SPOILER

Vice President - Mike Pence

Het kabinet
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Acting Secretary of Defense - Patrick M. Shanahan
Acting Attorney General - Matthew Whitaker
Secretary of the Interior - ???
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:
Acting White House Chief of Staff - Mick Mulvaney
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - ???
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - ???
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - ???
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, General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, Jeff Sessions. John F. Kelly, Ryan Zinke, Nikki Haley, Scott Pruitt

SPOILER

quote:

Warner responds to Burr's comments on collusion, saying he disagrees and that the committee still has key witnesses to speak to -- a rare split among the bipartisan Senate Intel duo, @mkraju https://t.co/nuRcDBUzYC

quote:

House Majority Leader Hoyer says House could vote on border security funding bill “as early as tomorrow night,” but adds nothing is final; still working out details. - @AlexNBCNews

quote:

NEW: One of the women at center of Virginia sexual assault allegations also accuses ex-NBA star Corey Maggette of rape; the alleged incident occurred 20 years ago when they were both students at Duke University. https://t.co/xBboIyK6CE

quote:

Op dinsdag 12 februari 2019 22:37 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
The Border Wall: What Has Trump Built So Far?

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op dinsdag 12 februari 2019 22:37 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
The Border Wall: What Has Trump Built So Far?

[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 12-02-2019 om 22:50:02 The national debt has passed a new milestone, topping $22,000,000,000,000 for the first time. https://t.co/excfyWpyI1 reageer retweet

quote:

President Trump says he’s “not happy” with the tentative deal announced by top congressional negotiators but also says he doesn't think there will be another partial government shutdown, ABC News' @karentravers reports https://t.co/Rt0gblIayG https://t.co/ck2wFw0w7E

quote:

McConnell to set up vote on Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on Tuesday that the Senate will vote on the Green New Deal, an environmental and energy plan touted by progressives.

The deal has no chances of passing the Senate, where it will need 60 votes.

But it will force Senate Democrats, including a slew of 2020 presidential candidates, to vote on the proposal — potentially providing votes for McConnell and the GOP to exploit.

“We’re going to voting on that in the Senate. Give everybody an opportunity to go on record,” McConnell told reporters.

Progressives, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), introduced the climate change resolution as part of an effort to push the U.S. to take a lead role in reducing carbon emissions through the economy and create millions of "good, high-wage jobs" by striving for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.

But Republicans have lashed out and mocked the proposal. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a member of GOP leadership, characterized the legislation on Tuesday as a “raw deal.”

quote:

It’s been 4 days since the president underwent his annual physical exam and still no data has been released. What are they hiding? @jaketapper @peterbakernyt

quote:

Op dinsdag 12 februari 2019 23:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ik denk dat de sprekende weegschaal alleen maar:"One person at the time please." zegt.

quote:

The Republican chairman and ranking Democrat of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Tuesday blasted President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen for missing a planned appearance before that committee due to purported medical issues, less than a month before he is due to begin serving a three-year prison sentence.

Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., said any "good will" that committee had toward Cohen is gone after reports that Cohen has been out in New York at night socializing despite claiming he needed to postpone Tuesday's scheduled hearing because he is still recovering from shoulder surgery.

The Intelligence Committee, which last month issued a subpoena to Cohen compelling his testimony Tuesday in a closed session, had granted that requested delay, Cohen's lawyer Lanny Davis had said Monday.

Davis said the committee would announce a "future date" for testimony from Cohen, who pleaded guilty last year to lying to Congress, financial crimes, and campaign finance violations related to hush-money payments to two women who claim to have had affairs with Trump. The president denies having sex with either woman.

"According to the press we still have Michael Cohen to interview one more time, but I can assure you that any good will that might have existed in the committee with Michael Cohen is now gone," Burr fumed to reporters Tuesday.

Asked if there was a chance the committee will not get to interview Cohen before he begins serving a three-year prison term on March 6, Burr said, "I don't know, you'd have to ask him about it."

"He's had a letter for six months asking for his return" to appear before the committee, Burr said.

"He's already stiffed us on being in Washington today because of an illness," Burr said. "You have, um — on Twitter, a reporter reported he was having a wild night Saturday night eating out in New York with five buddies. Didn't seem to have any physical limitations. And he was out with his wife last night."

twitter:

BinkleyOnStyle twitterde op zondag 10-02-2019 om 14:21:57 Had a lovely dinner last night at L’Avenue with ... wait ... who’s that there? Why, it’s Michael Cohen, greeting tables as he leaves a three hour dinner with friends, who he warmly hugged). https://t.co/n7TxDxoukq reageer retweet

SPOILER

Asked if he would issue another subpoena to Cohen, Burr said, "I've never gotten into who we have subpoenaed and haven't subpoenaed."

"But I think he clearly rises to one of the people that I would go to every length I could to make sure that we got his testimony," Burr said.

"I would prefer to get him before he goes to prison ... but, you know, the way he's positioning himself [by] not coming to the committee, we may help him go to prison," Burr quipped.

The Intelligence Committee's ranking Democrat, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, said, "I share the frustration" of Burr.

"You would think that someone — we've been trying to work with Mr. Cohen — and somebody whose veracity is in somewhat question, you'd think he would want to not do things that further diminish his ability for people to have faith in him," Warner said.

Cohen's lawyer Davis, when contacted by CNBC, declined to comment on the criticism from Burr and Warner.

Cohen so far has had three planned appearances before a congressional committee postponed.

He originally was expected to testify publicly last Friday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

But in late January, Cohen postponed that appearance indefinitely because of concerns about his family's safety, Davis said. Davis accused Trump and his current lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, of making "threats," specifically by suggesting Cohen's father-in-law was engaged in wrongdoing.

Trump later said of Cohen, "I would say he's been threatened by the truth."

Cohen is currently scheduled to testify Feb. 28 before the House Intelligence Committee in a session closed to the public. That appearance originally was set for last Friday as well, but was postponed by committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., for what Schiff said was "the interests of the investigation."

Senate Intel Chair Richard Burr: 'Any good will' with Michael Cohen 'is now gone'

quote:

Was just presented the concept and parameters of the Border Security Deal by hard working Senator Richard Shelby. Looking over all aspects knowing that this will be hooked up with lots of money from other sources....

quote:

....Will be getting almost $23 BILLION for Border Security. Regardless of Wall money, it is being built as we speak!

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 00:52:28 Thank you to @MSNBC! https://t.co/VdRnirACAz reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 01:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:
In El Paso draaide men voor de rally van Trump: 'You can't always get what you want' van de Stones.
Daar was over nagedacht. Trump wist al dat hij zou verliezen en dus ging hij zo de achterban voorbereiden op deze miskleun. Want dat is het tenslotte.

Benieuwd voor wie hij banger is, voor Pelosi of voor Coulter/Hannity. Ik denk voor Pelosi.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 01:06 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 00:52:28 Thank you to @:MSNBC! https://t.co/VdRnirACAz reageer retweet

Trump bedankt MSNBC, zo slim is hij weer wel. Het filmpje erbij zegt genoeg.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op dinsdag 12-02-2019 om 17:38:01 Re: the headline, "Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia," same aide says: "the word 'direct' is doing a lot of work here." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 01:05:43 House Intel chair Adam Schiff says that Trump's refusal to issue a report on Jamal Khashoggi's murder underscores the need for congressional scrutiny of Trump's possible financial ties to the Saudi regime."This further underscores the importance."https://t.co/VTytR7Urx3 reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 01:10:05 Schiff says there's a reason the Trump admin has probably blown off the deadline to produce a report on Khashoggi's murder."I presume that they haven’t produced one, because we know what the conclusion would be," Schiff said. "Apparently they don’t want to put that in writing." https://t.co/kQJp8cgVCk reageer retweet

quote:

The Democratic Party has filed a formal request for a new election in North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District over widespread allegations of ballot fraud engineered by GOP campaign operatives during the 2018 primary and general elections.

As Law&Crime previously reported, Republican Mark Harris bested Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes, according to unofficial tallies. Since election night, however, elections experts have alleged the GOP’s victory was tainted by fraudulent harvesting and/or destruction of Democratic Party absentee ballots.

As evidence mounted against Harris operative McCrae Dowless and his employees, county canvassing boards called their results into question and the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE) subsequently declined to validate the apparent Republican win.

In a 33-page brief submitted to the NCSBE, attorneys for McCready not only allege that Harris’ campaign benefited from the ballot harvesting and/or destruction scheme, but that said scheme was likely part-and-parcel of the GOP’s path to victory in the Tarheel State.

[..]

twitter:

wpjenna twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 02:26:08 Economic red flag: A record 7 million Americans are 90 days or more behind on their auto loan payments — even more than during the wake of the financial crisis. An important read from ⁦@byHeatherLong⁩: https://t.co/dvvRRcPVYl reageer retweet

quote:

Chuck Schumer is actively recruiting a high-profile fighter pilot to take on Mitch McConnell in 2020 — a calculated act of aggression against a leading Republican foe.

Schumer met with Amy McGrath, a Marine veteran-turned 2018 congressional candidate, at Democratic Party headquarters last month to pitch her on running against McConnell. McGrath listened and didn’t rule it out. The Democratic leader first contacted McGrath in December.

McConnell, the longest-serving Senate GOP leader, is gearing up for a reelection fight and leaving little to chance. His political team has begun compiling opposition research on McGrath and delving into tracking footage of her. On Wednesday, senior Republican Party officials involved with a pro-McConnell super PAC will meet in Washington to begin mapping out a potential campaign against McGrath.

The Republican leader has also tapped a 2020 campaign manager: Kevin Golden, a veteran party operative who worked on McConnell’s 2014 reelection bid and oversaw Tennessee Republican Marsha Blackburn’s successful 2018 Senate campaign.

Schumer’s offensive underscores the frayed relations between the two Senate leaders. In recent months, they have sparred bitterly on issues ranging from judicial nominees to the federal shutdown.

While it’s not unprecedented for one Senate leader to try to unseat a counterpart, the recruitment mission is an unmistakable act of hostility that’s sure to ratchet up tensions.

Joining Schumer for the meeting with McGrath were Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairwoman Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), as well as top committee officials Scott Fairchild and Devan Barber. McGrath aides Mark Nickolas and Lori LaFave also attended.

Nickolas confirmed the meeting but said that no decision was imminent.

“The military officer in her always approaches these things pretty methodically and thoughtfully,” he said.

Spokespersons for Schumer and the DSCC declined to comment on the meeting.

SPOILER

McConnell’s team has been preparing for months. Last year, the campaign tapped its first two officials, Shane Noem and Jonathan Shell.

McConnell aides have also examined McGrath’s unsuccessful 2018 bid, when GOP Rep. Andy Barr cast her as too liberal for the central Kentucky district. Aides to the Republican leader view the contest as a template for how to defeat her in 2020.

McConnell, long known for his bare-knuckled political tactics and encyclopedic knowledge of Kentucky politics, monitored the race closely and offered Barr advice.

As part of their research into McGrath, which dates back to 2017, McConnell’s team has been scrutinizing her past statements and positions and looking into years of video footage of her.

The GOP leader is also activating the big donor network he’s cultivated over his three-decade-plus Senate career. And plans being drawn up for the pro-McConnell group Kentuckians for Strong Leadership. On Wednesday, Steven Law, Carl Forti, and Scott Jennings, senior party strategists who’ve previously been involved with the super PAC, will hold an organizational meeting to discuss the path forward.

Aside from the super PAC, McConnell has accumulated over $4 million for his personal campaign bank account.

“The brilliance of McConnell’s campaigns are that they are comprised of a complex orchestra of political instruments brought together for a symphony of absolute destruction,” said Josh Holmes, a McConnell political adviser. “His opponents may hear a note or two before they decide to run but he saves the full composition to ensure it’s the last thing a candidate hears before they enter the political graveyard.”

McGrath was one of the highest-profile Democratic House candidates of the 2018 election cycle. Initially rejected by Washington Democrats in favor of the better-known mayor of Lexington, Jim Gray, McGrath catapulted to a primary victory on the strength of a viral biographical ad touting her career as a Marine and groundbreaking fighter pilot.

Ultimately, the 44-year-old first time candidate was unable to parlay a multi-million-dollar war chest and national profile into victory in a heavily Republican district. She was narrowly defeated by Burr.

Those close to McGrath say that she’s remained undecided about the race since meeting with Schumer last month.

McGrath isn’t the only potential candidate McConnell is preparing for. His team has also been been assembling opposition research on Matt Jones, a liberal sports radio show host who’s long been entertaining a bid for the seat.

twitter:

Fahrenthold twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 04:00:40 Here's @realDonaldTrump seeking to prop up a coal supplier by keeping open a federal power plant.So who benefits? The owner of the coal company is a Trump donor...and a Trump customer. He was a "high rate" guest at the Trump Hotel. https://t.co/TFsT3Yibuq reageer retweet

quote:

President Trump set up a clash with an independent agency Monday evening with his call for the Tennessee Valley Authority to keep open an aging coal plant that buys much of its coal from a company chaired by Robert E. Murray, one of the president’s major supporters.

The TVA board will meet Thursday to consider whether to close the 49-year-old plant, which operated only intermittently last year because it was no longer needed to supply uninterrupted power known as baseload. The board also is considering shutting down a 52-year-old coal unit at Bull Run near Oak Ridge, Tenn.

In a tweet Monday night, Trump said: “Coal is an important part of our electricity generation mix and @TVAnews should give serious consideration to all factors before voting to close viable power plants, like Paradise #3 in Kentucky!”

But the TVA is leaning toward the closure of the Paradise and Bull Run plants precisely because they are not viable.

The agency has already said that closing the Paradise coal plant would have no significant effect. The unit “does not provide the level of flexibility needed to balance hourly, daily and seasonal changes in energy consumption,” the agency said in a proposal. “In addition, cycling the unit off and on results in more wear and tear and higher operation and maintenance costs,” it added.

“With less need for base load resources, assets that have relatively high projected future maintenance cost and environmental compliance expenditures, high forced outage rates and poor generation portfolio fit are now the focus of more detailed study for potential retirement,” the agency said on its website. “The Tennessee Valley Authority’s Paradise Fossil Plant (PAF) Unit 3 falls into this category of assets.”

SPOILER

As recently as 2013, Murray Energy was delivering nearly 100,000 tons of coal a month to the Paradise coal plant. But two other coal units, Paradise 1 and 2, on the same site in Muhlenberg County in western Kentucky were replaced with natural gas generation in the spring of 2017. The Paradise Unit 3 employs about 140 people.

Murray, founder of Murray Energy and a leading donor to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, has been pressing the president to help prop up coal-fired plants since the beginning of the administration. In Energy Secretary Rick Perry’s first month in office, Murray presented a four-page “action plan” to rescue the coal industry. The plan said that commissioners at three independent regulatory agencies “must be replaced,” Environmental Protection Agency staff slashed, and safety and pollution rules “overturn[ed].”

Murray is also a customer at Trump’s hotel in downtown Washington, according to a list of “VIP Arrivals” distributed to Trump hotel staff on June 20, 2018. This list, which was obtained by The Washington Post, showed Murray and a fellow coal executive, Heath Lovell of Alliance Energy, checking in for one-night stays. Under both of their names, the hotel’s staff wrote “High Rate,” signifying they were especially high-paying.

Since November 2013, the TVA board has approved the retirement of 16 coal-fired electric power units at five plants, according to its filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Coal has dropped to 17 percent of TVA’s power supply.

“We have a situation where in order to maintain reliable power and keep prices as low as feasible, we have to assess the generation fleet and make some difficult but necessary decisions,” TVA spokesman Jim Hopson said.

The closure of coal plants was part of a 2011 agreement the authority made with the Environmental Protection Agency, four state governments and three environmental advocacy groups, the SEC filing said. More recently, the state of Maryland and seven environmental advocacy groups have filed complaints against the EPA because of excessive nitrogen oxide emissions from TVA plants, including Paradise Unit 3.

Trump’s call to keep the plant open “flies in face of what we see happening in U.S. energy markets,” said Jason Bordoff, director of the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy. “Coal can’t compete with cheap gas and renewables. TVA’s own analysis justifies reducing the use of coal in its power mix.”

This is the latest in a string of efforts by the Trump administration to prop up failing coal plants. The Energy Department urged the independent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to order subsidies for coal and nuclear plants in the name of the reliability of the electrical grid, but the commission rejected the call, citing other factors as more important in ensuring reliability. Four of the five members of that panel were appointed by Trump, but the vote against the Energy Department plan was unanimous.

The president later urged the Energy Department to declare a national emergency to keep aging coal and nuclear plants open, but the department has not done so.

“We’ve not had reliability problems,” Hopson said. “We have been 99.99 percent reliable for 19 consecutive years. We are very proud of our reliability.”

The Tennessee Valley Authority was established during the Great Depression in 1933 and built dams and harnessed hydropower to help the impoverished region. Today, the TVA serves 10 million customers in seven states. It also provides flood control and helps manage navigation on the Tennessee River.

The TVA has a nine-member board, but there are two vacancies. Trump has appointed four of the seven active members. The agency receives no taxpayer money.

“Arguments that we need to support coal for national security reasons are not supported by any objective analysis,” Bordoff said. “There is no basis for supporting the president’s call.”

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 04:05:49 American Media, the parent company of the National Enquirer, has a negative net worth of about $203,000,000. https://t.co/a6qkvhWcDJ reageer retweet

quote:

The publisher of the National Enquirer, currently under attack by Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos, has been facing steep financial losses that have left the once-loyal keeper of Donald Trump’s secrets with more than $1 billion in debt and a negative net worth.

The closely held American Media Inc. -- led by the president’s longtime friend, David Pecker -- recorded a $31.5 million loss in the six months that ended Sept. 30, according to documents reviewed by Bloomberg. That marked an improvement over the previous year, but nonetheless brought the company’s total losses over the last 5 1/2 fiscal years to $256 million. AMI owed about $203 million more than its assets were worth.

Adding to the troubles for Pecker and his New York-based publishing company is the wrath of Bezos. The billionaire wrote in a blog post last week that he was blackmailed by the tabloid, which allegedly threatened to publish sexually suggestive photos from an extramarital affair. The exchange followed a 12-page spread in the Enquirer last month full of racy text messages that he reportedly sent to his paramour.

Bezos, the world’s richest person, has the resources to fight. On Monday alone, his wealth increased by a bigger dollar figure than all of AMI’s revenue for the first half of this fiscal year.

[..]

twitter:

JohnBrennan twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 03:11:29 Senate Intel Committee is doing good work, but it does not conduct criminal investigations. It is up to Special Counsel to charge those who criminally conspired with Russia. Don’t conflate collusion, which occured, with criminal conspiracy. Stay tuned. https://t.co/I0yXofGd9I reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 04:23:41 I want to thank all Republicans for the work you have done in dealing with the Radical Left on Border Security. Not an easy task, but the Wall is being built and will be a great achievement and contributor toward life and safety within our Country! reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
En weer een blunder van niet liegende politici. Kamala Harris claimt dat ze wiet heeft gerookt tijdens haar studententijd. Tegelijkertijd luisterde ze naar 2pac en Snoop.
Het grappige is dat 2pac en Snoop nog niet eens een album uit hadden in die tijd.
Is het een verschrikkelijke leugen? Nee, maar het laat wel weer zien dat politici er alles aan doen om maar wat extra stemmen binnen te halen. Zou er eindelijk eens journalist opstaan die haar vraagt in welke manier seks met de burgermeester van SF haar carrière heeft geholpen?

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 00:14:44 Right-wing outlets have been gleeful today about Harris supposedly lying about...what music she listened to while smoking weed as a young woman. But as @AsteadWesley notes, these outlets omitted a key part of the exchange. It's not at all clear she was dishonest. (Weird thread!) reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:07 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ik dacht al, waar blijft-ie!

Draadje:

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 00:14:44 Right-wing outlets have been gleeful today about Harris supposedly lying about...what music she listened to while smoking weed as a young woman. But as @:AsteadWesley notes, these outlets omitted a key part of the exchange. It's not at all clear she was dishonest. (Weird thread!) reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 02:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Blijkbaar trappen mensen massaal in Trump's misleidende uitspraak tijdens de rally en nu zijn tweet.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op dinsdag 12-02-2019 om 17:38:01 Re: the headline, "Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia," same aide says: "the word 'direct' is doing a lot of work here." reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 04:11 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

Fahrenthold twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 04:00:40 Here's @:realDonaldTrump seeking to prop up a coal supplier by keeping open a federal power plant.So who benefits? The owner of the coal company is a Trump donor...and a Trump customer. He was a "high rate" guest at the Trump Hotel. https://t.co/TFsT3Yibuq reageer retweet

Trump urges Tennessee Valley Authority to keep open an aging coal-burning power plant

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:14 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Interessantere is dat ze op Reddit al aan het klagen zijn. Over dat ze mensen heeft opgesloten daarvoor.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
En weer een blunder van niet liegende politici. Kamala Harris claimt dat ze wiet heeft gerookt tijdens haar studententijd. Tegelijkertijd luisterde ze naar 2pac en Snoop.
Het grappige is dat 2pac en Snoop nog niet eens een album uit hadden in die tijd.
Is het een verschrikkelijke leugen? Nee, maar het laat wel weer zien dat politici er alles aan doen om maar wat extra stemmen binnen te halen. Zou er eindelijk eens journalist opstaan die haar vraagt in welke manier seks met de burgermeester van SF haar carrière heeft geholpen?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 09:54 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:

[..]

Over 2Pac gesproken, dit is ook een geweldige Tweet.

[ afbeelding ]

Nu het er sterk op lijkt dat ''Mueller Time'' nooit gaat komen raken ze echt in paniek.

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 09:54 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:

[..]

Over 2Pac gesproken, dit is ook een geweldige Tweet.

[ afbeelding ]

Nu het er sterk op lijkt dat ''Mueller Time'' nooit gaat komen raken ze echt in paniek.

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
En weer een blunder van niet liegende politici. Kamala Harris claimt dat ze wiet heeft gerookt tijdens haar studententijd. Tegelijkertijd luisterde ze naar 2pac en Snoop.
Het grappige is dat 2pac en Snoop nog niet eens een album uit hadden in die tijd.
Is het een verschrikkelijke leugen? Nee, maar het laat wel weer zien dat politici er alles aan doen om maar wat extra stemmen binnen te halen. Zou er eindelijk eens journalist opstaan die haar vraagt in welke manier seks met de burgermeester van SF haar carrière heeft geholpen?

quote:

Op dinsdag 12 februari 2019 17:40 schreef archito het volgende:
Voorpagina nieuws op Fox:

https://www.foxnews.com/p(...)fore-they-made-music

Want een foutje in je herinnering is veel erger dan 10.000 leugens vertellen in 2 jaar tijd.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 10:07 schreef IkStampOpTacos het volgende:

[..]

25 miljoen maar? Alleen aan vorderingen op de criminele campagneleider van Trump heeft het zich al terug verdiend dus.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 10:46 schreef Ulx het volgende:
En een eventuele clawback bij Trump/Trump Org ook niet.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
En weer een blunder van niet liegende politici. Kamala Harris claimt dat ze wiet heeft gerookt tijdens haar studententijd. Tegelijkertijd luisterde ze naar 2pac en Snoop.
Het grappige is dat 2pac en Snoop nog niet eens een album uit hadden in die tijd.
Is het een verschrikkelijke leugen? Nee, maar het laat wel weer zien dat politici er alles aan doen om maar wat extra stemmen binnen te halen. Zou er eindelijk eens journalist opstaan die haar vraagt in welke manier seks met de burgermeester van SF haar carrière heeft geholpen?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 11:03 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

daar valt genoeg te halen om heel de FBI voor decennia te bekostigen..

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 05:14 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Interessantere is dat ze op Reddit al aan het klagen zijn. Over dat ze mensen heeft opgesloten daarvoor.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 10:23 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Dan quote ik mezelf toch gewoon even:

[..]

Het is gewoon ongelofelijk hypocriet om dit zo groot op te blazen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 11:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Als de leugens van het niveau, “een mijl hoge stapel hamburgers kan helemaal niet” zijn dan denk ik dat ik die 10.000 leugens ook niet helemaal serieus kan nemen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Het grappige van al dit alles is dat elke misstap van de democraten hier word afgedaan met een variant op “but her e-mails”.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:04 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Welke misstappen?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:06 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Russia hoax bijv.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:06 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Russia hoax bijv.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 11:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Als de leugens van het niveau, “een mijl hoge stapel hamburgers kan helemaal niet” zijn dan denk ik dat ik die 10.000 leugens ook niet helemaal serieus kan nemen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:03 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Het grappige van al dit alles is dat elke misstap van de democraten hier word afgedaan met een variant op “but her e-mails”.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:06 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Russia hoax bijv.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:08 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

[..]

Want dat is inderdaad de meest ernstige leugen die Trump heeft verteld.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:12 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dus je geeft hier toe dat Trump liegt.

We boeken vooruitgang dus.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:13 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Hou mij er even buiten.
Je hoeft mij niet te vertellen dat Trump liegt, maar ik dacht dat mijn sarcasme duidelijk was als reactie op Chivaz.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:08 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Dat we hier rustig de conclusies van ome Mueller afwachten is het goedpraten van misstappen van Democraten?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:18 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Het is natuurlijk erg zuur dat hier al ruim 2 jaar gehoopt wordt op een hoax en er dan niks uitkomt.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:18 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Het is natuurlijk erg zuur dat hier al ruim 2 jaar gehoopt wordt op een hoax en er dan niks uitkomt.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:27 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Ik heb hier ook nooit beweerd dat Trump altijd de waarheid spreekt.
Er is hier wel iemand in dit topic actief die vertelde dat politici doorgaans niet liegen. Dat doet alleen Trump blijkbaar.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:27 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Ik heb hier ook nooit beweerd dat Trump altijd de waarheid spreekt.
Er is hier wel iemand in dit topic actief die vertelde dat politici doorgaans niet liegen. Dat doet alleen Trump blijkbaar.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Heeft Mexico het geld voor de muur al gestort/

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:22 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

al die arrestaties, aanklachten en gevangenisstraffen als hoax wegzetten is een misdadige opvatting an sich.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:51 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Wat en waar was precies de collusie om de verkiezingen in 2016 te manipuleren?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:52 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

We wachten nog even de uitkomst van het onderzoek af ipv een kristallen bol te gebruiken.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:51 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Wat en waar was precies de collusie om de verkiezingen in 2016 te manipuleren?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 12:51 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Wat en waar was precies de collusie om de verkiezingen in 2016 te manipuleren?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:04 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

De politie geeft tijdens een lopend onderzoek zelden/nooit commentaar over de details van de gevonden misdrijven.

Snap je waarom ze dat niet doen?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:03 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
https://www.nbcnews.com/n(...)-trafficking-n970926

en dat willen ze zogenaamde "drugssmokkelaars" met een muur bij de Mexicaanse grens tegenhouden....

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:05 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

De advocaat van Trump sluit het in ieder geval niet uit:

Giuliani: 'I never said there was no collusion' between the campaign and Russia'

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:08 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

En als dat al zo was is dat niet erg want COLLUSION IS NOT A CRIME.

quote:

The Senate Intelligence Committee: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND RUSSIA!

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:40 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trump weer:

[..]

De getuigen die bij dit comite hun verhaal deden werden toch allemaal opgepakt wegens liegen tegen het Congres?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 13:52 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

De vraag is WAAROVER hebben ze gelogen, en WAAROM?

quote:

The people of the world are sick and tired of being set against each other by powerful criminals who want us divided so they can continue to rape, steal from and exploit us.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:19 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Deze is ook prachtig:

[..]

En dan vervolgens achter een kerel als Trump aanhollen, die met zijn Tax Cuts alleen maar meer rijkdom en macht over heeft geheveld naar de zogenaamde elite. In de VS kun je immers invloed kopen en dat lukt aardig als de overheid de allerrijksten nog rijker maakt.

Maar blijf gerust geloven dat Trump de corrupte elite te grazen gaat nemen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:39 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Dat onderzoek draait op niets uit, mijn voorspelling is dat ze dit onderzoek zo lang als zijn presidentschap laten lopen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:39 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Dat onderzoek draait op niets uit, mijn voorspelling is dat ze dit onderzoek zo lang als zijn presidentschap laten lopen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:42 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Is de pers trouwens al bij de presidentskandidaten geweest om te vragen wat ze nu echt van die green new deal vinden?
Ik vond het na hun endorsement en de reactie op het voorstel verdacht stil.

En is er nog een kritische journalist geweest die aan Harris heeft gevraagd of haar seksuele relatie met de burgermeester van SF invloed heeft gehad op haar carrière?
En dan natuurlijk de volgende vraag, in hoe verre denkt zij het feminisme te kunnen vertegenwoordigen als de duidelijke machtsdynamiek niet in haar voordeel was?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:52 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

En over dit soort dingen maak jij je als Trumpfan druk?

De hypocrisie spat van je af.

quote:

This is the emerging GOP spin if/when president signs border deal without money he demanded: "I'm not going to be disappointed in the president. I'm going to be disappointed in Congress" says Rep @MarkMeadows on Fox. Doesn't answer why Trump shut down govt.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Ik vind dat de pers wel eens wat kritische vragen mag stellen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:05 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dan moet Trump maar eens een echte persconferentie geven.

Met heel veel tijd voor Jim Acosta.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Heeft de pers al aan Gabbard gevraagd om afstand te nemen van David Duke. Duke heeft immers zijn zegen gegeven aan Gabbard.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 14:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Heeft de pers al aan Gabbard gevraagd om afstand te nemen van David Duke. Duke heeft immers zijn zegen gegeven aan Gabbard.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:14 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Ilhan Omar is right about the influence of the Israel lobby

Om er nog maar weer even op terug te komen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:14 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Ilhan Omar is right about the influence of the Israel lobby

Om er nog maar weer even op terug te komen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:25 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Blijf het ook altijd maar mooi vinden dat hele volksstammen meteen de antisemitisme-kaart trekken zodra iemand kritiek op Israël durft te leveren.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:12 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Tulsi Gabbard denounces David Duke, rejects his endorsement

Bij normale politici hoeven de media daar niet op aan te dringen. Trump heeft meer moeite met het veroordelen van extremisten.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 15:05 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dan moet Trump maar eens een echte persconferentie geven.

Met heel veel tijd voor Jim Acosta.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 17:14 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Kritiek op Trump en de negatieve berichtgeving kennen we onderhand wel.
Het heeft ervoor gezorgd dat alle schijn van onpartijdigheid compleet verdwenen is.
Daarom ook mijn vraag of de presidentskandidaten al hebben gereageerd op de idiote punten in dat plan van AOC.
Ze hebben allemaal hun endorsement aan gegeven maar niemand heeft er commentaar op geleverd. Ik vind het vreemd dat je als democraat zulke idiote voorstellen mag steunen zonder jezelf te hoeven verantwoorden.
Dan zit er journalistiek toch echt iets mis en kunnen we van onpartijdigheid toch echt niet spreken. En dan vinden journalisten het gek dat ze niet echt serieus genomen worden.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 17:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Kritische vragen stellen aan Trump mag niet, maar dooremmeren over welke cd werd gedraaid in de kamer van Harris in 1988 is belangrijk?

quote:

Trump has installed a room-sized "golf simulator" game at the White House, which allows him to play virtual rounds at courses all over the world by hitting a ball into a large video screen, according to two people told about the system, WaPo reports. https://t.co/F1dxfxs48e

quote:

Trump's golf simulator system cost about $50,000, and was put in during the last few weeks in a room in his personal quarters, a White House official said. https://t.co/cQjHK6TV7C

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:16 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

De shutdown raakte hem ook hard. Hij kon niet eens naar de golfbaan.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:23 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Leuk dat er nog steeds niet ingegaan word op mijn punt. Dus de media die in veel gevallen onpartijdigheid veinst is dus totaal niet kritisch over de kandidaten die een gooi doen naar de nominatie. Dus voor enigzins kritische journalistiek over de democraten moet ik dus op rechtse blogjes en fox news zitten.
Ik ben dus al achter 2 dingen gekomen sinds ik mij eigen begeef in dit topic.
Politici liegen doorgaans niet tenzij ze Donald Trump heten. En van de journalistiek hoef je geen kritische vragen aan democraten te verwachten want daar zijn rechtse blogjes en fox news voor.
Kortom Trump heeft dus groot gelijk om ten strijde te trekken tegen de media.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:27 schreef OMG het volgende:
Ten strijde trekken tegen de media, tenzij ze iets melden dat hem wel bevalt, dan is het top.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:31 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Zo werkt het blijkbaar, als democraat heb je het voorrecht om geen kritische vragen op je bord te krijgen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:31 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Zo werkt het blijkbaar, als democraat heb je het voorrecht om geen kritische vragen op je bord te krijgen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:41 schreef OMG het volgende:

[..]

Tenzij een AOC rond loopt te bazuinen dat een green new deal door Mexico wordt betaald is het redelijk flauw om te doen alsof alles oneerlijk, partijdig en weet ik het wat is.

Een Trump heeft jaren lopen roepen dat Mexico zou betalen, dus kritiek hierop wanneer er bij de overheid voor geld wordt aangeklopt is niet zo raar.
Dat meneer bij een rally stelt dat de brandweer zich niet aan de wet zou hebben gehouden door duizenden meer mensen in een gebouw toe te laten dan veilig is, is ook wel leuk om te melden, vooral met de voorgeschiedenis van alle 8000+ leugens die hiervoor voorbij zijn gekomen.

Om dat over een AOC en Kamala Harris te beginnen is dan best suf, aangezien die bij lange na niet dezelfde soort geschiedenis hebben als een Trump. Je mag best kritisch zijn, maar als er het komende uur 3 tweets van Trump met 8 leugens voorbij komen, dan is dat niet te vergelijken. En kritiek zal er genoeg komen naar mate de 2020 verkiezingen aan komen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:35 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Republikein is klein en democraten is groot, en dat is niet eerlijk!

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:55 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

We zullen het zien, ik durf mijn hand er voor in het vuur te steken dat de kritiek minimaal zal zijn.
Als men nu niet kritisch is waarom dan wel over een jaar?
De media heeft maar een missie en dat is Trump uit het witte huis al moet hun eigen geloofwaardigheid naar de klote gaan.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Personen zoals jij zijn niet serieus te nemen. Twee jaar lang zit je jezelf af te trekken over elk negatief bericht omtremt Trump.
En wanneer ik mezelf afvraag waar de balans is dan maak je een verwijzing naar Calimero.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Personen zoals jij zijn niet serieus te nemen. Twee jaar lang zit je jezelf af te trekken over elk negatief bericht omtremt Trump.
En wanneer ik mezelf afvraag waar de balans is dan maak je een verwijzing naar Calimero.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 19:03 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Als Trump wil dat er positiever over hem geschreven wordt kan hij daar natuurlijk zelf ook aan bijdragen door niet overal zo'n enorme shitshow van te maken en serieuze pers weg te zetten als the enemy of the people.

quote:

Women of Color Shouldn’t Trust Elizabeth Warren
With affirmative action on the chopping block, we can’t afford to back a candidate whose fraud played into ugly stereotypes about programs to boost diversity and equality.

quote:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal Is a Home Run—for Mitch McConnell
AOC is thinking big and looking to move our old friend the Overton Window. But her resolution might be slamming it shut.

quote:

Trump Went Low. The 2020 Democrats Are Racing to the Gutter.
You would think Democrats would be happy to nominate the kind of candidate to unite the country, and claim the White House. Not so.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:55 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

We zullen het zien, ik durf mijn hand er voor in het vuur te steken dat de kritiek minimaal zal zijn.
Als men nu niet kritisch is waarom dan wel over een jaar?
De media heeft maar een missie en dat is Trump uit het witte huis al moet hun eigen geloofwaardigheid naar de klote gaan.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 19:14 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Je weet dat de media uitgebreid aandacht hebben besteed aan de e-mails van Clinton en dat dat mede heeft geleid tot haar verlies?

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 19:19 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Het zou wat zijn als dat genegeerd werd.

quote:

Wisconsin Republicans stripped Colin Kaepernick's name from a resolution recognizing Black History Month, saying the former NFL quarterback was too controversial to be included. https://t.co/qpBvZviWE4

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Personen zoals jij zijn niet serieus te nemen. Twee jaar lang zit je jezelf af te trekken over elk negatief bericht omtremt Trump.
En wanneer ik mezelf afvraag waar de balans is dan maak je een verwijzing naar Calimero.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 21:24 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

De balans is dat Trump in 3 jaar bijna 10,000 verifieerbare leugens vertelt.

twitter:

Liam_O_Hare twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 20:11:20 Now deleted tweet from Benjamin Netanyahu’s account boasting about a meeting “to advance the common interest of war with Iran.” https://t.co/6NcsehKfsU reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 22:01 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Over die door de VS georganiseerde Midden-Oosten conferentie in Polen...

twitter:

Liam_O_Hare twitterde op woensdag 13-02-2019 om 20:11:20 Now deleted tweet from Benjamin Netanyahu’s account boasting about a meeting “to advance the common interest of war with Iran.” https://t.co/6NcsehKfsU reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 18:31 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Zo werkt het blijkbaar, als democraat heb je het voorrecht om geen kritische vragen op je bord te krijgen.

quote:

Op woensdag 13 februari 2019 22:14 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Dat moet wel een mislukte grap zijn, toch?

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 00:42:06 Judge Amy Berman Jackson says Mueller prosecutors have proved 3 of the 5 examples they cite as occurrences when Manafort lied to them in the course of his cooperation and she agrees that prosecutors are no longer bound to recommend a lighter sentence. https://t.co/wX4A39anrY reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 00:45:41 Judge: Mueller prosecutors have established that Manafort intentionally made multiple false statements to the FBI, the OSC, and the grand jury concerning matters that were material to the investigation: his interactions and communications with Konstantin Kilimnik. https://t.co/hFAHcDDHid reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 00:50:07 Judge: Mueller prosecutors have established that Manafort intentionally made false statements to the FBI, the OSC, and the grand jury concerning payments by an unidentified Firm A to a law firm, a matter that was material to their investigation. https://t.co/hFAHcDDHid reageer retweet

Paul Manafort may have Lied To Stay In Trump's Good Graces: Adam Schiff | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC

Inside Paul Manafort's 2016 meeting with a Russian operative

quote:

The 2016 nominating conventions had recently concluded and the presidential race was hitting a new level of intensity when Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s campaign chairman, ducked into an unusual dinner meeting at a private cigar room a few blocks away from the campaign’s Trump Tower headquarters in Manhattan.

Court records show that Manafort was joined at some point by his campaign deputy, Rick Gates, at the session at the Grand Havana Room, a mahogany-paneled space with floor-to-ceiling windows offering panoramic views of the city.

The two Americans met with an overseas guest, a longtime employee of their international consulting business who had flown to the United States for the gathering: a Russian political operative named Konstantin Kilimnik.

The Aug. 2, 2016, encounter between the senior Trump campaign officials and Kilimnik, who prosecutors allege has ties to Russian intelligence, has emerged in recent days as a potential fulcrum in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation.

It was at that meeting that prosecutors believe Manafort and Kilimnik may have exchanged key information relevant to Russia and Trump’s presidential bid. The encounter goes “very much to the heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating,” prosecutor Andrew Weissmann told a federal judge in a sealed hearing last week.

One subject the men discussed was a proposed resolution to the conflict over Ukraine, an issue of great interest to the Russian government, according to a partially redacted transcript of the Feb. 4 hearing.

During the hearing, the judge also appeared to allude to another possible interaction at the Havana Room gathering: a handoff by Manafort of internal polling data from Trump’s presidential campaign to his Russian associate.

The new details provide a rare hint at what Mueller is examining in the final stretch of his nearly 21-month-old investigation — and underscore his deep interest in the Grand Havana Room gathering, which ended with the three men leaving through separate doors, as Judge Amy Berman Jackson noted.

Weissmann said in the hearing that one of the special counsel’s main tasks is to examine contacts between Americans and Russia during the 2016 race and determine whether Trump associates conspired with the Russian-backed interference campaign.

“That meeting — and what happened at that meeting — is of significance to the special counsel,” he said pointedly.

The hearing was held in a closed courtroom, and only a partial transcript was released because the special counsel has argued that public disclosure of the issues discussed could harm “ongoing law enforcement investigations.”

A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment.

SPOILER

A spokesman for Manafort, who prosecutors have alleged breached a cooperation agreement by lying to investigators, also declined to comment. Manafort has pleaded guilty to crimes related to consulting work he did in Ukraine. He has not been accused of coordinating with the Russians to tilt the election.

Kilimnik, whom prosecutors have charged with working with Manafort to obstruct the investigation, did not respond to a request for comment.

In a 2017 statement to The Washington Post, he denied any connection to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik said the Grand Havana Room meeting had nothing to do with politics or the presidential campaign. Instead, he called the session a “private” visit, during which he and Manafort gossiped about “bills unpaid by our clients” and the political scene in Ukraine, where Manafort had worked as a political consultant for a decade before joining Trump’s campaign.

'An unusual time'

There have long been questions about why Manafort would break away from his duties running Trump’s campaign to meet with his Russian employee, an encounter The Post first reported in 2017.

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, a former CIA official who now teaches at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, said that episode raises many red flags.

Manafort “goes way outside the normal bounds of behavior,” Mowatt-Larssen said.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation, called the details about what occurred at the Grand Havana Room gathering “the most interesting and potentially significant development we have seen in a long time.”

Prosecutors have alleged that among the false statements Manafort made to investigators during his interviews in recent months were key lies about the Aug. 2 meeting and other interactions with Kilimnik.

Manafort’s lawyers have acknowledged he gave incomplete and sometimes conflicting information during 12 interviews and two sessions in front of a grand jury. But they said he did not intend to lie, but was instead confused and at times forgetful.

Jackson told the lawyers she will probably rule Wednesday on whether she believes that Manafort lied to prosecutors, a decision that could impact his sentencing in March.

The Grand Havana Room meeting took place during a critical moment in the 2016 race.

Less than two weeks earlier, the issue of Russia’s role in the campaign exploded into view when WikiLeaks published thousands of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s supporters immediately fingered Russia in the hack, a view later embraced by U.S. intelligence agencies.

Instead of condemning the Kremlin, Trump mockingly asked Russia to find emails Clinton had deleted while serving as secretary of state. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said at a July 27 news conference.

Trump also made a series of public statements in July that appeared to echo Kremlin talking points on foreign policy. In an interview with the New York Times, he questioned the U.S. commitment to defending NATO partners from Russian aggression. Then he promised to look into recognizing Russia’s invasion of Crimea.

“You know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were,” he said in an ABC News interview July 31.

In court last week, prosecutors focused on Manafort’s choice to meet with Kilimnik in person during this period.

“There is an in-person meeting at an unusual time for somebody who is the campaign chairman to be spending time and to be doing it in person,” Weissmann said.

At the same time, Manafort was strategizing about how to use his prominent role with the Trump campaign to halt a personal financial spiral, court records show. He owed millions in property taxes and for home improvements, insurance policies, credit cards and other debts, according to documents introduced during his trial in Virginia last summer.

Manafort viewed Kilimnik — his liaison to high-level Ukrainian politicians and Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska — as key to leveraging his unpaid role as Trump’s campaign chairman, emails reviewed by The Post show. The two were in frequent contact during Manafort’s tenure at Trump’s campaign, according to court records.

A Russian army veteran who had trained at a military language academy known as a feeder school for the intelligence services, Kilimnik had worked for Manafort since 2005, when he began serving as a translator for Manafort’s Ukraine operation.

In documents filed in court last year, Mueller’s prosecutors wrote that Gates, Manafort’s deputy, said Kilimnik told him he had formerly been an officer in the GRU, the Russian military intelligence unit accused of engineering the 2016 election interference. Prosecutors said the FBI has assessed that Kilimnik’s intelligence ties continued into 2016.

Kilimnik was also well known at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, and officials there met with him frequently to discuss Ukrainian politics, according to people familiar with his work. During last week’s hearing, prosecutors acknowledged there was “no question” Kilimnik had been in communication with State Department officials.

Manafort told the Times in February 2017 he had never “knowingly” spoken to a Russian intelligence officer. “It’s not like these people wear badges that say, ‘I’m a Russian intelligence officer,’ ” he added.

'Tuesday would be best'

In April 2016, Manafort emailed Kilimnik to ask if the “OVD operation” had seen the positive press Manafort was receiving for his Trump work, The Post previously reported. That was an apparent reference to Deripaska, a onetime Manafort business partner.

“How do we use to get whole?” Manafort wrote.

Kilimnik has told The Post he came to the United States and met with Manafort on May 7 to discuss business issues. Then, on July 7, Manafort emailed Kilimnik, asking him to inform Deripaska that if he needed “private briefings” about the campaign, “we can accommodate.”

A Deripaska spokeswoman has said he was never offered nor received campaign briefings. Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni also said no briefings for Deripaska took place, telling The Post in 2017 the email ex­changes reflected an “innocuous” effort to collect past debts.

On July 29, 2016, Kilimnik wrote Manafort a cryptic note.

Kilimnik told Manafort he had met that day with the man who had given Manafort “the biggest black caviar jar several years ago.” The Post has previously reported that congressional investigators believed Kilimnik’s reference to “black caviar” was a code for money.

Kilimnik wrote that he and the man had talked for five hours and he had important messages to relay to Manafort as a result. Kilimnik asked when Manafort would be available to meet.

“Tuesday would be best,” Manafort responded. The following Tuesday was Aug. 2.

When they saw each other days later at the Grand Havana Room, one topic the men discussed was a peace proposal for Ukraine, an agenda item Russia was seeking as a key step to lift punishing economic sanctions, according to court records.

Prosecutors have accused Manafort of lying to them about how frequently he and Kilimnik discussed the matter — initially telling investigators he would not “countenance” the idea because he viewed it as a “backdoor” of some kind. Despite Manafort’s claim of disinterest, prosecutors said he and Kilimnik continued to pursue the subject in several subsequent meetings, including one in January 2017 when the Russian was in Washington for Trump’s inauguration.

In court, Manafort’s lawyers contended that he was candid about the discussions when reminded by prosecutors and denied that his account has been inconsistent.

'An extremely sensitive issue'

There are also indications in the transcript of last week’s hearing that prosecutors have explored whether it was at the Manhattan cigar bar that Manafort shared polling data related to the 2016 White House race with Kilimnik — another topic about which Manafort lied, they allege.

The sharing of that data was first disclosed, apparently inadvertently, in a court filing by Manafort’s attorneys last month. At the time, it was unclear when Manafort passed along the information to his Russian employee — as well as the substance of the material.

During last week’s hearing, the judge devoted a significant portion of time to discussing what appeared to be the polling data — something she noted Manafort initially said “just was public information.”

Weissmann said Manafort had a motive to lie about sharing material with Kilimnik as he was running Trump’s campaign. “It’s obviously an extremely sensitive issue,” the prosecutor said, adding, “We can see what it is that he would be worried about.”

What exactly might have been shared with Kilimnik at the Grand Havana Room appears to be a matter of dispute.

On the day of the gathering, Manafort sent Gates an email asking him to print material for a meeting, according to court records. The substance of the material has not been publicly disclosed.

An attorney for Gates declined to comment.

Jackson indicated in the hearing that Gates has testified that the material was shared at the Grand Havana Room gathering. “Didn’t he say it happened at the meeting?” she asked.

“I don’t believe so,” responded Richard W. Westling, an attorney for Manafort.

Westling noted that the email Gates printed did not specifically reference Kilimnik, implying the material may not have been for the Russian. And he argued that Gates has offered inconsistent accounts and should not be believed.

Manafort’s defense team also suggested that the information was too detailed to be helpful and would have been useless to Kilimnik. “It frankly, to me, is gibberish . . . It’s not easily understandable,” Westling said.

Jackson appeared skeptical. “That’s what makes it significant and unusual,” the judge said.

As a longtime aide to Manafort, Kilimnik had experience using public surveys. In a February 2017 interview, Kilimnik described to Radio Free Europe the key role polling has played in Manafort’s political consulting.

“I’ve seen him work in different countries, and he really just does, you know, takes very seriously his polling and, you know, he can stand, you know, two weeks going through the data, and he’ll come with the best strategy you can ever have, and he’ll put it on the table of the candidate,” Kilimnik said.

It is unclear how long Kilimnik remained in the United States after the Grand Havana Room meeting.

Flight records show that a private plane belonging to Deripaska landed at Newark Liberty International Airport shortly after midnight on Aug. 3, just hours after Kilimnik and Manafort met. The plane spent only a few hours on the ground before taking off again and returning to Moscow.

Larissa Belyaeva, a spokeswoman for Deripaska, said the plane carried only members of his family.

“We can confirm that Mr. Deripaska has never lent his private jet to Mr. Kilimnik nor has ever had any interaction with him,” she said.

In the days after the meeting, Manafort’s work in Ukraine bubbled into public view. On Aug. 19, he resigned from Trump’s campaign.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 05:15:00 The former campaign chairman of the President of the United States has been found to have lied about his contacts with Russians. reageer retweet

twitter:

NicolleDWallace twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 04:10:01 “Only after he was confronted with evidence did Mr. Manafort acknowledge that he and Mr. Kilimnik continued to discuss the proposal on at least three other occasions after Mr. Trump was elected, he said.” Manafort Found to Have Lied to Prosecutors... https://t.co/TCDV0o4whZ reageer retweet

quote:

A federal judge ruled on Wednesday that Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, had breached his plea agreement by lying multiple times to prosecutors after pledging to cooperate with the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

The decision by Judge Amy Berman Jackson of United States District Court in Washington may affect the severity of punishment that awaits Mr. Manafort. Judge Jackson is scheduled to sentence him next month on two conspiracy counts, and he is also awaiting sentencing for eight other fraud convictions in a related case.

After Mr. Manafort agreed in September to cooperate with the office of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, the judge found, he lied about his contacts with a Russian associate during the campaign and after the election. Prosecutors claim that the associate, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, has ties to Russian intelligence, and have been investigating whether he was involved in Russia’s covert campaign to influence the election results.

The judge also found that Mr. Manafort had lied about a payment that was routed through a pro-Trump political action committee to cover his legal bills, and about information relevant to another undisclosed investigation underway at the Justice Department.

But Judge Jackson decided that prosecutors failed to prove that Mr. Manafort, 69, had deceived them about two other matters: Mr. Kilimnik’s role in a conspiracy with Mr. Manafort to obstruct justice, and whether Mr. Manafort had been in contact with Trump administration officials.

Although the defense won on those points, the judge’s split decision bodes poorly for Mr. Manafort. The ruling decreases any chance that Judge Jackson will show Mr. Manafort leniency, although legal experts have said that sentencing guidelines already made that highly unlikely. It could also affect the severity of his punishment in a case tried in Federal District Court in Alexandria, Va., over the summer. He was convicted by a jury there in August for tax evasion, bank fraud and other crimes.

SPOILER

Prosecutors had declared in November that Mr. Manafort had breached his plea agreement by lying, relieving them of any obligation to suggest a lighter sentence because of his plea and cooperation. The judge found that the prosecutors had reached their conclusion in good faith, rejecting arguments by the defense that Mr. Manafort had misspoken merely because he was confused or could not remember clearly.

Judge Jackson’s reasoning could become clearer in the next few days when a transcript of Wednesday’s closed hearing on the matter becomes public. But like transcripts of earlier hearings, it is likely to be heavily redacted to protect the secrecy of the special counsel’s inquiry.

The prosecutors convinced Judge Jackson that Mr. Manafort had deceived them about his talks with Mr. Kilimnik, including their conversations about a possible deal that might have served the Kremlin’s ends. The two men repeatedly discussed a proposal to resolve a conflict over Russia’s incursions into Ukraine, possibly giving Moscow relief from punishing American-led sanctions that had been imposed after Russia seized Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

Andrew Weissmann, one of Mr. Mueller’s top deputies, told the judge this month that the interactions between the two men go “to the larger view of what we think is going on and what we think is the motive here.” He suggested that Mr. Manafort had misled the prosecutors into believing that he had rejected the Ukraine plan with Mr. Kilimnik out of hand during a meeting on Aug. 2, 2016, while Mr. Manafort was still running Mr. Trump’s campaign. Only after he was confronted with evidence did Mr. Manafort acknowledge that he and Mr. Kilimnik continued to discuss the proposal on at least three other occasions after Mr. Trump was elected, he said.

The prosecutors also told the judge that Mr. Manafort deceived them about transferring Trump campaign polling data to Mr. Kilimnik during the campaign. The New York Times has reported that the data included both private and public data, and that Mr. Manafort wanted the information delivered to two Ukrainian oligarchs who had financed Ukrainian political parties that were aligned with Russia.

Mr. Manafort’s lawyers had suggested that Mr. Manafort had only wanted to share public data in the interest of promoting himself and maybe winning lucrative work overseas. The oligarchs and their allies had paid Mr. Manafort tens of millions of dollars in Ukraine to help Viktor F. Yanukovych win the presidency there. Mr. Yanukovych was forced out of power in a popular uprising in 2014 and fled to Russia.

But the prosecutors seem to have pitted Mr. Manafort’s assertions against those of Rick Gates, Mr. Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman. Mr. Gates pleaded guilty to two felonies and has been cooperating with Mr. Mueller’s team for the past year.

During the earlier hearing, Mr. Weissmann appeared to suggest that Mr. Manafort’s lies about the polling data were too important to dismiss as innocent memory lapses. Whether any Americans, wittingly or unwittingly, engaged with Russians who were trying to interfere in the presidential election went to “the core” of the special counsel’s inquiry, Mr. Weissmann said.

He suggested that Mr. Manafort might have been trying to cover up the data transfer because it might hurt his chances of winning a presidential pardon for his crimes.

If it became known that Mr. Manafort had given Mr. Kilimnik the campaign’s polling data, Mr. Weissmann said, it could have “negative consequences in terms of the other motive that Mr. Manafort could have, which is to at least augment his chances for a pardon.”

twitter:

Phil_Mattingly twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 04:29:37 And now official what aides have been saying was likely: Senate will vote first tomorrow on the border security/spending package.Then House.Package will be cleared for President Trump to sign by Thursday night. reageer retweet

twitter:

nielslesniewski twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 05:35:51 Several policy riders in the mix earlier Wednesday, including back pay for federal contractors for wages lost during the 35-day partial shutdown and the VAWA extension, didn't make it in the final bargaining over the fiscal 2019 spending conference report https://t.co/RGVhyc3ZXK reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 04:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
How Manafort’s 2016 meeting with a Russian employee at New York cigar club goes to ‘the heart’ of Mueller’s probe

Inside Paul Manafort's 2016 meeting with a Russian operative

[..]

Maar geen collusion hoor! En als er sprake van collusion was, had Trump er niks mee te maken!

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 05:15:00 The former campaign chairman of the President of the United States has been found to have lied about his contacts with Russians. reageer retweet

En vergeet niet: Democrats liegen ook!

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 04:43 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Maar geen collusion hoor! En als er sprake van collusion was, had Trump er niks mee te maken!

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 08:37 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
En als Trump er wél wat mee te maken heeft is het niet strafbaar natuurlijk.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 11:21 schreef chibibo het volgende:

[..]

En als het wel strafbaar is, heeft Hillary het ook gedaan.

quote:

Former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has a new job as a lobbyist. https://t.co/xLpor9gJdt https://t.co/ZZ7cO7vgWp

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 12:19 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Onder HRC zou iedereen lobbyist zijn.

quote:

I’m not gonna sugar coat it, if @realDonaldTrump takes this sham border deal from the Democrats, he loses in 2020 and we ALL lose for years to come.

I’ll discuss on @foxandfriends in 10 mins!

quote:

Omar is scheduled to speak Feb. 23 in Tampa at what is labeled a Yemen Emergency Dinner sponsored by Islamic Relief USA, or IRUSA. Islamic Relief, which has chapters in 20 nations, has been branded a terror financier by the governments of the United Arab Emirates and Israel. Russian authorities, the Swiss bank UBS, the British bank HSBC, and reports by governmental entities in Germany and Sweden all have determined that Islamic Relief has supported radical Islamist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

https://www.washingtonexa(...)tism-on-her-schedule

quote:

EXCLUSIVE: DHS guts task force protecting elections from foreign meddling. https://t.co/3z5OKiMnLK

quote:

Michael Avenatti agreed Wednesday to relinquish financial control of his longtime law firm hours after a former partner filed papers accusing him of hiding millions of dollars from the court that oversaw its bankruptcy.

The celebrity lawyer and his firm, Eagan Avenatti, consented to the appointment of a receiver to take possession of its bank accounts, case files, computers and other assets.

https://www.latimes.com/p(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:09 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
awyer and his firm, Eagan Avenatti, consented to the appointment of a receiver to take possession of its bank accounts, case files, computers and other assets.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:09 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Ook met Michael Avenatti gaat het niet zo lekker. Ooit de handler van Stormy Daniels en grote hoop van de Democraten om Trump te verslaan in de presidentsverkiezingen van 2020. Nu wordt hij verdacht van verduistering.

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:09 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Ook met Michael Avenatti gaat het niet zo lekker. Ooit de handler van Stormy Daniels en grote hoop van de Democraten om Trump te verslaan in de presidentsverkiezingen van 2020. Nu wordt hij verdacht van verduistering.

[..]

quote:

House Judiciary chair Jerry Nadler has summoned acting A.G. Whitaker back to the Hill to explain what Nadler said were "unsatisfactory, incomplete" answers in areas involving Mueller's probe. Otherwise, Nadler writes, the Committee will seek to depose him.
https://t.co/Gzcg8uAXBe

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:09 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Ook met Michael Avenatti gaat het niet zo lekker. Ooit de handler van Stormy Daniels en grote hoop van de Democraten om Trump te verslaan in de presidentsverkiezingen van 2020. Nu wordt hij verdacht van verduistering.

[..]

quote:

Trump’s approval rating rises to 52 percent, highest since 2017

President Trump’s approval rating has reached 52 percent, according to a new poll released Monday, his highest level since shortly after his inauguration in 2017.

https://nypost.com/2019/0(...)-highest-since-2017/

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:19 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Met president Trump zelf gaat het uitstekend. Inmiddels is vastgesteld door een Senaatscomité dat hij zich niet schuldig heeft gemaakt aan samenwerken met de Russen. De verwachting is dat Mueller binnenkort met dezelfde conclusie komt en de waarheid dus eindelijk officieel wordt!

Inmiddels heeft Trump een approval rating van 52%, het hoogste niveau sinds 2017. Hij doet het fantastisch.

[..]

Het zijn mooie tijden voor de MAGA movement!

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:19 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
De verwachting is dat Mueller binnenkort met dezelfde conclusie komt en de waarheid dus eindelijk officieel wordt!

[..]

Het zijn mooie tijden voor de MAGA movement!

quote:

Adam Schiff calls the Manafort news "devastating": "It's not just that if he told the truth, it would be damaging to Manafort or Kilimnik, but it would reflect so adversely on the president that he would lose his chance of a pardon." https://t.co/yQEYYtTLLs

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:27 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Wie heeft die verwachting?

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:34 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De rechter heeft ook gezegd dat Manafort gelogen heeft tegen Mueller nadat hij een deal sloot.

[..]

Blijven liegen voor Trump en hopen dat hij je als beloning een pardon geeft.

quote:

Disgraced FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe pretends to be a “poor little Angel” when in fact he was a big part of the Crooked Hillary Scandal & the Russia Hoax - a puppet for Leakin’ James Comey. I.G. report on McCabe was devastating. Part of “insurance policy” in case I won....

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:27 schreef archito het volgende:

[..]

Wie heeft die verwachting?

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:18 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Met dat soort praktijken kun je het tot in het Witte Huis brengen.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:19 schreef Vader_Aardbei het volgende:
Inmiddels heeft Trump een approval rating van 52%, het hoogste niveau sinds 2017. Hij doet het fantastisch.

[..]

Het zijn mooie tijden voor de MAGA movement!

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:50 schreef Gehenna het volgende:

[..]

ohja, gewoon een poll eruit pakken en dat weer presenteren als feiten.. Want dat schept het beste beeld voor je.

Hij heeft op dit moment op basis van alle polls: een approval rating van 41%: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

Vergeleken met z'n voorgangers doet ie het belabberd:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Scott Pelley on what Andrew McCabe told him: "There were meetings at the Justice Department in which it was discussed whether the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet could be brought together to remove the President of the United States under the 25th amendment."

quote:

A call like this was highly unusual. Presidents do not, typically, call FBI directors. There should be no direct contact between the president and the director, except for national-security purposes. The reason is simple. Investigations and prosecutions need to be pursued without a hint of suspicion that someone who wields power has put a thumb on the scale.

The Russia team was in my office. I took the call on an unclassified line. That was another strange thing—the president was calling on a phone that was not secure. The voice on the other end said, It’s Don Trump calling. I said, Hello, Mr. President, how are you? Apart from my surprise that he was calling at all, I was surprised that he referred to himself as “Don.”

The president said, I’m good. You know—boy, it’s incredible, it’s such a great thing, people are really happy about the fact that the director’s gone, and it’s just remarkable what people are saying. Have you seen that? Are you seeing that, too?


He went on: I received hundreds of messages from FBI people—how happy they are that I fired him. There are people saying things on the media, have you seen that? What’s it like there in the building?

This is what it was like: You could go to any floor and you would see small groups gathering in hallways, some people even crying. The overwhelming majority liked and admired Director Comey—his personal style, the integrity of his conduct.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:52 schreef wolfrolf het volgende:

[..]

YOU ARE FAKE NEWS

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:54 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Fake news is zo 2018.

Socialist Propaganda!

quote:

MARKETS: Stocks are opening broadly lower after the government reported a surprise drop in retail sales last month, raising concerns about how healthy the U.S. economy is. https://t.co/YdoZEX6sie https://t.co/4TGJzq4cSO

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 16:10 schreef Gehenna het volgende:

[..]

fax me even de 'echte' feiten dan

quote:

JUST IN: Judge rules Sandy Hook families can depose Alex Jones in defamation case https://t.co/2G7m0fIhL6 https://t.co/wrPSQYRI2e

quote:

NEW - Fox News rejected a national ad for the anti-Nazi documentary short "A Night At The Garden" that was going to run during Hannity's show. The reason? A Fox account executive told the ad-buyer: "Our CEO said that it was not appropriate for our air." https://t.co/qDZUEyly5Q

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 15:50 schreef Gehenna het volgende:

[..]

ohja, gewoon een poll eruit pakken en dat weer presenteren als feiten.. Want dat schept het beste beeld voor je.

Hij heeft op dit moment op basis van alle polls: een approval rating van 41%: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

Vergeleken met z'n voorgangers doet ie het belabberd:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 16:05 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Via Kyle Griffin.


Every Day Is a New Low in Trump's White House

[..]

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 13:35:34 This article is laughably terrible. The writer says he contacted the Border Patrol, got sent a November press release about how new wall is going to be built soon...and therefore “Trump was telling the truth” that it’s already being built. https://t.co/AzUKACugMa https://t.co/Ay4GvDTmRn reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 13:35:35 I got sent the same press release when I contacted CBP this week, then asked follow-up questions about what is actually happening now, to which they explained that only “vegetation clearing” is currently taking place. reageer retweet

quote:

A Connecticut judge has ruled that Infowars host and conspiracy peddler Alex Jones must undergo a sworn deposition in the defamation case brought against him by family members of Sandy Hook shooting victims. https://t.co/XWkLuDBf0t

quote:

Chuck Schumer met with Beto O’Rourke last week to discuss a possible 2020 Senate campaign against Republican Sen. John Cornyn, a source familiar with the meeting tells Politico. https://t.co/hVv69Okf8w

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 16:10 schreef Gehenna het volgende:

[..]

fax me even de 'echte' feiten dan

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 18:14 schreef wolfrolf het volgende:

[..]

ik zat maar een beetje te garpen natuurlijk

trump is een muppet

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 17:25 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Kyle Griffin:

[..]

Heerlijk. Alex Jones onder ede. Ik hoop dat dit openbaar is. Wat een smerig stuk teringlijer is dat.

Veel succes met de waarheid vertellen Alex. Anders ga je de cel in.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 17:07 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Het 'ECHTE' nieuws volgens Trump

[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 13:35:34 This article is laughably terrible. The writer says he contacted the Border Patrol, got sent a November press release about how new wall is going to be built soon...and therefore “Trump was telling the truth” that it’s already being built. https://t.co/AzUKACugMa https://t.co/Ay4GvDTmRn reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 13:35:35 I got sent the same press release when I contacted CBP this week, then asked follow-up questions about what is actually happening now, to which they explained that only “vegetation clearing” is currently taking place. reageer retweet

quote:

The Tennessee Valley Authority defies Trump, votes to shut down two aging coal-fired power plants. https://t.co/Yqp6japEbK

twitter:

AP twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 21:11:52 BREAKING: Senate GOP leader McConnell: Trump has 'indicated he's prepared to sign' funding bill, will declare emergency on border. reageer retweet

twitter:

spectatorindex twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 21:11:41 BREAKING: Mitch McConnell says President Trump will both sign spending bill and declare national emergency over border wall. reageer retweet

quote:

WASHINGTON — Millions of Americans are waiting for Robert Mueller to give them the final word on whether the Trump campaign conspired with the 2016 Russian election interference effort — and whether their president is under the influence of a foreign adversary.

Millions of Americans may be sorely disappointed.

Unless Mueller files a detailed indictment charging members of the Trump campaign with conspiring with Russia, the public may never learn the full scope of what Mueller and his team has found — including potentially scandalous behavior that doesn't amount to a provable crime.

The reason: The special counsel operates under rules that severely constrain how much information can be made public.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:12 schreef Infection het volgende:

twitter:

AP twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 21:11:52 BREAKING: Senate GOP leader McConnell: Trump has 'indicated he's prepared to sign' funding bill, will declare emergency on border. reageer retweet

twitter:

spectatorindex twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 21:11:41 BREAKING: Mitch McConnell says President Trump will both sign spending bill and declare national emergency over border wall. reageer retweet

quote:

Declaring an Emergency to Build a Border Wall: The Statutory Arguments
As the government shutdown drags on, President Trump has made multiple statements hinting that, if Congress refuses to appropriate $5.6 billion in new appropriations to fund a wall along the southern border, he will declare a national emergency in order to access existing Pentagon funds for the effort. On Dec. 18, Trump tweeted, “Because of the tremendous dangers at the Border, including large scale criminal and drug inflow, the United States Military will build the Wall!” On Jan. 4, the president acknowledged the possibility of using emergency powers to fund the wall, saying, “We can call a national emergency because of the security of our country … I haven't done it. I may do it … We can call a national emergency and build it very quickly.” On Jan. 6, he told reporters, “I may declare a national emergency dependent on what's going to happen over the next few days." This may not be idle talk: according to Reuters, Vice President Mike Pence has said that the White House counsel’s office is examining the legality of declaring such an emergency in order to construct a wall. (Lawfare).

SPOILER

Building a wall was one of the central promises of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The Trump administration initially requested that Congress appropriate $25 billion for the project after Mexico refused to pay for it, as Trump had promised on the campaign trail, but Congress specifically denied the funds in 2017 and 2018. After Congress passed a number of stopgap measures to continue funding the government while talks continued on money for the wall, on Dec. 22 Trump refused to sign another temporary measure, which caused the government to shut down.

In short, the president is looking for a way to end the government shutdown while keeping his campaign promise to build the wall. But in the absence of an appropriate statutory authority on which to rely to build the wall, such action would be unconstitutional: Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution assigns the role of making laws to Congress, and Article I, Section 9 specifies that “[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” The question, therefore, is what existing statutory authorities the president could reasonably rely on to use already-appropriated funds to build the wall.

Construction Authority
With the caveat that it remains unclear precisely what legal authority or authorities Trump has in mind, it is possible to make some educated guesses about what administration lawyers may be considering.

The first question is what legal authorities might actually be available for the purpose of using already-appropriated funding to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. Congressional oversight of military construction programs is extensive, and as a general matter, all military construction projects must first be authorized by Congress. The General Accounting Office (GAO) in B-213137, 63 Comp. Gen. 422, 433 (1984) interpreted 41 U.S.C. § 12 to require specific congressional authorization for military construction projects and to prohibit the use of other, more general appropriations for such projects. Congress typically authorizes military construction projects in the annual Military Construction Authorization Act, with project authorizations broken down individually in the accompanying conference report. As such, the large general-purpose pot of Pentagon funding known as Operation & Maintenance (O&M) funding generally cannot be used for construction purposes.

But the Defense Department’s emergency military construction authorities contain two exceptions to this requirement of congressional authorization. The first, outlined in 10 U.S.C. § 2803, allows up to $50 million of appropriated funds for military construction to be spent on not-specifically-authorized construction projects if those projects are for the purpose of national security and protecting the safety of U.S. troops. According to Defense Department guidance from 2013, the relevant legislative history indicates that this authority may not be used for projects denied authorization in previous Military Construction Appropriations Acts—and unfortunately for the administration, the wall fits this description. In any event, the $50 million authorized under § 2803 would be a drop in the bucket of the $5.6 billion Trump is currently requesting and would fall well short of the estimated cost for the wall, which is likely somewhere between $12 billion and $25 billion.

The second exception, outlined in 10 U.S. Code § 2808(a),provides that:

“[i]n the event of a declaration of war or the declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) that requires use of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense, without regard to any other provision of law, may undertake military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces. Such projects may be undertaken only within the total amount of funds that have been appropriated for military construction, including funds appropriated for family housing, that have not been obligated.” (Emphasis added.)

If such a national emergency is declared, the secretary of defense must notify the appropriate congressional committees and provide an “estimated cost of the construction projects, including the cost of any real estate action pertaining to those construction projects.” The authority terminates “with respect to any war or national emergency at the end of the war or national emergency.”

The portion of this law that references a “declaration of war” can be quickly dispensed with. There is no authority for the president to declare war: that power is expressly reserved to the Congress in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Therefore, Trump could only invoke this authority by declaring a national emergency, consistent with Trump’s recent statements. Presidents have invoked § 2808 by declaring national emergency at least twice: in 1990 in Executive Order 12734 in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, and in 2001 in Executive Order 13235, following the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001.

Under a plain reading of this language, it would seem the authority to engage in military construction projects would only apply to national emergencies that require use of the armed forces—and construction done pursuant to the authority would also need to be related to that specific use of the armed forces. In other words, the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, could not serve as the basis for a national emergency that would authorize building the wall on the border with Mexico. The president also likely couldn’t declare a national emergency with respect to the Mexican border and then construct something that would not in any way support the mission of the U.S. armed forces in responding to the supposed emergency.

It is not obvious that the current situation at the U.S.-Mexico border requires the presence of the military. According to a report by Customs and Border Protection (CBP), CBP apprehensions along the southwest border plummeted by approximately 80 percent from Fiscal Year 2000 to FY 2017, from a high of over 1.6 million to around 300,000. Though numbers rose slightly in FY 2018, the administration has not presented evidence that CBP officials require military assistance to prevent immigrants from entering the country.

Nonetheless, in November 2018, a White House memo reportedly “authorized a more forward-leaning role for the active-duty forces, permitting troops to work alongside Border Patrol agents in duties such as crowd control and temporary detention.” Trump’s deployment of troops to the border in October was widely criticized as an election-year ploy, but it also may have had the effect of laying the groundwork for a national emergency determination that would allow Trump to build the wall using existing military construction funds pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2808(a). That is, because troops are currently stationed at the border, there is a better case that an emergency related to the border would require the use of the armed forces under § 2808(a).

But what would the basis of the emergency be? The government might point to an alleged crisis in border enforcement generally, though as noted, publicly available data does not indicate such a crisis. Recent statements by administration officials suggest that the government may also seek to make a more specific argument about terrorism. Various administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen and White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, have publicly made the link between terrorism and what is happening at the southern border. On Jan. 6, for example, Sanders said in an interview that “nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally [in FY 2018]. And we know that our most vulnerable point of entry is at our southern border.” (Though the source of Sanders’s information is unclear, NBC has since reported that CBP stopped only six individuals listed as known or suspected terrorists from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in the first half of FY 2018.)

If the president finds that the situation at the border “requires the use of the armed forces,” the next question is whether construction of a wall could be construed as “necessary to support such use of the armed forces.” This, in turn, raises the issue of what U.S. troops are actually doing and responding to at the border. The New York Times has reported that the approximately 5,900 American troops on the border are spread between southwestern Texas and southern California in small bases, where they have helped set up concertina wire and other security barriers. USA Today reported on Jan. 4 that the Department of Homeland Security requested from the Department of Defense more support from active-duty military troops to bolster CBP officers along the southern border, in particular more combat engineers to install concertina wire and more aircraft and crews to transport CBP officers. One can imagine the administration making an argument that the troops need the wall for their mission to keep terrorists and/or civilian invaders out of the United States, and the concertina wire they are laying is not sufficient for them to respond effectively. How convincing one finds this argument is a different question.

Declaring Emergency
Beyond the limitations outlined in § 2808(a), the statute does not provide any explicit criteria or guidance for the president regarding what type of circumstances would qualify as a “national emergency” for purposes of this construction authority. Both the courts and Congress have typically been deferential to presidential declarations of national emergencies. For example, in the context of economic sanctions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)—which was enacted in part to limit the president’s ability to declare unending national emergencies—courts have generally deferred to the executive’s decisions regarding whether a particular foreign policy issue creates a national emergency sufficient to invoke IEEPA’s authorities, along with the underlying factual determinations by the executive branch.

If the administration were to tie the need for a wall to the threat of terrorism, it might seek to piggyback on the national emergency already declared in Executive Order 13224 by President George W. Bush, which authorized the use of economic sanctions to address terrorism and threats of terrorism committed by foreign terrorists against U.S. nationals or the United States. An executive order by Trump to extend that national emergency declaration to cover construction pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2808 would look very similar to the two prior executive orders in which § 2808 was invoked: these orders rested on national emergencies that had already been declared.

§ 2808(a)’s reference the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), which was enacted in 1976 as a way to rein in the proliferation of emergency powers, provides the affirmative authorization to the president to issue a national emergency declaration. But it also provides a process-oriented framework for congressional involvement in the event the president declares such a national emergency. Under the National Emergencies Act, any such declaration of a national emergency must “immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register.” A national emergency covered by these provisions terminates if either a joint resolution is enacted or the president issues a proclamation terminating the emergency. Such a joint resolution terminating the emergency would enjoy expedited consideration in Congress but would still need either the signature of the president or enough votes to override a presidential veto. The statute states that every six months “each House of Congress shall meet to consider a vote on a joint resolution to determine whether that emergency shall be terminated.”

This language, however, is not legally binding on Congress. And as Elizabeth Goitein points out, the law has neither stemmed the declaration of national emergencies nor encouraged declarations that the national emergency is over.

It is worth noting that under these provisions, even a valid termination of the national emergency by the president or via a joint resolution would not affect “(A) any action taken or proceeding pending not finally concluded or determined on such date; (B) any action or proceeding based on any act committed prior to such date; or (C) any rights or duties that matured or penalties that were incurred prior to such date.” This raises the question of whether these sections would allow the project to go forward if, for example, the administration were to sign a contract obligating the funds to build the wall before Congress terminated the national emergency.

Other Possibilities
Several other legal authorities are worth mentioning in the event the Trump administration decides to invoke them in connection with a national emergency declaration.

Over the years, myriad national emergency authorities have been given to the president through legislation, and the Brennan Center for Justice usefully categorized them last month. These authorities authorize a panoply of types of activities—related to things like public health, federal personnel, and criminal prosecution and detainment—that would not by their terms authorize construction of a wall. In my review, only about few would seem close to being on-point for the purpose of constructing Trump’s proposed wall:

• Under 33 U.S.C. § 2293, the secretary of the Army may terminate or defer any Army civil works project and apply the resources, including funds, personnel, and equipment, of the Army’s civil works program to authorized civil works, military construction, and civil defense projects that are essential to the national defense, without regard to any other provision of law "in the event of a declaration of war or a declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act [50 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq.] that requires or may require use of the Armed Forces.”
• Under 50 U.S.C. § 98f (a)(2), any officer or employee of the United States designated by the president may order the release of materials in the strategic raw materials stockpile for use, sale, or other disposition, if the officer or employee determines that the release is required for purposes of the national defense during a national emergency.
• Under 40 U.S.C. § 905, procedures for providing notice to local government and prospective purchasers before purchase or sale of real property in urban areas by an administrator of general services may be waived during a period of national emergency proclaimed by the president.
• Under 7 U.S.C. § 4208, legal provisions intended to protect farmland do not apply to the acquisition or use of farmland for national defense purposes during a national emergency.
• Under 42 U.S.C. § 4625 (c)(3)(B), a provision that persons displaced by a federal project may not be required to leave their dwelling unless they have had a reasonable opportunity to relocate to a comparable replacement dwelling does not apply in the case of a national emergency declared by the president.
• Under 10 U.S.C. § 2662 (f), the secretary of the military department concerned, or the secretary of defense with respect to Department of Defense transactions, may waive advance reporting requirements for real property transactions "if the Secretary concerned determines that the transaction is made as a result of … a declaration of a national emergency by the President pursuant to the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq.).

Another statutory authority that could potentially be used to support construction of the wall, and which would not require the declaration of a national emergency, is 10 U.S.C. § Section 284, which authorizes the secretary of defense to “provide support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the Federal Government or of any State, local, tribal, or foreign law enforcement agency” for the purposes set forth in the section if requested by another Federal agency or State, local, or tribal governments in support of law enforcement efforts. Those purposes include, among other things, “[c]onstruction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States,” as well as the “[t]he establishment (including an unspecified minor military construction project) and operation of bases of operations or training facilities for the purpose of facilitating counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of the Department of Defense or any Federal, State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency within or outside the United States” (emphasis added).

The wall would almost certainly not qualify as an “unspecified minor military construction project,” because the cost is too high. But if the Trump administration decided the wall was really a “fence,” it might be well on its way to making the argument that the administration may send Pentagon funds to the Department of Homeland Security or another agency to build a wall.

Conclusion
At first glance, the president’s proposal to build a wall as a matter of national emergency in the face of a government shutdown over the refusal by Congress to provide funds for such a wall seems like an end-run around Congress’s constitutional prerogatives to make laws and appropriate funds. But on closer inspection, the potentially relevant statutes delegate substantial authority to the president, and it is possible to imagine arguments that members of Congress, or the courts, could find convincing if they are predisposed to defer to the president on questions of what constitutes a national emergency at the border. The responses to such an action by the president will be both political and legal. It remains to be seen whether actions and statements by the president and other administration officials that are not readily supported by facts and data can overcome more basic constitutional concerns that the president is abusing his power at the expense of the legislative branch.

quote:

Authorities confirm arrest of suspect in fire at Comet Ping Pong. US Park Police took man into custody after fight. Details to come. https://t.co/7h5Z8Y82vu

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:20 schreef MangoTree het volgende:
You may be disappointed by the Mueller report (nbc news)

[..]

Het rapport en de onderzoeksmethoden blijven dus zoveel mogelijk geheim voor ons.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:26 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Via WaPo.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:32 schreef Infection het volgende:

[..]

Hmm? Ik zie het verband niet helemaal?

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:32 schreef Infection het volgende:

[..]

Hmm? Ik zie het verband niet helemaal?

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 21:56 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Google eens op Pizzagate en Comet Ping Pong.

quote:

Newly empowered Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives plan to use court documents from Robert Mueller’s Russia probe to conduct hearings on President Donald Trump without waiting for the special counsel’s final report, according to lawmakers and aides.

Concerned that Mueller’s report could be months away and ultimately limited in scope, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have started examining documents filed by Mueller’s team in its probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion by Trump’s campaign team.

They plan to use the court filings to build a picture of wrongdoing by Trump advisers that can provide the basis for hearings, Democratic lawmakers and aides told Reuters.

“There’s enough information already for us to conduct robust oversight hearings. We’ve seen enough from the people who’ve been implicated, indicted, jailed to be awfully busy for the foreseeable future,” said Representative Ted Deutch, a Democrat on the committee.

SPOILER

It is not known when Mueller will complete his probe, or whether the public or Congress will see his original report.

However, Democrats believe the details he has already divulged in criminal court filings against former Trump associates could show patterns indicating obstruction of justice and abuse of power, possibly providing grounds for impeachment proceedings.

“We don’t have anything like a complete picture at this point. But a picture is starting to emerge,” said Representative Jamie Raskin, a subcommittee vice chairman.

White House officials did not respond to requests for comment. Mueller’s office declined to comment.

The Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, Doug Collins, dismissed the plan as an effort by its chairman, Jerrold Nadler, to placate Democratic voters. Republicans are in the minority in the House after Democratic wins in elections last November.

The committee has jurisdiction over any impeachment effort, and plans in coming weeks to roll out its oversight agenda on a range of issues which also include conflicts of interest, emoluments and public corruption, an aide said.

The panel on Tuesday announced the hiring of two top litigators, both Trump critics, as special oversight counsels.

Democrats on the committee say many of Mueller’s findings are already on file in federal court in the form of criminal charges, plea agreements and sentencing memoranda, and that they provide a partial roadmap of alleged misdeeds.

“We don’t need to wait until the Mueller report comes out to start exploring what constitutes obstruction of justice, what constitutes abuse of power, where a violation of the president’s oath would be implicated,” Deutch said.

The committee would avoid topics and witness testimony that could conflict with Mueller’s ongoing work, the aide said.

RUSSIA TIES

Thirty-four people have pleaded guilty or been indicted in the Mueller inquiry so far.

Court documents depict a Trump campaign that placed a high priority on improving U.S.-Russia relations while also revealing that Trump, then a candidate, sought approval from President Vladimir Putin’s government for a Trump tower project in Moscow.

Former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos sought meetings between the campaign and Russian government officials after being told Moscow had “dirt” on Trump’s presidential rival, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, the court filings show.

After Trump won the election but before he took office, former national security adviser Michael Flynn appealed to Russia to oppose a U.N. resolution on Israeli settlements and to not retaliate over U.S. sanctions on Russia for election meddling, according to a court document.

Lawmakers also expect to focus on allegations that several of Trump’s former advisers lied to Congress and federal investigators.

“Why are all these people lying under oath? Why are all of these people trying to obstruct justice? What is the story that is being concealed here?” Raskin said.

Mueller may be dissuaded from specifically linking Trump to any of his investigations in his final report because of a standing Justice Department opinion that presidents cannot be indicted while in office, the aide said.

Department regulations governing the special counsel’s office also stipulate that reports should be confidential and amount to little more than “brief notifications.”

Nadler said he is “not confident at all” that the Mueller report will help lawmakers determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Trump.

“It could be a comprehensive report telling us a lot. Or it could be a statement that on such-and-such a date we indicted so-and-so, and on such-and-such a date we decided not to indict so-and-so,” Nadler said.

If Mueller’s final report is not provided to Congress in full when it is issued, Nadler could subpoena the document and call Mueller to testify.

He could also introduce legislation to give Congress access to the full report or make a formal House request for access to Mueller’s grand jury evidence, an action similar to steps taken by his Watergate-era predecessor in the 1970s.

Not all committee Democrats think such action is necessary.

“They’re not going to bury it. There’s no shovel big enough for them to bury it,” said Representative Eric Swalwell, pointing to polls showing that an overwhelming majority of Americans want Mueller to produce a full public report on his probe.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 20-11-2014 om 15:36:28 Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate with Congress. reageer retweet

twitter:

NBCNews twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 22:27:03 JUST IN: Government funding bill passes Senate in 83-16 vote; bill goes to House. https://t.co/l5nMyfCLJX https://t.co/1asNLSscUi reageer retweet

quote:

Trump is 6’3” and weighs in at 243, his physician says

quote:

Trump medical report out —> https://t.co/moMcAS0Ksa

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 22:30 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Volgens mij was hij vorig jaar korter.
.

[..]

quote:

NATIONAL EMERGENCY WON'T HELP. IT'S OVER IF HE SIGNS THIS BILL! https://t.co/K3N8tjVzBK

quote:

Now that Trump is declaring a national emergency, remember:

Nancy Pelosi can initiate a process that may end up *forcing* the GOP Senate to vote on it:

https://t.co/5DYcX1pHx5

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 22:58 schreef Hexagon het volgende:
Voor de Democraten komt dit wel goed uit. Geen shutdown meer en Trump is nu helemaal zelf verantwoordelijk voor zn muur en ook voor het falen daarvan.
.

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 22:30 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Volgens mij was hij vorig jaar korter.
.

[..]

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 23:00:54 Based on the report from the president's physician, Trump is now considered obese by the National Institutes of Health.His BMI (based on a height of 6'3" and a weight of 243) is 30.4. Anything 30 or above is considered obese. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 23:06 schreef Arcee het volgende:
Trump dreigt er alleen maar mee.

quote:

Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate with Congress.

quote:

"You want to talk about a national emergency?" Speaker Pelosi says. "Let's talk about today, the one-year anniversary" of the Parkland shooting.

"Why don't you declare that a national emergency? I wish you would. But—a Democratic president can do that." https://t.co/47mhr4iLAE https://t.co/3vxEzeYjBm

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 23:16 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Wie zou deze tweet uit 2014 hebben geschreven?

[..]

twitter:

SpeakerPelosi twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 22:53:03 Declaring a national emergency would be a lawless act, a gross abuse of the power of the presidency and a desperate attempt to distract from the fact that @realDonaldTrump broke his core promise to have Mexico pay for his wall. reageer retweet

twitter:

rachaelmbade twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 23:58:47 BREAKING: @Judiciary Chair @RepJerryNadler tells me the House will bring a resolution of disapproval up to try to terminate Trump's national emergency to build the wall. If that fails in the Senate or is vetoed by Trump, House Dems will sue, he says. Story coming... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 14 februari 2019 23:47 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:
Mooi. De volgende Democratische president kan global warming een national emergency declaren en de nodige resources er voor inzetten

Heerlijk, die precedentjes die Trump zet...

twitter:

waltshaub twitterde op donderdag 14-02-2019 om 21:47:48 being a bad negotiator is not a national emergency reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 01:25:05 The Justice Department has warned the White House a national emergency declaration is nearly certain to be blocked by the courts on, at least, a temporary basis, preventing the immediate implementation of Trump's plan to build the wall, ABC News reports. https://t.co/jVOR5VmeoS reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 01:43:15 NEW: The Senate Intelligence chairman said last week that Chris Steele had remained unwilling to engage. But we can reveal that Steele submitted written answers to the committee in August. The panel then withdrew the subpoena for his testimony. My latest: https://t.co/3pehbc0q9g reageer retweet

twitter:

peterbakernyt twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 03:08:35 House passes spending bill 300-128, sending it to Trump for his signature. ⁦@ESCochrane⁩ ⁦@maggieNYT⁩ https://t.co/MCavP854Qt reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 03:43:22 If a president under criminal investigation falsely—and provably falsely—declaring a "national emergency" to accrue to himself special powers doesn't scare you, just imagine it's Hillary Clinton doing it and apparently your sanity sensors will turn back on https://t.co/Ijn7WChnVp reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 05:10:01 Interesting optics on Friday as Trump, according to the W.H. schedule, declares a national emergency at the southern border and then jets off to Mar-a-Lago a few hours later. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 06:17 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Filmpje in link:

Emergency declaration could backfire, force Republican opposition

Dus als Pelosi een resolutie door het Huis krijgt om de door Trump uitgeroepen noodtoestand te stoppen is de Senaat verplicht dat ook in stemming te brengen en hebben de Dems maar een paar stemmen nodig.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 09:18 schreef Montov het volgende:
Geen paniek, wapenbezitters komen wel in opstand wanneer de noodtoestand onterecht wordt uitgeroepen. Toch?...

Vorig jaar riep Trump nog dat het aantal mensen die illegaal de grens oversteken het laagste is in 45 jaar. Er is dus geen ramp.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 09:18 schreef Montov het volgende:
Geen paniek, wapenbezitters komen wel in opstand wanneer de noodtoestand onterecht wordt uitgeroepen. Toch?...

Vorig jaar riep Trump nog dat het aantal mensen die illegaal de grens oversteken het laagste is in 45 jaar. Er is dus geen ramp.

quote:

(...)the bipartisan ground on which the Senate purported to have built its inquiry may be cracking. On Tuesday, Warner said he disagreed with Burr’s claim that the probe had found no “direct evidence” of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The comment left some legal experts perplexed, too. “I don’t think I’ve ever had a case where I have direct evidence of a conspiracy,” said Chuck Rosenberg, a Justice Department veteran who served as former FBI Director James Comey’s chief of staff until 2015. “If there is snow on your front lawn, you can safely conclude that it snowed,” Rosenberg told me. “Is that direct evidence? No. It’s circumstantial—someone could’ve driven up to your house and thrown snow on your lawn. But that’s unlikely. The law treats circumstantial and direct evidence as being of equal weight.”(...)

quote:

“Trying to use the 25th Amendment to try and circumvent the Election is a despicable act of unconstitutional power grabbing...which happens in third world countries. You have to obey the law. This is an attack on our system & Constitution.” Alan Dershowitz. @TuckerCarlson

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 11:39 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trump is wakker.

[..]

Waarom is gebruik maken van een onderdeel van de constitutie onconstutioneel?

quote:

That Trump tweet calling the 25th Amendment "unconstitutional power grabbing" is funny because the 25th Amendment is part of the Constitution.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 12:43 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Nate Silver zegt dat Trump in herhaling valt en dat dat niet verstandig is.

https://fivethirtyeight.c(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Trump refused to believe that North Korea had test-fired a missile in 2017, per Andrew McCabe book. “He thought that North Korea did not have the capability to launch such missiles. He said he knew this because Vladimir Putin had told him so.” https://t.co/0HxKotlaW7

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 12:43 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Nate Silver zegt dat Trump in herhaling valt en dat dat niet verstandig is.

https://fivethirtyeight.c(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 14:57 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Hangt er van af wat zijn strategie precies is. Als hij herkozen wil worden is het niet verstandig. Als hij niet impeached wil worden wel.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 14:57 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Hangt er van af wat zijn strategie precies is. Als hij herkozen wil worden is het niet verstandig. Als hij niet impeached wil worden wel.

quote:

MORONIC!

He can't build any part of a border wall -- with an emergency declaration or as commander in chief -- if he signs this bill. https://t.co/aK9ur5HEaa

quote:

Trump gets his first 2020 GOP primary challenger: former MA Gov. Bill Weld

Weld announced a presidential exploratory committee this morning in NH https://t.co/rBrgVIeJkw

quote:

Weld says President Trump's decision to kick U.S. press out of Oval Office mtg with Russians was an "act of such contempt not only towards the press but towards the United States as an institution."

Says the "international array of nations" can't take another 6 years of Trump https://t.co/rLCZuXA4a9

quote:

Mike Pence: The president usurping power and end-running Congress is "a profound mistake." https://t.co/GjDbHDvh0u

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:04 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Cortez heeft er dus voor gezorgd dat Amazon niet meer naar New York komt. 25.000 banen zo door de plee heen gespoeld.
Gek genoeg vind ze dat een overwinning dat er minder werk is voor de mensen in haar stad.
Het frisse nieuwe gezicht van de democratische partij is allesbehalve fris.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:18 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Hangt ervan af hoe je het bekijkt. Niet voor niets staakt Amazon personeel wereldwijd vaak. De omstandigheden in de magazijnen zijn niet best.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:04 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Cortez heeft er dus voor gezorgd dat Amazon niet meer naar New York komt. 25.000 banen zo door de plee heen gespoeld.
Gek genoeg vind ze dat een overwinning dat er minder werk is voor de mensen in haar stad.
Het frisse nieuwe gezicht van de democratische partij is allesbehalve fris.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:04 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Cortez heeft er dus voor gezorgd dat Amazon niet meer naar New York komt. 25.000 banen zo door de plee heen gespoeld.
Gek genoeg vind ze dat een overwinning dat er minder werk is voor de mensen in haar stad.
Het frisse nieuwe gezicht van de democratische partij is allesbehalve fris.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:18 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Hangt ervan af hoe je het bekijkt. Niet voor niets staakt Amazon personeel wereldwijd vaak. De omstandigheden in de magazijnen zijn niet best.

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:46:37 Trump on people who accurately note that most drugs come through ports of entry, not unwalled areas: "It's just a lie. It's all a lie." His own Drug Enforcement Administration says that. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:04 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Cortez heeft er dus voor gezorgd dat Amazon niet meer naar New York komt. 25.000 banen zo door de plee heen gespoeld.
Gek genoeg vind ze dat een overwinning dat er minder werk is voor de mensen in haar stad.
Het frisse nieuwe gezicht van de democratische partij is allesbehalve fris.

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:50:06 Trump falsely claims Mexico has "almost 40,000 murders. 40,000." He initially tweeted the correct number, 33,341, then said "38,000," and now "40,000." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:50 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Mooi dat AOC ook hier op fok een boeman begint te worden.

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:50:58 Trump: "I'm going to be signing a national emergency. Annnd: it's been signed many times before...there's rarely been a problem. They sign it, nobody cares."There has never been an emergency declaration to seize money for a controversial initiative Congress refused to fund. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:24 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Wel grappig hoe simplistisch die statements van jou zijn. Helaas is de realiteit wat genuanceerder.

https://ny.curbed.com/201(...)sland-city-explained

Er zitten een heleboel haken en ogen aan zo'n plan. Behalve harde cijfers speelt er ook emotie mee, optics en talloze andere zaken.

Verdiep je er eerst eens in voor je zo'n lompe naieve uitspraak doet als "cortez blabla"? Geen wonder dat niemand je hier serieus neemt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:51 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:50:06 Trump falsely claims Mexico has "almost 40,000 murders. 40,000." He initially tweeted the correct number, 33,341, then said "38,000," and now "40,000." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 16:50 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Mooi dat AOC ook hier op fok een boeman begint te worden.

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:55:45 Trump is now saying that China does not have a drug problem because it gives the death penalty to drug dealers. China has a drug problem. https://t.co/0GYPV8VC9D reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:57:31 Trump: "In a way, what I did by creating such a great economy, and if the opposing party got in, this economy would be down the tubes." He mocks people who say "the previous administration" had something to do with the good economy. He is rambling hard. reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:59:08 Trump lies that more people are trying to illegally immigrate than "probably" ever before. Apprehensions on the southwest border are a quarter of what they were two decades ago. From https://t.co/YAFxOMPWKE: https://t.co/kVoB7WGz1R reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 16:59:50 Trump is simultaneously claiming that he has done an amazing job on border security but that there is a crisis on border security. He says that is because "we haven't been given the equipment. We haven't been given the walls." reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:01:20 "We're right now in construction with wall in some of the most important areas," Trump lies. There is no new wall under construction. Construction on a short stretch of levee wall in the Rio Grande Valley is close to starting. reageer retweet

quote:

There are no TelePrompTers set up for the President’s remarks in the Rose Garden.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:03 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Keep on blathering, dumbfuck. See ya in court.

https://twitter.com/tamar(...)434977489731584?s=19

quote:

Pres. Trump: "Whether it's $8 billion or $2 billion or $1.5 billion, it's going to build a lot of wall. We're getting it done."

"We have renovated a tremendous amount of wall...that's where a lot of the money has been spent." https://t.co/CV4O2qBEB2 https://t.co/Mww6DAxc3a

quote:

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:11:15 Trump on tariffs: "You're talking to the wrong person, because I happen to like tariffs." He says the U.S. is taking in lots of money "from China"; the tariffs are paid by American importers of Chinese products, not China, though Chinese firms eat some of the cost. reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:13:08 Trump on the USMCA: "By the way...that's where the money's coming from - not directly, but indirectly - for the wall. Nobody wants to talk about that." That's because it's a lie; even if ratified, we don't know how it'll impact the US economy, and it won't pay for any initiative. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:17 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2(...)tter_impression=true

Beto O’Rourke wilt graag de muur tussen El Paso en Mexico slopen. Volgens mij is het bewezen dat de muur wel degelijk voor meer veiligheid heeft gezorgd.
Maar als het maar lijnrecht tegenover Trump staat dan is het natuurlijk een goed plan.
Waarom proberen de democraten toch zo hard om de uiterst linkervleugel van de democratische partij te pleasen? Er valt veel meer te halen in het redelijke midden.

twitter:

davidmackau twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:05:12 trump's intonation here — going UP on like every fifth WORD as he discussed the COURTS — was honestly hypnotic https://t.co/Ll9YQaHEFy reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:17:24 Trump is telling his usual lie about chain migration and the "young wiseguy" who committed the terror attack on Manhattan's West Side Highway in 2017. reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:18:21 Trump is telling his usual lie about the diversity visa lottery, falsely saying foreign governments put in their bad apples to dump them on the US: "I'm not going to put in my stars, I'm going to put in people I don't want." Individuals enter the lottery on their own. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:17 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2(...)tter_impression=true

Volgens mij is het bewezen dat de muur wel degelijk voor meer veiligheid heeft gezorgd.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:18 schreef mcmlxiv het volgende:

[..]

Want Trump is het redelijke midden?

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:20 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Nee hij bedoelt dat als Trump muren wil bouwen, het andere uiterste is om bestaande muren te slopen. Dat lijkt mij ook niet nodig en legt juist opnieuw focus op de muur. Dat is niet slim denk ik. Ze moeten zich meer focussen op echte issues in de VS (armoede, wapens, instortende infrastructuur, etc)

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:22:59 Asked about the DEA saying drugs cross at ports of entry, and stats showing crossings are down, and where he gets his numbers, Trump says, "I get my numbers from a lot of sources, like Homeland Security, primary. And the numbers I have from Homeland Security are a disaster." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:23 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
En wat zijn de kansen dat de noodtoestand niet door de rechter in stand gehouden wordt?

quote:

“I didn’t need to do this”, Trump says of national emergency declaration. How is it then an emergency?

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:23 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
Wat zijn nu de volgende stappen? Gaat Trump meteen geld krijgen nu? Hoelang gaat het duren voor de bouw begint? En wat zijn de kansen dat de noodtoestand niet door de rechter in stand gehouden wordt?

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:24:48 Trump again falsely says a deal with China would be "the biggest deal ever made." They're not talking about a comprehensive trade agreement, but even if they were, TPP covered more than twice as much trade, about $1.5 trillion. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:24 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dankzij dit soort opmerkingen?

[..]

quote:

Trump: "want to do it (wall) faster. I can do it over a longer period of time but don't want to."

Question: Where is the emergency if he just wants to do it faster?
Does he realize he's only hurting his own case?
#NonEmergency

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:26 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

KatiePhang twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:26:16 @kylegriffin1 Before even being used in a lawsuit, Congress can use it to destroy any argument in support of this so-called National Emergency. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:26 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:26:49 Trump notes Obama told him North Korea was biggest world problem. He says, "I believe he would have gone to war with North Korea...he told me he was...close to starting a big war with North Korea." There is zero evidence this is true; people around Obama have told me zero chance. reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 15-02-2019 om 17:28:10 Trump says that Abe of Japan nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize, giving him "the most beautiful copy of a letter" he sent to the Nobel committee. (Not sure about this.) He complains that although many other people think he should get it, he probably won't. reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:28 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Ik weet het niet to be honest. Ik denk dat Trumps fan base nu helemaal in extase is in ieder geval. Zal me weinig verbazen als de ratings omhoog gaan.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 15:01 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Hoezo?

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 februari 2019 17:32 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Zolang hij zijn base van 35-40% weet te houden, zal geen Republikein stemmen voor impeachment. Dit is rood vlees voor die base. Trump weet meer dan wij over wat er in het Mueller rapport zal komen te staan, wellicht sorteert hij hier op voor?