 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Deze president heeft dingen gedaan die buiten het kader vallen wat het gros van zijn voorgangers hebben gedaan. Een strafrechtelijke actie hoeft niet per sé uit de koker van de senaat te komen, maar misschien wel daarbuiten en wel uit die van de staat New York.