If every ounce of extraordinary evidence explained by the Chicago Police Department is true, former actor and likely future felon Jussie Smollett deserves to be prosecuted without mercy and to the fullest extent of the law. But if the latest announcement from the “Empire” producers are any indication, Hollywood will continue to handle the hate crime hoaxer with kid gloves. If they do, make no mistake, they will have blood on their hands.

“While these allegations are very disturbing, we are placing our trust in the legal system as the process plays out,” the producers of “Empire” said in a statement released by 20th Century Fox Television. “We are also aware of the effects of this process on the cast and crew members who work on our show and to avoid further disruption on set, we have decided to remove the role of ‘Jamal’ from the final two episodes of the season.”

In other words, the producers have left more than an ample amount of room to both take Smollett back in the future and absolve him of guilt by blaming writing him out of the show on “disruption,” not the fact that he likely committed a felony.

To recap: Smollett allegedly orchestrated a fake, racist and homophobic hate crime by paying two black, Nigerian brothers with checks to stage an assault at 2 a.m. in the middle of one of the worst polar vortex’s in recent Chicago history. The case against Smollett is watertight enough to go straight to a grand jury, and this is the level of skepticism that Hollywood is still espousing?

Smollett’s stupidity alone was criminal enough, but farcical lunacy aside, Smollett’s actions threatened more than whatever two suspects the cops could have erroneously rounded up and had the disgraced “Empire” actor testify against. Instead, Smollett threatened the safety and security of every black and gay man at risk of becoming the victim of a hate crime.

[Related: Chicago cops fume over Jussie Smollett dragging city ‘through the mud’]

Law enforcement looks willing to serve Smollett real justice and hard time, but Hollywood and its enablers haven’t been so adamant. They better buck up and get in line with the cops, and fast, or else they’ll make it abundantly clear that every ounce of publicity granted to Smollett wasn’t about anti-black or anti-gay discrimination, but simply exploiting the pain of marginalized groups to vilify Trump supporters.

In the aftermath of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings and the unraveling of the Julie Swetnick allegations, then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, referred her claims, including a sworn affidavit, to the Department of Justice and the FBI. It was the unequivocally ethical call, not merely to exonerate Kavanaugh, but to enhance the credibility of future rape and assault victims of the future. The attacks levied against legitimate victims of assault cases almost always center around a basic premise: anyone can lie and get away with it. If cases such as Swetnick’s and Smollett’s are investigated and condemned, not just by the law but also by society at large, then that premise is no longer true.

While false reports of hate crimes and assaults are rare, they happen, and in any case with exculpatory evidence, the purveyor of the hoax must be punished at every echelon of society.

“[It’s] the type of thing that happens way too often, especially in the Trump era,” wrote comedian Hari Kondabolu of the Smollett hoax in a tweet with 14,000 likes. “He may have taken advantage of a VERY REALISTIC FEAR.”

This sort of social justice exoneration of evil individuals to prove a greater point, in this case, the supposed malevolence of all Trump supporters, throws actual individuals and actual victims under the bus. If real crimes are perceived as justified retribution for the average offenses of greater social groups, are the people refusing to condemn them actually standing for victims, or just using their real pain to punish the unpalatable?

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/make-an-example-of-jussie-smollett-in-criminal-court-and-hollywood-alike

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/431154-graham-handful-of-gop-senators-will-vote-to-block-trumps-emergency

On Friday, Venezuelan forces shot at protesters along Venezuela’s border with Brazil escalating the growing conflict between embattled and illegitimate president Nicholas Maduro and U.S. backed, self-declared interim president Juan Guaido. That violence, which left two dead and at least 14 wounded, signals that there will be no easy resolution to the crisis in Venezuela.

The violence comes ahead of a Saturday deadline, called for by Guaido and supported by the Trump administration, for U.S. aid to enter the country.

With the goal of forcing regime change, the U.S. has sent millions of dollars wroth of food, medicine, and other necessities to the border. By attempting to force aid across the border, the U.S. hopes to destabilize Maduro’s grip on power, undercutting his control of supplies and facing the military to abandon support for his regime.

But if Friday’s violence is any indicator of events to come, the military is more likely to fire on anyone attempting to break through the barricaded border than to turn their weapons on their colleagues and Maduro.

For Venezuela, that means that Saturday’s looming showdown is not likely to trigger a peaceful transition of power or redirect the country away from its current trajectory of precipitous decline.

Instead, forcing a conflict over aid entering the country that is likely to result in more violence will only make it that much more difficult to incentivize the military to switch sides. That makes sense, once you’ve shot at and killed civilians, in addition to blocking food from reaching starving people, they’re far less likely to offer amnesty. That reality combined with Trump’s threat this week that should the military remain loyal to Maduro they’ll “lose everything,” means that the military is likely more entrenched in their support.

For Venezuela, where the key to power lies in securing the backing of the military, that means that the conflict over the country’s future is likely to worsen, potentially setting the stage for a long-term standoff that continues to deprive the country’s already suffering population of desperately needed supplies.

As the U.S. weighs further involvement and the possibility of using Saturday’s likely conflict as an excuse to throw more support behind Guaido, Washington must recognize that the violence already unfolding at the border makes a limited engagement and a quick resolution unlikely if not impossible.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/what-fridays-border-violence-means-for-venezuela

The Trump administration posted a final rule Friday that would require family planning clinics to be housed in separate buildings from abortion clinics, a move that would cut off Planned Parenthood from some federal funding.

The rule applies to a $286 million-a-year grant, known as Title X, that pays for birth control, testing of sexually transmitted diseases, and cancer screenings for 4 million low-income people. It requires the “physical and financial” separation of family planning services and abortion.

Federal funds are not permitted to go toward abortions except in the cases of rape, incest, or if a woman’s pregnancy threatens her life. Abortion foes, however, have long fought for rules along the lines of the one advanced Friday because they say allocating federal funds toward clinics such as Planned Parenthood frees up additional funds to provide abortions. The organization receives between $50 million and $60 million from Title X.

Planned Parenthood vowed to do everything it could to fight back, including through the courts.

“Planned Parenthood will fight the Trump-Pence administration through every avenue so this illegal, unethical rule never goes into effect,” said Dr. Leana Wen, Planned Parenthood’s president, speaking to reporters on a press call.

The organization said the requirements would force its facilities to build separate entrances and exits, construct new health centers, or hire a second staff of doctors, nurses, and administrative staff.

The rule takes effect 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register but clinics will have a year to comply with the new building requirements.

Planned Parenthood, which covers roughly 40 percent of people who use Title X to get medical services, has drawn criticism from the Trump administration because it provides abortions. Republicans in Congress have failed to cut off funding from Planned Parenthood, leaving anti-abortion groups to rely on the White House to advance their causes.

The rule does not defund all of Planned Parenthood, as some Republicans have called for, because the organization gets other government funding. Separately from government funding, it receives donations as well as reimbursement for services by insurers. The rule would, however, either force facilities to make major changes or forgo tens of millions of dollars.

The rule would also block providers from referring for abortions for the purpose of family planning or promoting the practice if they are receiving Title X grants. Critics have often referred to it as a “gag rule.”

“Imagine if the Trump administration prevented doctors from talking to our patients with diabetes about insulin,” Wen said in a statement after the rule came out. “It would never happen. Reproductive health care should be no different. Reproductive health care is healthcare and healthcare is a basic human right.”

The Trump administration has denied that the proposal would prevent doctors from counseling women about abortion.

One of the main purposes of the proposal is to shift federal funds from Planned Parenthood and other organizations that provide abortions to community and rural health centers, or otherwise pressure Planned Parenthood and other facilities to stop providing abortions.

The Family Research Council, an organization that opposes abortion, praised the rule and said Trump has “been persistent in fulfilling his pro-life campaign promises.”

“Planned Parenthood and other abortion centers will now have to choose between dropping their abortion services from any location that gets Title X dollars and moving those abortion operations offsite,” Tony Perkins, the group’s president, said in a statement. “Either way, this will loosen the group’s hold on tens of millions of tax dollars.”

The rule is similar to a 1988 policy instituted by former President Ronald Reagan, which required family planning services to have a “physical separation” and “separate personnel” from abortion providers.

Planned Parenthood and other groups challenged the Reagan-era rule in court. The Supreme Court allowed the policy to move forward, but it was never carried out completely. Then-President Bill Clinton rolled back the rules in 1994.

“We don’t believe this is less extreme than the Reagan rule,” Carrie Flaxman, deputy director of public policy litigation and law at Planned Parenthood, said in the call with reporters. “It does the same things that rule did… Congress has been very clear that rules like this one cannot be imposed.”

The Trump administration announced late last year that it would be giving family planning grants to 11 Planned Parenthood facilities, but did not specify the amount for the grants. Wen suggested to reporters that Planned Parenthood would consider no longer participating in Title X if the rules stay in place, saying her organization was committed to providing abortions, but stressed the first course of action would be to fight back.

“We have encountered countless attacks on our ability to provide reproductive healthcare to our patients,” she said. “This is just one more attack.”

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/trump-administration-moves-to-cut-off-some-planned-parenthood-funding

Weeks later, he agreed to plead guilty in a related case in federal court in Washington, D.C., and cooperate with prosecutors from Mr. Mueller’s office. But the deal blew up when a judge ruled he had repeatedly lied to the government about his contact 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 a covert attempt to influence the election results.

In the Manhattan case, the evidence presented to a grand jury appears to have been connected to loans issued by Citizens Bank in Rhode Island and Federal Savings Bank in Chicago.

The banks have received grand jury subpoenas for records relating to the loans they issued to Mr. Manafort, which were worth millions of dollars, people with knowledge of the matter said. The grand jury has also been hearing testimony about the loans. Citizens Bank has been cooperating with the investigation, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. A spokeswoman for Federal Savings Bank did not respond to a request for comment.

It is unclear precisely what charges Mr. Manafort would face, but they could include two state felonies: falsifying business records, if the evidence shows Mr. Manafort used the loan money for an unauthorized purpose, and mortgage fraud.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/nyregion/manafort-pardon-trump.html

Jussie Smollett‘s character has been removed from the final two episodes of the upcoming season of Fox’s “Empire,” the show’s executives said Friday.

“The events of the past few weeks have been incredibly emotional for all of us. Jussie has been an important member of our EMPIRE family for the past five years and we care about him deeply. While these allegations are very disturbing, we are placing our trust in the legal system as the process plays out,” co-creators Lee Daniels and Brett Mahoney and executive producers Danny Strong, Brian Grazer, Sanaa Hamri, Francie Calfo and Dennis Hammer told Fox News.

“We are also aware of the effects of this process on the cast and crew members who work on our show and to avoid further disruption on set, we have decided to remove the role of ‘Jamal’ from the final two episodes of the season,” the statement continued.

The second half of Season 5 of “Empire” returns to Fox on March 13.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT RETURNS TO ‘EMPIRE’ SET AFTER ARREST FOR ALLEGED STAGED ATTACK

While these allegations are very disturbing, we are placing our trust in the legal system as the process plays out

— “Empire” executive producers

This image released by Fox shows Jussie Smollett, left, and A.Z. Kelsey in a scene from the “Pride” episode of “Empire” which originally aired on Oct. 10, 2018. Smollett’s co-starring role in “Empire” may end up being the pinnacle of his career, industry observers and insiders said as the actor faces criminal charges that he faked a hate crime against himself.

The statement comes after Smollett returned to the Chicago set of “Empire” on Thursday just hours after posting bail on a felony disorderly conduct charge.

Earlier on Thursday, Fox said: “We understand the seriousness of this matter and we respect the legal process. We are evaluating the situation and we are considering our options.”

Smollett walked out of the Cook County jail in Chicago on Thursday afternoon, about two hours after a hearing in which the judge set his bond at $100,000. Taking a stern tone, the judge called his alleged staging of a hate crime “outrageous.”

CHICAGO POLICE BLAST JUSSIE SMOLLETT ‘PHONY ATTACK’: ‘BOGUS POLICE REPORTS CAUSE REAL HARM’

Following three weeks of mounting suspicions, Smollett, who is accused of filing a false police report, was charged Wednesday with felony disorderly conduct. He turned himself in at central booking early Thursday. If convicted, he’ll face up to three years in prison.

Chicago police laid out their case against Smollett Thursday morning, accusing the TV star of orchestrating an elaborate hoax via two “bogus” hate crimes — one employing an alleged attack, and one involving a threatening letter — all in order to secure a pay raise.

Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said Smollett orchestrated a “phony attack” in order to take “advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career.”

‘EMPIRE’ ACTOR JUSSIE SMOLLETT’S BOND SET AT $100G, JUDGE CALLS EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM ‘OUTRAGEOUS’

“I’m left hanging my head and asking why,” a visibly upset Johnson told reporters. “Why would anyone, especially an African-American man, use the symbolism of a noose to make false accusations? How could someone look at the hatred and suffering associated with that symbol? … How can an individual who has been embraced by the city of Chicago turn around and slap everyone in this city by making this false claim?”

He added, “Bogus police reports cause real harm.”

In a statement obtained by Fox News Thursday, Smollett’s legal counsel said the nation “witnessed an organized law enforcement spectacle that has no place in the American legal system.

“The presumption of innocence, a bedrock in the search for justice, was trampled upon at the expense of Mr. Smollett and notably, on the eve of a Mayoral election,” his team continued.

“Mr. Smollett is a young man of impeccable character and integrity who fiercely and solemnly maintains his innocence betrayed by a system that apparently wants to skip due process and proceed directly to sentencing.”

Smollett initially told police he was attacked by two masked men as he was walking home from a Subway sandwich shop around 2 a.m on Jan. 29. The actor, who is black and gay, said the men beat him, made derogatory comments and yelled, “This is MAGA country” — an apparent reference to President Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again” — before fleeing.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT’S CELEBRITY SUPPORTERS LARGELY SILENT AFTER CHICAGO POLICE BLAST ‘EMPIRE’ ACTOR’S ‘HOAX’

But this isn’t how prosecutors and police say things actually unfolded.

Prosecutors said at the actor’s bond hearing that Smollett misled police and the public to believe that his attackers were white when he told police his primary attacker was wearing a ski mask that only exposed the area around his eyes.

Police said Smollett hired two black men to help him carry out the hoax. According to prosecutors, Smollett told the two brothers to attack him, shout out the MAGA line, and put a rope around his neck.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT’S ALLEGED CHICAGO ATTACK DETAILS UNFOLD: A TIMELINE OF EVENTS

“He instructed them to get his attention by yelling ‘”Empire” F–‘ and ‘”Empire” n—–‘ [and] instructed them to give him a chance to appear to fight back,” Assistant State Attorney Risa Lanier said. Lanier said he provided them with $100 to purchase a red hat (the MAGA slogan is often found on red ballcaps) masks and gloves.

Superintendent Johnson said police found the “check that [Smollett] used to pay [the brothers]” to fake the beating, adding that he paid them $3,500 “for the two of them in total, and then $500 upon return.”

He said the attack “was staged” and “as far as we can tell, the scratching and bruising that you saw on [Smollett’s] face was most likely self-inflicted.”

Johnson was also incensed at the spotlight the incident put on his town for the past three weeks.

“This is shameful because it painted this city that we all love and work hard in, in a negative connotation,” he said. “To insinuate and stage a hate crime of that nature when he knew that as a celebrity he’d get a lot of attention… It’s despicable. It makes you wonder what’s going through someone’s mind.”

COOK COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY RECUSES HERSELF FROM JUSSIE SMOLLETT CASE

“As a black man, who spent his entire life living in the city of Chicago, I know the racial divide that exists here. I know how hard it’s been for our city and our nation to come together,” he said. Johnson added that “absolute justice would be an apology to this city that he smeared … admitting what he did and then be man enough to offer what he should offer up in terms of all the resources that were put into this.”

“Empire” is shot in Chicago and follows a black family as they navigate the ups and downs of the recording industry.

In less than a month, the 36-year-old changed from being the seemingly sympathetic victim of a hate crime to being accused of fabricating the entire affair for money and attention.

The felony charge emerged on the same day detectives and the two brothers, who were initially viewed as suspects, testified before a grand jury. Smollett’s attorneys met with prosecutors and police, but it was unknown what they discussed or whether Smollett attended the meeting.

CNN’S DON LEMON: IT’S ‘NOT HIS FAULT’ JUSSIE SMOLLETT LOST IN THE ‘COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION’

Police said the investigation shifted after they questioned the two brothers who were in the area that morning. Police said Thursday that Smollett spoke to the brothers an hour before and an hour after he says they helped the actor stage last month’s attack.

SMOLLETT’S LAWYERS DENY HE PLANNED ATTACK AFTER CHICAGO COPS CLAIM HE’S NO LONGER CONSIDERED A VICTIM IN CASE

Detective Commander Edward Wodnicki said at the news conference Thursday that after questioning the brothers for nearly two days last week, they were released and investigators no longer viewed them as suspects.

The brothers, who were identified by their attorney as Abimbola “Abel” and Olabinjo “Ola” Osundairo, were initially held for nearly 48 hours on suspicion of assaulting Smollett. Police said one of the men had worked on “Empire,” and Smollett’s attorneys said one of the men is the actor’s personal trainer, whom he hired to help get him physically ready for a music video. The actor released his debut album, “Sum of My Music,” last year.

Investigators said they have phone records that show there were extensive communications between Smollett and the brothers. Lanier said Thursday afternoon that one of the brothers, Abel, was a source of “designer drugs,” including Molly, for the actor.

SHARPTON, AT MEETING WITH KAMALA HARRIS, SAYS SMOLLETT SHOULD FACE ‘MAXIMUM’ PUNISHMENT IF ALLEGATIONS TRUE

Wodnicki said the brothers testified before a grand jury before prosecutors charged Smollett on Wednesday. Smollett was charged by prosecutors, not the grand jury. Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said the brothers appeared before the panel to “lock in their testimony.”Speaking outside the courthouse where the grand jury met on Wednesday, the brothers’ attorney said the two men testified for about two-and-a-half hours.

“There was a point where this story needed to be told, and they manned up and they said we’re going to correct this,” Gloria Schmidt said.

She said her clients did not care about a plea deal or immunity. “You don’t need immunity when you have the truth,” she said.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT DIDN’T GIVE BRETT KAVANAUGH THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE BUT ASKS FOR IT NOW

She also said her clients received money from Smollett, but she did not elaborate. Smollett has been active in LBGTQ issues, and initial reports of the assault drew outrage and support for him on social media, including from Sen. Kamala Harris of California and TV talk show host Ellen DeGeneres.

But several hours after Smollett was declared a suspect and the charges announced, there was little reaction from celebrities online.

TRUMP SLAMS JUSSIE SMOLLETT FOR SMEARING SUPPORTERS WITH ‘RACIST AND DANGEROUS COMMENTS’

Smollett has a record, one that concerns giving false information to police when he was pulled over on suspicion of driving under the influence. He later pleaded no contest to a reduced charge and took an alcohol education and treatment program.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smolletts-empire-role-cut-from-seasons-final-episode-creators-say

[What you need to know to start the day: Get New York Today in your inbox.]

The Manhattan district attorney’s office is preparing state criminal charges against Paul J. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, in an effort to ensure he will still face prison time even if the president pardons him for his federal crimes, according to several people with knowledge of the matter.

Mr. Manafort is scheduled to be sentenced next month for convictions in two federal cases brought by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III. He faces up to 25 years in prison for tax and bank fraud and additional time for conspiracy counts in a related case. It could effectively be a life sentence for Mr. Manafort, who turns 70 in April.

The president has broad power to issue pardons for federal crimes, but no such authority in state cases. And while there has been no clear indication that Mr. Trump intends to pardon Mr. Manafort, the president has spoken repeatedly of his pardon power and defended his former campaign chairman on a number of occasions, calling him a “brave man.”

The office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., first began investigating Mr. Manafort in 2017 in connection with loans he received from two banks. Those loans were also the subject of some of the counts in the federal indictment that led to his conviction last year. But the state prosecutors deferred their inquiry in order not to interfere with Mr. Mueller’s case.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/nyregion/manafort-pardon-trump.html

February 22 at 11:45 AM

Venezuelan soldiers opened fire on a group of civilians attempting to keep open a segment of the southern border with Brazil for deliveries of humanitarian aid, causing multiple injuries and the first fatalities of a massive opposition operation meant to deliver international relief to this devastated South American country, according to eyewitnesses and community leaders.

At 6:30 a.m. on Friday, a military convoy approached a checkpoint set up by an indigenous community in the southern village of Kumarakapay, on the main artery linking Venezuela to Brazil. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on Thursday ordered the closure of Venezuela’s border with Brazil.

When the volunteers sought to block the military vehicles by standing in front of them, soldiers began firing assault rifles. At least two people were killed and a dozen wounded, at least three of them seriously. The dead were named as a woman, Zorayda Rodriguez, 42, and a man, Rolando Garcia.

The Trump administration, which opposes Maduro, promptly denounced the shooting. “The United States condemns the killings, attacks, and the hundreds of arbitrary detentions that have taken place in Venezuela,” a State Department spokesman said. “We stand with the victims’ families in demanding justice and accountability.” (Vice President Pence, who is one of the administration’s most forceful Maduro critics, is scheduled to be in Colombia on Monday for a scheduled meeting of the Lima Group — a consortium of Latin American countries, plus Canada, that have called for Maduro’s ouster.)

In tweets, opposition leader Juan Guaidó — who was en route to the Colombian border — said: “In the community of Kumarakapay, 2 soldiers shot against Pemones that were at a checkpoint. The result of this crime is 12 people wounded and one dead. Our solidarity is with them. It will not go unpunished.”

In a separate tweet, he added, “To soldiers: between today and tomorrow you will define how to be remembered. We know you are with the people, you have made it clear to us. Tomorrow you can demonstrate it.”

At least 30 neighbors took to the streets following the shootings, kidnapping three soldiers, according to Carmen Elena Silva, 48, who had joined the roadblock, and George Bello, a spokesman for the indigenous community.

“The majority of the people support the entrance of humanitarian aid, and we want to keep our border open,” Silva said. “This is help, not war. . . . Every day more children die.”

Jorge Perez, a local councilman in Gran Sabana, the district in which the town is located, said he was present when the soldiers opened fire. “I ask the armed forces, is it constitutional for them to fire against unarmed indigenous people?” he said. “Is it constitutional to kill indigenous people?”

A spokesmen for Venezuela’s Communications Ministry said it could not yet comment on the incident.

The activists belonged to the Pemones indigenous tribe that has joined the opposition effort to haul in aid donated by the United States and other countries from bordering nations on Saturday. The aid is coming from nations — including the United States — that have demanded that Maduro step down. His government has ordered a full blockade of the aid and dispatched the military to reinforce Venezuela’s borders.

The incident appeared to be the most violent confrontation yet in a still-unfolding operation in which thousands of volunteers are seeking to reach bordering nations to haul in the aid. Opposition leaders feared more clashes on Saturday, when volunteers plan to bring aid over the border.

Tensions between the military and the indigenous Pemones involved in the fatal exchange have been rising for years over the fast spread of illegal gold mining on their traditional lands. Opposition leaders convening in San Cristobal, the largest Venezuelan metropolis near the Colombian border, denounced the use of excessive force.

“We have to condemn what happened today,” said Maria Gabriela Chávez, a coordinator for environmental issues in the National Assembly, the opposition-controlled legislature that Maduro stripped of its powers in 2017. “In the new Venezuela that is coming, we will assume this pain and experience as a lesson.”

In this city of nearly 300,000, opposition lawmakers outlined plans for an operation Saturday meant to receive aid shipments that have piled up in Cucuta, a Colombian border city.

Franklin Duarte, an opposition official, announced four points of departure starting at 3 a.m. He said volunteers would be bused to the four international bridges that connect bordering cities to Cucuta, to help the aid come in. Those volunteers who are planning to stay in San Cristobal, he said, would march toward the city’s military barracks holding flags.

“Unlike protests in the past, this time the people will stay in the street until containers of humanitarian aid come in,” he said.

“Tomorrow will mark the before and after for Venezuelans fighting to get back their democracy,” said Edgar Zambrano, vice president of the National Assembly.

The governor of the state of Tachira, Laidy Gomez, called on both sides to avoid violence.

“To violence, we have to respond with peace, and to tell the violent that we, the good ones, are better than that, that we do not want a war.”

The Maduro government, however, was reinforcing its efforts to stop the aid from coming in. In a statement, Colombian authorities said that shipping containers — overturned by the government earlier this month to block the Tienditas bridge connecting Venezuela and Colombia — were welded in place overnight.

“Last night, while Cúcuta and the world were preparing to raise their voices in unison for the Freedom of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorship welded the containers to the structure of the Unity Bridge, as if it were a metaphor for the dictator clinging to power,” Colombian migration authorities said in a statement.

Carol Morello in Washington contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/one-dead-multiple-injured-after-venezuelan-national-guard-opens-fire-on-opposition-supporters/2019/02/22/09d60f1a-3518-11e9-8375-e3dcf6b68558_story.html

“);var a = g[r.size_id].split(“x”).map((function(e) {return Number(e)})), s = u(a, 2);o.width = s[0],o.height = s[1]}o.rubiconTargeting = (Array.isArray(r.targeting) ? r.targeting : []).reduce((function(e, r) {return e[r.key] = r.values[0],e}), {rpfl_elemid: n.adUnitCode}),e.push(o)} else l.logError(“Rubicon bid adapter Error: bidRequest undefined at index position:” + t, c, d);return e}), []).sort((function(e, r) {return (r.cpm || 0) – (e.cpm || 0)}))},getUserSyncs: function(e, r, t) {if (!A && e.iframeEnabled) {var i = “”;return t && “string” == typeof t.consentString && (“boolean” == typeof t.gdprApplies ? i += “?gdpr=” + Number(t.gdprApplies) + “&gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString : i += “?gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString),A = !0,{type: “iframe”,url: n + i}}},transformBidParams: function(e, r) {return l.convertTypes({accountId: “number”,siteId: “number”,zoneId: “number”}, e)}};function m() {return [window.screen.width, window.screen.height].join(“x”)}function b(e, r) {var t = f.config.getConfig(“pageUrl”);return e.params.referrer ? t = e.params.referrer : t || (t = r.refererInfo.referer),e.params.secure ? t.replace(/^http:/i, “https:”) : t}function _(e, r) {var t = e.params;if (“video” === r) {var i = [];return t.video && t.video.playerWidth && t.video.playerHeight ? i = [t.video.playerWidth, t.video.playerHeight] : Array.isArray(l.deepAccess(e, “mediaTypes.video.playerSize”)) && 1 === e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize.length ? i = e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize[0] : Array.isArray(e.sizes) && 0

‘);$vidEndSlate.removeClass(‘video__end-slate–inactive’).addClass(‘video__end-slate–active’);}};CNN.autoPlayVideoExist = (CNN.autoPlayVideoExist === true) ? true : false;var configObj = {thumb: ‘none’,video: ‘politics/2019/02/18/trump-national-emergency-lawsuits-democrats-california-collins-dnt-lead-vpx.cnn’,width: ‘100%’,height: ‘100%’,section: ‘domestic’,profile: ‘expansion’,network: ‘cnn’,markupId: ‘large-media_0’,adsection: ‘const-article-pagetop’,frameWidth: ‘100%’,frameHeight: ‘100%’,posterImageOverride: {“mini”:{“width”:220,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-small-169.jpg”,”height”:124},”xsmall”:{“width”:307,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-medium-plus-169.jpg”,”height”:173},”small”:{“width”:460,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-large-169.jpg”,”height”:259},”medium”:{“width”:780,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”http://www.noticiasdodia.onlinenewsbusiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/190217111112-trump-0215-exlarge-169-2.jpg”,”height”:438},”large”:{“width”:1100,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-super-169.jpg”,”height”:619},”full16x9″:{“width”:1600,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-full-169.jpg”,”height”:900},”mini1x1″:{“width”:120,”type”:”jpg”,”uri”:”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190217111112-trump-0215-small-11.jpg”,”height”:120}}},autoStartVideo = false,isVideoReplayClicked = false,callbackObj,containerEl,currentVideoCollection = [],currentVideoCollectionId = ”,isLivePlayer = false,mediaMetadataCallbacks,mobilePinnedView = null,moveToNextTimeout,mutePlayerEnabled = false,nextVideoId = ”,nextVideoUrl = ”,turnOnFlashMessaging = false,videoPinner,videoEndSlateImpl;if (CNN.autoPlayVideoExist === false) {autoStartVideo = true;if (autoStartVideo === true) {if (turnOnFlashMessaging === true) {autoStartVideo = false;containerEl = jQuery(document.getElementById(configObj.markupId));CNN.VideoPlayer.showFlashSlate(containerEl);} else {CNN.autoPlayVideoExist = true;}}}configObj.autostart = CNN.Features.enableAutoplayBlock ? false : autoStartVideo;CNN.VideoPlayer.setPlayerProperties(configObj.markupId, autoStartVideo, isLivePlayer, isVideoReplayClicked, mutePlayerEnabled);CNN.VideoPlayer.setFirstVideoInCollection(currentVideoCollection, configObj.markupId);videoEndSlateImpl = new CNN.VideoEndSlate(‘large-media_0’);function findNextVideo(currentVideoId) {var i,vidObj;if (currentVideoId && jQuery.isArray(currentVideoCollection) && currentVideoCollection.length > 0) {for (i = 0; i 0) {videoEndSlateImpl.showEndSlateForContainer();if (mobilePinnedView) {mobilePinnedView.disable();}}}}callbackObj = {onPlayerReady: function (containerId) {var playerInstance,containerClassId = ‘#’ + containerId;CNN.VideoPlayer.handleInitialExpandableVideoState(containerId);CNN.VideoPlayer.handleAdOnCVPVisibilityChange(containerId, CNN.pageVis.isDocumentVisible());if (CNN.Features.enableMobileWebFloatingPlayer &&Modernizr &&(Modernizr.phone || Modernizr.mobile || Modernizr.tablet) &&CNN.VideoPlayer.getLibraryName(containerId) === ‘fave’ &&jQuery(containerClassId).parents(‘.js-pg-rail-tall__head’).length > 0 &&CNN.contentModel.pageType === ‘article’) {playerInstance = FAVE.player.getInstance(containerId);mobilePinnedView = new CNN.MobilePinnedView({element: jQuery(containerClassId),enabled: false,transition: CNN.MobileWebFloatingPlayer.transition,onPin: function () {playerInstance.hideUI();},onUnpin: function () {playerInstance.showUI();},onPlayerClick: function () {if (mobilePinnedView) {playerInstance.enterFullscreen();playerInstance.showUI();}},onDismiss: function() {CNN.Videx.mobile.pinnedPlayer.disable();playerInstance.pause();}});/* Storing pinned view on CNN.Videx.mobile.pinnedPlayer So that all players can see the single pinned player */CNN.Videx = CNN.Videx || {};CNN.Videx.mobile = CNN.Videx.mobile || {};CNN.Videx.mobile.pinnedPlayer = mobilePinnedView;}if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (jQuery(containerClassId).parents(‘.js-pg-rail-tall__head’).length) {videoPinner = new CNN.VideoPinner(containerClassId);videoPinner.init();} else {CNN.VideoPlayer.hideThumbnail(containerId);}}},onContentEntryLoad: function(containerId, playerId, contentid, isQueue) {CNN.VideoPlayer.showSpinner(containerId);},onContentPause: function (containerId, playerId, videoId, paused) {if (mobilePinnedView) {CNN.VideoPlayer.handleMobilePinnedPlayerStates(containerId, paused);}},onContentMetadata: function (containerId, playerId, metadata, contentId, duration, width, height) {var endSlateLen = jQuery(document.getElementById(containerId)).parent().find(‘.js-video__end-slate’).eq(0).length;CNN.VideoSourceUtils.updateSource(containerId, metadata);if (endSlateLen > 0) {videoEndSlateImpl.fetchAndShowRecommendedVideos(metadata);}},onAdPlay: function (containerId, cvpId, token, mode, id, duration, blockId, adType) {/* Dismissing the pinnedPlayer if another video players plays an Ad */CNN.VideoPlayer.dismissMobilePinnedPlayer(containerId);clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner(containerId);if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== ‘undefined’ && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);videoPinner.animateDown();}}},onAdPause: function (containerId, playerId, token, mode, id, duration, blockId, adType, instance, isAdPause) {if (mobilePinnedView) {CNN.VideoPlayer.handleMobilePinnedPlayerStates(containerId, isAdPause);}},onTrackingFullscreen: function (containerId, PlayerId, dataObj) {CNN.VideoPlayer.handleFullscreenChange(containerId, dataObj);if (mobilePinnedView &&typeof dataObj === ‘object’ &&FAVE.Utils.os === ‘iOS’ && !dataObj.fullscreen) {jQuery(document).scrollTop(mobilePinnedView.getScrollPosition());playerInstance.hideUI();}},onContentPlay: function (containerId, cvpId, event) {var playerInstance,prevVideoId;if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === ‘function’) {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout(‘restoreEpicAds’);}clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner(containerId);if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== ‘undefined’ && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);videoPinner.animateDown();}}},onContentReplayRequest: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== ‘undefined’ && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);var $endSlate = jQuery(document.getElementById(containerId)).parent().find(‘.js-video__end-slate’).eq(0);if ($endSlate.length > 0) {$endSlate.removeClass(‘video__end-slate–active’).addClass(‘video__end-slate–inactive’);}}}},onContentBegin: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {if (mobilePinnedView) {mobilePinnedView.enable();}/* Dismissing the pinnedPlayer if another video players plays a video. */CNN.VideoPlayer.dismissMobilePinnedPlayer(containerId);CNN.VideoPlayer.mutePlayer(containerId);if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === ‘function’) {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout(‘removeEpicAds’);}CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner(containerId);clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);CNN.VideoSourceUtils.clearSource(containerId);jQuery(document).triggerVideoContentStarted();},onContentComplete: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === ‘function’) {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout(‘restoreFreewheel’);}navigateToNextVideo(contentId, containerId);},onContentEnd: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== ‘undefined’ && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(false);}}},onCVPVisibilityChange: function (containerId, cvpId, visible) {CNN.VideoPlayer.handleAdOnCVPVisibilityChange(containerId, visible);}};if (typeof configObj.context !== ‘string’ || configObj.context.length 0) {configObj.adsection = window.ssid;}CNN.autoPlayVideoExist = (CNN.autoPlayVideoExist === true) ? true : false;CNN.VideoPlayer.getLibrary(configObj, callbackObj, isLivePlayer);});CNN.INJECTOR.scriptComplete(‘videodemanddust’);

(CNN)House Democrats introduced a resolution Friday to block President Donald Trump’s effort to build a wall on the southern border through his emergency powers, setting up votes in Congress to rebuke the President’s proclamation.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/22/politics/house-democrats-trump-national-emergency-vote/index.html

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said Thursday his exit from the Justice Department is coming “a lot later” than he expected amid reporting that special counsel Robert Mueller could wrap up the Russia investigation within a week.

Rosenstein made the comment during a speech to his alma mater, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, which he called “one of my last significant events” as the No. 2 law enforcement official in the nation.

“My time as a law enforcement official is coming to an end, a lot later than I expected,” he said.

The speech comes one day after CNN reported Attorney General William Barr could announce as soon as early next week the end of Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller to the special counsel role in May 2017 in the days after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, has overseen the day-to-day operations of the inquiry, which is also examining possible collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and the Kremlin and whether the president attempted to obstruct justice.

A DOJ source told CNN on Sunday that Rosenstein plans to leave the department by mid-March, claiming that he always intended to leave after helping with the transition for his successor. In January, a DOJ source told the Washington Examiner that Rosenstein was expected to depart within weeks as he only always expected to serve for about two years.

In recent days, Trump has accused Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe of planning to carry out an “illegal and treasonous” plan against him.

McCabe, who is promoting his new book this week, provided the first on-the-record corroboration of months-old reports that Rosenstein told Justice Department officials about wearing a “wire” to record conversations with Trump and that he had discussed invoking the 25th Amendment against the president to remove him from office in the days after Comey was fired.

The Justice Department claims his version of events was “inaccurate and factually incorrect” and that Rosenstein never authorized the use of a wire to secretly record Trump.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hint-about-mueller-closure-rod-rosenstein-says-doj-exit-coming-a-lot-later-than-expected


Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders occupy similar ideological space and will inevitably be competing for many of the same voters. For the time being, they seem intent on avoiding one another. | Jose Luis Magana/AP Photo

2020 elections

The two are heading for a likely collision, but so far they seem intent on avoiding one another.

The Bernie Sanders vs. Elizabeth Warren primary is on.

The run-up to their presidential announcements sparked concern on the left that having both of them in the race would split the activist base and clear the way for a more moderate nominee. Now that they’re both in, the competition between the two promises to be one of the more intriguing subplots of the primary.

Story Continued Below

Sanders starts out indisputably ahead. Bolstered by the grassroots army he amassed in 2016, the Vermont senator easily outraised Warren in the first 24 hours of their campaigns. He’s far ahead of her in the polls, too, trailing only former Vice President Joe Biden, who hasn’t announced whether he’ll run.

Sanders’ camp is treating Warren accordingly. He and his aides are avoiding any whiff of public criticism of Warren. They declined even to respond when her allies argued last week that Sanders entering the race would benefit her.

Warren’s team downplays the metrics surrounding their campaign launches, instead taking the long view. If Sanders falters after weeks or months as a front-runner — he is guaranteed to draw more scrutiny now than he did in 2016, given his strength from the outset — the Massachusetts senator wants to be seen as a more viable alternative to beat Donald Trump in a general election.

But the fact remains that the two occupy similar ideological space and will inevitably be competing for many of the same voters. For the time being, they seem intent on avoiding one another.

Warren has sought to head off comparisons with Sanders by creating her own space where she hopes she’ll catch fire. She’s gone out of her way to avoid the “socialism” tag — declaring she is “a capitalist to her bones” — putting her in a position to step in if Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, is rejected for being too far left. (On Thursday, he came under fire from Florida Democrats after declining to answer whether Venezuela’s socialist dictator, Nicolas Maduro, should step down.)

In stump speeches, Warren is not just embracing “Medicare for All” — one of Sanders’ 2016 rallying cries — but attempting to offer her own distinct platform with a menu of proposals such as providing free child care for millions of low-income children.

“One of the mistakes that a lot of presidential candidates make is they try to take the lessons from the last race and apply them to the current campaign,” said Doug Rubin, a Boston-based strategist and past Warren adviser. “I think what Elizabeth is doing, she’s already moving the debate aggressively forward with her tax on the wealthy and child care proposal. She’s not just trying to rerun the last race in a better way, she’s trying to run on new issues that really matter to people.”

Her allies are arguing that she actually benefits from Sanders being in the race, because the “center of gravity” will now move toward their similar economic populist and anti-Wall Street message. Eventually, they believe, voters will decide that she’s the candidate best able to defeat Trump, and offering the best fit for an era in which more record-breaking numbers of women are running for and winning elected office.

“Both are very good on the issues that are popular to voters, and both would conceivably beat Trump,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the pro-Warren Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “We feel Elizabeth Warren is the most electable of the Democratic primary field because she’s a progressive woman who voters see as instinctively fighting for working people and willing to challenge powerful interests.”

Asked about Green’s theory, Sanders’ team didn’t bite.

“Sen. Warren has been a fighter for working people,” said spokeswoman Arianna Jones, “and Bernie considers her a close friend. We look forward to a positive campaign of ideas.”

The Sanders campaign is making a concerted effort to hire women and minorities, unveiling a diverse group of top hires and campaign co-chairs this week. His 2016 campaign was criticized for being too white and male, and for allowing alleged sexual harassment to fester.

In an interview with The Young Turks on Tuesday, Sanders suggested that he would seek a woman younger than him as a running mate.

“I think we would look for somebody who is maybe not of the same gender that I am, and maybe somebody might be a couple of years younger than me,” he said, “and somebody who can take the progressive banner as vice president and carry it all over this country.”

But Sanders’ entry is already creating a strategic challenge for Warren’s campaign on several fronts. Chief among them is small-dollar fundraising. Beyond the sheer competition for small dollars, each time Sanders reports a blockbuster haul it will be compared with Warren’s numbers.

Activists and friendly media outlets already are contrasting the two candidates’ handling of race and gender issues, their policies and their theory of change in government. After his launch, Indivisible’s national political director praised Sanders on Twitter as having an “exciting vision” on Medicare for All and free college tuition, but added that she “laments his racially agnostic language” while discussing economic inequality.

An article in Jacobin, a socialist magazine, described them both as anti-establishment and anti-Wall Street, but said Sanders “prefers to use the government’s power to tax and spend directly to meet America’s needs — or replace the market altogether,” while Warren “wants to empower regulators and rejigger markets to shape ‘pre-distribution’ income, before taxes.”

Had Sanders opted not to run, Warren would have been well-positioned to win over many of his supporters. According to the most recent Morning Consult online survey, 26 percent of Sanders’ supporters said Biden was their second choice and 16 percent said Warren was their second choice.

Sanders’ entry obviously dampens those prospects for Warren.

“Had Bernie decided not to run, I think 90 percent of his people would have flooded to Elizabeth Warren. There’s almost no question in my mind,” said Jonathan Tasini, who served as a national surrogate for Sanders in 2016 and who authored “The Essential Bernie Sanders and His Vision for America.” “If either Bernie or Elizabeth Warren end up being the nominee, the other part of that family will be satisfied. I can’t think of people who are Elizabeth Warren supporters who would be upset or vice versa.”

In 2016, Sanders absorbed a fairly robust movement of progressives who tried to draft Warren to run against Hillary Clinton. The “Ready for Warren” campaign grew to 60,000 people nationwide before turning into a larger “Run Warren Run” initiative.

When Warren declined, many of those people fled to Sanders.

Charles Lenchner, founder of Ready for Warren and then one of the founders of an early drafting effort for Sanders, said dynamics have changed since he attempted to enlist Warren in 2016.

“I think her influence in the primary is a good one,” Lenchner said. However: “Warren surrounds herself with consultants who are lifers in Washington. … She does not surround herself with people who are activists of movements who get arrested and all of that stuff.”

“I think she is not, at this time, doing the kinds of things that will create a relationship between a grass-roots movement and her primary campaign,” he added.

The New Hampshire primary could prove decisive for each of them, given that they hail from neighboring states.

Sanders walloped Hillary Clinton there in 2016. But Warren has worked to steadily make inroads: pumping money to help New Hampshire Democrats win 2018 races, hiring key operatives early and already hosting four campaign events there since January. On Friday, she’ll keynote a major fundraiser for the state’s Democratic Party.

Sanders, though, has the polling edge right now. A University of Massachusetts Amherst survey released this week found that 20 percent of likely Democratic voters said they would back him if the primary contest were held today, while 9 percent said they would support Warren. Biden was in the lead with 28 percent.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/22/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-2020-1179747

Source Article from https://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/ice-man-who-died-after-shooting-at-a-napa-deputy/article_f4ab2f51-1a99-55e1-879e-3b19771e29bf.html

WASHINGTON — House Democrats planned to push ahead Friday with a measure that seeks to terminate President Donald Trump’s emergency declaration that he issued last week in order to circumvent Congress and build his wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, was set to file a joint resolution in the House that would repeal the president’s declaration. The measure was to be filed during the chamber’s pro forma session, since lawmakers are on recess and don’t return to Washington until Monday.

As of Wednesday, more than 90 House Democrats had signed onto the legislation as official co-sponsors.

In a letter circulated to lawmakers of both parties, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., urged all members to back it, saying the president’s move “undermines the separation of powers and Congress’s power of the purse.”

“The House will move swiftly to pass this bill,” Pelosi said in the letter, specifying that it would be reported out of committee within 15 calendar days and would be considered on the House floor three days after that. “The President’s decision to go outside the bounds of the law to try to get what he failed to achieve in the constitutional legislative process violates the Constitution and must be terminated.”

Trump declared the national emergency in a speech from the White House Rose Garden last Friday after Congress refused to allot his full funding request for an actual wall in a bipartisan government spending package.

In declaring the emergency, he expected to have access to $8 billion for the wall, including the $1.375 billion in the funding package that he signed last week, $600 million in Treasury forfeiture, $2.5 billion from the drug interdiction program and $3.6 billion in military construction from the Defense Department, a senior White House official said.

The move has drawn bipartisan criticism, with Democrats blasting Trump and Republicans warning him that it sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents.

Under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, Congress has the ability to try to end an emergency status instituted by the president. Democrats in the House will have no problem passing the resolution given their 235-197 majority.

Once it passes the House, the measure would be sent to the Senate, where unlike most pieces of legislation, GOP leaders could not block it from reaching the floor. The federal law requires that the Senate take up the House-passed resolution within 18 days.

The resolution is considered “privileged” — which means it would not be subject to a filibuster and require 60 votes to move forward. Instead, it would simply require 51 votes to pass. If all 47 Democrats were to support the measure, they would need only four Republican defections to pass it — in a chamber that has not lacked for GOP criticism of the president’s move.

In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, said the president’s declaration represented a sharp expansion of executive power.

“That’s why you see an awful lot of us concerned about this,” said Johnson, who said he would hear the president out — but did not rule out voting on a resolution of disapproval in the Senate, saying he would “decide when I actually have to vote on it.”

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said on Monday that the money Trump would be raiding from the military construction budget is needed for facilities around the country.

“So I think it’s a bad idea,” he told reporters at Miami International Airport. “I also think it’s a bad idea because usually emergency declarations are for situations in which Congress doesn’t have time to organize itself to vote on it. The Congress just had a vote on this and it just expressed itself.”

A number of other GOP senators have publicly expressed skepticism or opposition to the declaration — with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, saying she would back a measure limited to disapproval of the declaration itself. “If it’s a ‘clean’ disapproval resolution, I will support it,” she said, according to the Associated Press.

If both the House and Senate were to pass the resolution, it would send a major symbolic message — but its impact would be limited to symbolism: administration aides have already made clear Trump would veto any effort that interfered with his declaration, and the measure is unlikely to attract anywhere near the GOP support needed to overturn a presidential veto.

So Democrats are pushing back on other fronts, looking to nullify the declaration by challenging it in court, with California, New York and 14 other states filing a lawsuit on Monday to try to block the move.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-push-ahead-bid-terminate-trump-s-emergency-declaration-n974091

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said Thursday his exit from the Justice Department is coming “a lot later” than he expected amid reporting that special counsel Robert Mueller could wrap up the Russia investigation within a week.

Rosenstein made the comment during a speech to his alma mater, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, which he called “one of my last significant events” as the No. 2 law enforcement official in the nation.

“My time as a law enforcement official is coming to an end, a lot later than I expected,” he said.

The speech comes one day after CNN reported Attorney General William Barr could announce as soon as early next week the end of Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller to the special counsel role in May 2017 in the days after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, has overseen the day-to-day operations of the inquiry, which is also examining possible collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and the Kremlin and whether the president attempted to obstruct justice.

A DOJ source told CNN on Sunday that Rosenstein plans to leave the department by mid-March, claiming that he always intended to leave after helping with the transition for his successor. In January, a DOJ source told the Washington Examiner that Rosenstein was expected to depart within weeks as he only always expected to serve for about two years.

In recent days, Trump has accused Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe of planning to carry out an “illegal and treasonous” plan against him.

McCabe, who is promoting his new book this week, provided the first on-the-record corroboration of months-old reports that Rosenstein told Justice Department officials about wearing a “wire” to record conversations with Trump and that he had discussed invoking the 25th Amendment against the president to remove him from office in the days after Comey was fired.

The Justice Department claims his version of events was “inaccurate and factually incorrect” and that Rosenstein never authorized the use of a wire to secretly record Trump.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hint-about-mueller-closure-rod-rosenstein-says-doj-exit-coming-a-lot-later-than-expected

Warren has also said she supports reparations, according to the Times, though her campaign declined to provide further details to the newspaper.

The Hill has reached out to both campaigns for comment.

Warren and Harris are both pursuing the Democratic nomination for president in 2020 and the Times noted that previous Democratic presidential candidates have not supported reparations.

Among those who have not backed the policy are former President Obama, 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonHillicon Valley: Trump pushes to speed up 5G rollout | Judge hits Roger Stone with full gag order | Google ends forced arbitration | Advertisers leave YouTube after report on pedophile ring 4 ways Hillary looms over the 2020 race Hillary Clinton met with Biden, Klobuchar to talk 2020: report MORE and her Democratic rival that year, Sen. Bernie SandersBernard (Bernie) SandersKamala Harris: Trump administration ‘targeting’ California for political purposes Harry Reid says he won’t make 2020 endorsement until after Nevada caucus Gillibrand to appear on Fox News Monday night MORE (I-Vt.), the Times noted. Sanders is running for president again in 2020.

Supporters have said the policy is necessary to address slavery and other racist parts of U.S. history. Such a move could cost several trillion dollars, according to experts.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/430999-warren-harris-back-reparations-for-black-americans-affected-by-slavery

In his State of the Union address, President Trump announced that he’d meet North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un for a second time in Vietnam at the end of February. It’s nearly upon us, and it promises to be highly significant, both for Trump’s presidency and for world history.

With little progress pushing the tyrant to give up nuclear weapons, there’s speculation that this meeting might be less about denuclearization and more about formally ending the Korean War. Trump alluded to as much, talking up “a historic push for peace” and leaving denuclearization unmentioned.

But without real progress on denuclearization, an end to the formal state of war would be a failure for Trump; hostilities ended in 1953. Nevertheless, a peace deal would have many benefits. On one side, it would allow Kim to claim greater legitimacy, pave the way for easing some sanctions, and grant the North leverage to argue that the U.S. and United Nations forces should leave the Korean Peninsula. On the other, a peace deal would make peace in the peninsula less precarious and end Pyongyang’s custom of lobbing missiles over Japan and menacing South Korea with military incursions.

A deal might even help open the closed country. People chuckled at Trump’s pitch to Kim, a video showing the possibilities of a North Korea filled with luxury resorts and foreign investment, but it is not an impossible dream. There is also good, though qualified, news in the fact that Kim seems to be moving against hard-liners and hawks within his regime.

Be all that as it may, North Korea’s leaders have a way of luring well-meaning diplomats deep into talks, only to walk away and return to its warlike posture. Trump must be wary not to hand credibility to Kim and get nothing in return. He will have failed if he does not move Kim on nukes, and he must not let talk of peace overshadow that goal.

Kim has done nothing yet to reduce his nuclear capabilities and seems to have little intention of doing so. He has concealed his weapons and refused to work in good faith with U.S. negotiators, which is all familiar to anyone who has read Pyongyang’s well-thumbed playbook.

Trump can be proud if he gets a peace deal, but only if it is accompanied by nuclear security. If he gets the first and not the second, he will have been duped.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/dont-be-kim-jong-uns-dupe-mr-trump

“);var a = g[r.size_id].split(“x”).map((function(e) {return Number(e)})), s = u(a, 2);o.width = s[0],o.height = s[1]}o.rubiconTargeting = (Array.isArray(r.targeting) ? r.targeting : []).reduce((function(e, r) {return e[r.key] = r.values[0],e}), {rpfl_elemid: n.adUnitCode}),e.push(o)} else l.logError(“Rubicon bid adapter Error: bidRequest undefined at index position:” + t, c, d);return e}), []).sort((function(e, r) {return (r.cpm || 0) – (e.cpm || 0)}))},getUserSyncs: function(e, r, t) {if (!A && e.iframeEnabled) {var i = “”;return t && “string” == typeof t.consentString && (“boolean” == typeof t.gdprApplies ? i += “?gdpr=” + Number(t.gdprApplies) + “&gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString : i += “?gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString),A = !0,{type: “iframe”,url: n + i}}},transformBidParams: function(e, r) {return l.convertTypes({accountId: “number”,siteId: “number”,zoneId: “number”}, e)}};function m() {return [window.screen.width, window.screen.height].join(“x”)}function b(e, r) {var t = f.config.getConfig(“pageUrl”);return e.params.referrer ? t = e.params.referrer : t || (t = r.refererInfo.referer),e.params.secure ? t.replace(/^http:/i, “https:”) : t}function _(e, r) {var t = e.params;if (“video” === r) {var i = [];return t.video && t.video.playerWidth && t.video.playerHeight ? i = [t.video.playerWidth, t.video.playerHeight] : Array.isArray(l.deepAccess(e, “mediaTypes.video.playerSize”)) && 1 === e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize.length ? i = e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize[0] : Array.isArray(e.sizes) && 0

Washington (CNN)Friday may be the day that special counsel Robert Mueller tells all in the long-running court saga of Paul Manafort’s prosecution.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/22/politics/manafort-sentecing-memo-preview/index.html

A federal judge has completely barred former Trump political adviser Roger Stone from speaking publicly about his ongoing prosecution on obstruction and false statement charges, after a picture of the judge appeared on Stone’s Instagram this week with what appeared to be crosshairs in the background.

The ruling followed a hearing on Thursday in which Stone took the stand to insist he was “heartfully sorry” for the picture, which Stone said he had reviewed prior to posting it — although he suggested someone else had first selected the image.

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson tore into Stone during the proceeding, saying she simply didn’t believe his explanation that an unnamed “volunteer” was to blame.

“I have serious doubts about whether you learned anything at all,” Jackson said. “From this moment on, the defendant may not speak publicly about this case — period. No statements about the case on TV, radio, print reporters, or Internet. No posts on social media. [You] may not comment on the case through surrogates. You may send out emails about donating to the Roger Stone defense fund.”

Jackson added an apparent threat to revoke Stone’s bail and send him to jail: “This is not baseball. There will be no third chance. If you cannot abide by this, I will be forced to change your surroundings so you have no temptations.”

Jackson had issued a limited gag order in Stone’s case last week, preventing him from discussing the case near the courthouse. Stone was being questioned Thursday by Jackson and government lawyers as to why Jackson should not take action in response to the image.

On Thursday, Stone made the risky decision to take the stand, after an initial series of questions from Jackson to Stone’s lawyer, Bruce Rogow.

The longtime Trump confidante walked into court wearing his signature circle framed glasses, but took them off before Jackson entered the courtroom. Stone’s wife and daughter sat in the front row.

Under questioning from prosecutors and Jackson, the 66-year-old Stone — who frequently looked directly at Jackson as he spoke — said the image had been selected by a volunteer who was working for him, though he couldn’t say who picked the photo or list the five or six volunteers who have been working for him when he was asked by prosecutors.

He said he had several photos to choose from and posted the image himself to his profile.

“You had a choice?” the judge interjected.

Stone said he picked the photo “randomly,” a suggestion the judge almost immediately dismissed.

“It was an egregious mistake. I obviously wish I could do it over again, but I cannot,” Stone said. “I recognize I let the court down, I let you down, I let myself down. … It was a momentary lapse in judgment.”

He has said the photo was “misinterpreted,” the symbol was actually the Celtic cross, not crosshairs of a gun, and he was not trying to threaten the judge. But, he added, he wasn’t sure what the symbol meant, because “I’m not into the occult.”

Former campaign adviser for President Donald Trump, Roger Stone walks out of the federal courthouse following a hearing, Friday, Jan. 25, 2019, in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Stone was arrested Friday in the special counsel’s Russia investigation and was charged with lying to Congress and obstructing the probe. (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)
(Associated Press)

TUCKER: IS AMERICA SAFE NOW THAT ROGER STONE WAS RAIDED BY A SWARM OF FBI AGENTS?

At one point during Thursday’s hearing, Rogow called the post that featured Jackson’s image “indefensible.” Jackson replied: “I agree with you there.”

“I am under enormous pressure,” Stone testified. “I now have TV people saying I will be raped if I go to jail. I’m having trouble putting food on the table and paying the rent.” (Indeed, CNN senior political analyst David Gergen pondered on air Monday if Stone — whom he called a “dandy” — would be raped in prison.)

Stone deleted the Instagram photo shortly after posting it, but later posted the same one again, this time without the apparent crosshairs.

In court, Stone said he “didn’t recognize it as a crosshair” and “didn’t notice” a crosshair in the image.

“This was a screwup,” Stone said. “I admit it.”

CNN ANALYST PONDERS: WILL STONE BE SUBJECT TO RAPE IN PRISON?

Jackson reminded Stone before his testimony that he would be subject to government cross-examination and was under oath. Asked whether he understood the picture could be construed as a threat, Stone replied: “I now recognize that. … I can’t rationalize my thinking because I wasn’t thinking, and that’s my fault.”

“I am kicking myself for my own stupidity, but not more than my wife is kicking me,” Stone later told Jackson. He added that “my consulting business has dried up” and said, “I’ve exhausted my savings.”

“This is not baseball. There will be no third chance.”

— U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson

Stone has pleaded not guilty to charges he lied to Congress, engaged in witness tampering and obstructed a congressional investigation into possible coordination between Russia and President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The charges stem from conversations he had during the campaign about WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group that released material stolen from Democratic groups, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The political operative and self-described dirty trickster is the sixth Trump aide or adviser charged in Mueller’s investigation. He was arrested last month and has remained free on a $250,000 personal recognizance bond. Stone has maintained his innocence and blasted the special counsel’s investigation as politically motivated.

Fox News’ Jake Gibson, Kelly Phares, Adam Shaw, and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/roger-stone-apologizes-to-judge-for-instagram-post-my-wife-is-kicking-me

The administration has been searching for concrete, commercially based criteria for performance outcomes — not just superficial legal changes that leave no impact on the ground. For example, even though China has changed laws to allow foreign companies greater access to its markets, a variety of regulatory barriers and licensing requirements continue to prevent foreign companies from operating freely, said Scott Kennedy, a China scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“Even if they could agree to some sort of standards on structural reforms, having them come to agreement on what enforcement would look like, that’s even further of a stretch,” Mr. Kennedy said of the talks.

Both countries have also floated measures that could undermine years of efforts aimed at making China’s economy more market oriented. The offers include large state-directed purchases of technological goods, natural gas and soybeans, as well as closer management of China’s currency. Those measures would violate Chinese promises to the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund.

But that may matter little to Mr. Trump, who has been largely focused on narrowing the trade gap between the two countries by getting China to buy more American products. The United States’ trade deficit with China is likely to increase in 2019, said Derek Scissors, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, increasing pressure on Mr. Trump to reach a deal that involves more American products flowing East.

“It’s coming from, how do we close the bilateral goods deficit really fast,” Mr. Scissors said. “We need large, quick purchases from the Chinese so the president isn’t ripped to pieces for violating the metric he ran on in 2016.”

China’s recent offers have included buying $200 billion of American semiconductors over the next six years, in addition to purchases of soybeans and natural gas. The eye-popping figure would help to reduce the $382 billion trade deficit in goods that the United States ran up with China last year, a metric that Mr. Trump often sees as evidence of a failed economic relationship.

In return for buying more American products, the Chinese have asked Mr. Trump not to follow through on his threat to increase tariffs to 25 percent from 10 percent — and to hopefully remove the tariffs entirely. They have also pushed the United States to remove restrictions on exports of high-tech products to China as well as constraints on Chinese investments in the United States.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/business/economy/china-us-trade-talks.html

President Trump keeps insisting that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has found “no collusion” between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia. But a close read of what we already know about what Mueller’s been doing suggests at the very least, some very questionable things were going on during the campaign.

Mueller’s team has already laid out a startling story in indictments, plea deals, and other court documents that are full of new revelations about the Trump team’s contacts with Russia that year — contacts that have moved from suspicious to downright scandalous.


Special counsel Robert Mueller leaves a closed meeting with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 21, 2017, in Washington, DC.
Alex Wong/Getty Images

The special counsel has not alleged any sinister, high-level election interference conspiracy involving Trump himself and the Russian government. But, particularly in recent filings, he has laid out damaging facts on three major matters that certainly seem at least collusion-adjacent.

1) The business opportunity for Trump: The Trump Organization was secretly in talks for a potentially very lucrative Moscow real estate deal during the campaign, and Russian government officials were involved. Trump and members of his family were briefed several times on the project.

2) A key figure with shady Russia connections: Trump’s former campaign chair Paul Manafort had a history of illegal work for pro-Russian interests and was in debt to a Russian oligarch. Then, during the campaign, he allegedly handed over Trump polling data to a Russian intelligence-tied associate.

3) The hacked — and leaked — emails: Russian intelligence officers hacked leading Democrats’ emails, and WikiLeaks eventually posted many of those stolen emails publicly. Trump associates like George Papadopoulos and Roger Stone seem to have had at least some advance knowledge of this.

These revelations are all significant, and greatly change what we know about what happened in 2016. They tell us that while Trump was praising Putin on the campaign trail, he and his family were trying to make massive amounts of money in Russia. Meanwhile, Manafort was handing out his polling data for unknown reasons, and Stone was at least trying to get an inside line on the emails criminally stolen from Democrats.

We don’t yet know whether there’s more to be revealed about any of these. Mueller also hasn’t indicated how these pieces fit together to form a larger story, and he hasn’t yet assessed how much, exactly, the president knew about each. And there are other incidents, like the infamous meeting with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower, that the special counsel has not yet said a single word about.

But the bigger picture is that, however you define “collusion,” we’ve learned a great deal more about just what top figures in Trumpworld were doing regarding Russia during the election — and it’s far from being a “nothingburger.”

1) Trump pursued a major Moscow business deal during the campaign

After Donald Trump began running for president in June 2015, Michael Cohen — his longtime lawyer and an executive at the Trump Organization — embarked on a secret effort to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

Last November, Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about that project, and Mueller has used Cohen’s criminal information and a subsequent sentencing memo to lay out facts related to the project. Namely:

The deal could have made Trump — and Cohen — lots of money: “If the project was completed,” Mueller’s team asserted in the sentencing memo, Trump’s business “could have received hundreds of millions of dollars from Russian sources in licensing fees and other venues.” They added that once Cohen began cooperating, he “explained financial aspects of the deal that would have made it highly lucrative for the Company and himself.”


Michael Cohen, longtime personal lawyer for President Donald Trump, leaves the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on April 26, 2018.
Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Trump and his family members were briefed on the talks: Cohen discussed the project with Trump personally at least four times, according to his plea agreement, and briefed Trump’s family members about it.

The Russian government got involved: We know that in January 2016, Cohen twice emailed Vladimir Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, asking for help moving the project forward. On January 20, Peskov’s personal assistant got in touch, and in a phone call, Cohen asked for assistance “in securing land to build the proposed tower and financing the construction.”


Russian President Vladimir Putin (right) and his press secretary Dmitry Peskov (left) attend a meeting at the Hermitage on October 3, 2018.
Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images

Trips to Russia were planned — but scrapped: At one point, Cohen asked Trump whether he’d be able to travel to Russia in connection with the project. In May 2016, Cohen texted an associate that he’d make the trip first, and Trump would do so “once he becomes the nominee after the convention.” Arrangements were made for Cohen to attend the St. Petersburg Forum in mid-June 2016, but days before it began, Cohen called off the trip. The deal, so far as we know, never ended up happening.

Importantly, Trump was either the Republican presidential primary frontrunner or the nominee-in-waiting all this time. He offered an unusually positive assessment of Putin on the campaign trail. It now seems likely this was motivated, at least in part, by Trump’s desire to score a major business deal in Russia.

2) Trump’s campaign chair, Paul Manafort, was compromised in all sorts of ways

Paul Manafort, a longtime Republican operative, joined the Trump campaign in March 2016, and a few months later he was put in charge as campaign chair.

There were three serious problems with that, Mueller’s charges against Manafort and other court filings make clear.

Manafort had skeletons in his closet: The GOP operative had spent much of the previous decade working for Ukraine’s pro-Russian political faction, including various oligarchs and Ukraine’s then-President Viktor Yanukovych.

Manafort made more than $60 million from this work — and hid much of it from the US government, laundering the money into the country through shell companies and dodging $15 million in taxes. He also coordinated an illegal unregistered lobbying campaign on the Ukrainian government’s behalf in the United States. (Manafort was convicted at trial for some of these crimes, and subsequently pleaded guilty to others.)

Manafort needed money: The second problem was that Manafort was in serious financial trouble. His patron Yanukovych had been deposed as president of Ukraine in 2014, and the Ukrainian money dried up.

As a result, Mueller has alleged, and Manafort eventually admitted, both before and after joining the campaign, Manafort made a series of fraudulent declarations to banks to try to get hefty mortgage loans. (He admitted the truth of these charges in his plea deal with Mueller.)


Paul Manafort arrives for a hearing at US District Court on June 15, 2018, in Washington, DC.
Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

Clearly, Manafort needed money by the time he joined the Trump campaign. But he took the Trump job unpaid. It’s also worth noting that Manafort was heavily indebted to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, whom he had once worked for.

Manafort gave Trump campaign polls to Konstantin Kilimnik: Manafort had a years-long business relationship with a Russian associate, Konstantin Kilimnik, whom he’d worked with on his Ukrainian projects. And according to the FBI, Kilimnik has ties to a Russian intelligence service.

Manafort remained in contact with Kilimnik during the Trump campaign. And Mueller has alleged that in August 2016, Manafort shared the campaign’s private polling data with Kilimnik at a secret meeting in New York City. Many of the details of this accusation are still redacted.

So at the very least, Manafort was badly compromised due to his history of illegal work for pro-Russian interests and his financial troubles. And handing over the presidential campaign’s polling data to an associate tied to Russian intelligence is certainly highly inappropriate.

However, we don’t yet know what the purpose of transferring the polling data was — whether Manafort was merely trying to impress foreign oligarchs and secure future business and income, or whether he handed over the data in hopes it could inform Russian interference efforts.

3) Trump associates appear to have had at least some knowledge of Democrats’ emails that were hacked by Russia

The most visible, high-profile way the Russian government interfered with the 2016 election was through hacking and leaking leading Democrats’ emails. And we’ve learned, through Mueller’s charges, that some Trump associates appear to have had some information about what was coming.

The hack and leak: During the 2016 campaign, officers of Russia’s military intelligence agency, the GRU, stole emails and other electronic documents from several leading Democrats and Democrat organizations — including the DNC, the DCCC, and several Clinton staffers, including campaign chair John Podesta.

The Russian intelligence officers publicly posted some of these stolen documents themselves — through a website they had set up called DCLeaks, and through an online persona they created called “Guccifer 2.0.” Other emails from the DNC and Podesta were eventually posted by WikiLeaks.

The Papadopoulos tip: In March 2016, George Papadopoulos, a little-known London-based energy consultant, was named a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. Shortly afterward, Papadopoulos met Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor. Mifsud said he had ties to the Russian government, began talking with him about a potential Trump trip to Russia, and soon afterward introduced him to two Russians with ties to the country’s government.

Then on April 26, 2016, Papadopoulos heard a bombshell from the professor. Mifsud had just returned from meeting top Russian officials in Moscow, he said, and he’d learned that the Russians had “dirt” on Clinton. Papadopoulos later told the FBI that Mifsud specifically said Russia had “thousands of emails.” (At this time, much of the hacking had been carried out, but it was not yet publicly known.)

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about these contacts, but it hasn’t been shown that he shared this tip with others in the Trump campaign.

Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi, and WikiLeaks: In June and July 2016, longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone — then supporting the campaign from the outside — allegedly informed top campaign officials that WikiLeaks had documents that would hurt Clinton’s campaign.

Then after WikiLeaks began posting its first such documents — the hacked DNC emails — a senior Trump campaign official “was directed” to get in touch with Stone and learn more about WikiLeaks’ plans, Mueller alleges.

Stone emailed an associate, Jerome Corsi, telling him to “get to” Assange and “get the pending” WikiLeaks emails. Corsi eventually responded with an email claimed that Assange planned “2 dumps,” including one in October. He also mentioned Podesta in the email, claiming he would be “exposed as in bed w enemy.” (At the time, it was not public knowledge that Podesta had been hacked.)

After that, Stone claimed some knowledge of Assange’s plans, both publicly and privately, including to Trump campaign officials like Steve Bannon. He also exchanged private Twitter messages with both Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks, though the messages we’ve seen are brief.

But Stone later said he didn’t actually know anything about Assange’s plans and was just passing on hearsay he’d gotten from a separate source, radio host Randy Credico. Corsi, too, said he didn’t know anything and had just somehow guessed that Assange had Podesta’s emails. (Mueller indicted Stone for allegedly lying to Congress about this.)


Roger Stone arrives for his arraignment hearing at the the US District Court in Washington, DC, on January 29, 2019.
Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images

The full story of what happened here remains unclear. But at the very least, Stone was clearly trying to get in touch with WikiLeaks regarding the documents it had. There are some indications he knew the group had Podesta’s emails. And he was in touch with top Trump campaign officials about this operation to release Democrats’ stolen documents.

Closer to collusion — but scandalous in their own right

Again, Mueller has brought no charges against Trump officials for criminally conspiring to interfere with the 2016 election.

Regardless of what is still to come from Mueller — and what Mueller puts in his final report, which is rumored to be coming soon — the special counsel’s court filings have already revealed or shed more light on matters like the Trump Tower Moscow talks, Manafort’s Russian contacts, and Stone’s outreach to WikiLeaks.

Whether these count as “collusion” may be in the eye of the beholder. But they’re all scandalous in and of themselves — and should be treated that way.


For more on the Mueller probe, follow Andrew Prokop on Twitter and check out Vox’s guide to the Trump-Russia investigation.

Source Article from https://www.vox.com/2019/2/21/18197995/mueller-report-trump-russia-collusion

(Reuters) – North Carolina’s elections board on Thursday ordered a new election for a U.S. House seat after officials said corruption surrounding absentee ballots tainted the results of a 2018 vote that has embarrassed the Republican Party.

The bipartisan board’s 5-0 decision came after Republican candidate Mark Harris, confronted by days of evidence that an operative for his campaign orchestrated a ballot fraud scheme, called for a new vote in the state’s 9th Congressional District.

“It’s become clear to me that the public’s confidence in the 9th District seat general election has been undermined to an extent that a new election is warranted,” Harris said on the fourth day of the hearing in Raleigh, the state capital.

Elections Board Chairman Bob Cordle said “the corruption” and “absolute mess” with absentee ballots had cast doubt on the entire contest.

“It certainly was a tainted election,” Cordle said. “The people of North Carolina deserve a fair election.”

The race is the country’s last unsettled 2018 congressional contest, and the outcome will not change the balance of power in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.

But evidence of ballot fraud by the Harris campaign turned the tables on the Republican Party, which has accused Democrats with little evidence of encouraging individual voter fraud in races such as the 2016 presidential election.

Harris’ request for a new vote came as a surprise after he spent months trying to fend off a rerun. He led Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes out of 282,717 ballots cast on Nov. 6, but elections officials refused to certify him the winner because of allegations of irregularities in the vote.

The pastor capitulated after his son testified he had warned his father of potential illegal activity by Republican political operative Leslie McCrae Dowless.

North Carolina law requires that a new primary nominating election also be conducted in the district, which covers parts of Charlotte and the southeast of the state. Republicans have held the seat since 1963.

‘ILLEGAL SCHEME’

It is unclear whether Harris, 52, will run again. He told the board he was recovering from an infection last month that led to sepsis and two strokes, and said his illness led to memory lapses during the hearing that made him realize he was not prepared for the “rigours” of the proceeding.

North Carolina’s Democratic Party said the hearing laid bare the Harris campaign’s “illegal scheme to steal an election.” McCready wasted no time in tweeting to supporters to donate to his campaign for the new election.

“Today was a great step forward for democracy in North Carolina,” he tweeted.

If Democrats pick up the seat, they would widen their 235-197 majority in the House after taking control of the chamber from President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans in the November elections.

State Republicans said they respected Harris’ decision to resolve a “tremendously difficult situation.”

“The people of North Carolina deserve nothing less than the full confidence and trust in the electoral system,” party Chairman Robin Hayes said in a statement.

Earlier on Thursday, Harris said he had known Dowless was going door to door on the candidate’s behalf to help voters obtain absentee ballots, a process that is legal. Harris said Dowless assured him he would not collect the ballots from the voters, which would violate state law.

But residents of at least two counties in the district said Dowless and his paid workers collected incomplete absentee ballots and, in some instances, falsely signed as witnesses and filled in votes for contests left blank, according to testimony at the hearing.

Harris campaign officials said they did not pay Dowless to do anything illegal, and Dowless maintained his innocence.

Reporting by Gabriella Borter in New York and Andrew Hay in New Mexico; Editing by Colleen Jenkins, James Dalgleish and Peter Cooney

Source Article from https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-election-north-carolina-idUSKCN1QA1W3