Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
‘Superbug’ fungus spread in two cities, health officials say
By MIKE STOBBE
yesterday
https://apnews.com/article/business-science-health-f2c6f1712e7d6907e543bb9e3dc53d2d
NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. health officials said Thursday they now have evidence of an untreatable fungus spreading in two hospitals and a nursing home.
The “superbug” outbreaks were reported in a Washington, D.C, nursing home and at two Dallas-area hospitals, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported. A handful of the patients had invasive fungal infections that were impervious to all three major classes of medications.
“This is really the first time we’ve started seeing clustering of resistance” in which patients seemed to be getting the infections from each other, said the CDC’s Dr. Meghan Lyman.
The fungus, Candida auris, is a harmful form of yeast that is considered dangerous to hospital and nursing home patients with serious medical problems. It is most deadly when it enters the bloodstream, heart or brain. Outbreaks in health care facilities have been spurred when the fungus spread through patient contact or on contaminated surfaces.
Health officials have sounded alarms for years about the superbug after seeing infections in which commonly used drugs had little effect. In 2019, doctors diagnosed three cases in New York that were also resistant to a class of drugs, called echinocandins, that were considered a last line of defense.
In those cases, there was no evidence the infections had spread from patient to patient — scientists concluded the resistance to the drugs formed during treatment.
The new cases did spread, the CDC concluded.
In Washington, D.C., a cluster of 101 C. auris cases at a nursing home dedicated to very sick patients included three that were resistant to all three kinds of antifungal medications. A cluster of 22 in two Dallas-area hospitals included two with that level of resistance. The facilities weren’t identified.
Those cases were seen from January to April. Of the five people who were fully resistant to treatment, three died — both Texas patients and one in Washington.
Lyman said both are ongoing outbreaks and that additional infections have been identified since April. But those added numbers were not reported.
Investigators reviewed medical records and found no evidence of previous antifungal use among the patients in those clusters. Health officials say that means they spread from person to person.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
https://apnews.com/article/business-science-health-f2c6f1712e7d6907e543bb9e3dc53d2d
Dems renew questions about FBI background check of Kavanaugh
BY ERIC TUCKER
today
https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-acd4945bda57be8c1d1c9ac43398b5f7
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats are raising new concerns about the thoroughness of the FBI’s background investigation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh after the FBI revealed that it had received thousands of tips and had provided “all relevant” ones to the White House counsel’s office.
FBI Director Christopher Wray, responding to longstanding questions from Democrats, disclosed in a letter late last month that it had received more than 4,500 tips as it investigated the nominee’s past following his 2018 nomination by President Donald Trump. The process was the first time that the FBI had set up a tip line for a nominee undergoing Senate confirmation, Wray said.
A group of Democratic senators said in a letter to Wray dated Wednesday that his response “raises significant additional questions.” They called on him to explain, among other things, how many tips the FBI decided were relevant and what criteria agents used to make that determination and what policies and procedures were used to vet the tips. The senators also asked for more information about the tip line, including how it was staffed and how the tips were recorded or preserved.
“Your letter confirms that the FBI’s tip line was a departure from past practice and that the FBI was politically constrained by the Trump White House,” the senators wrote.
Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court in October 2018 after a rancorous process in which claims emerged that he had sexually assaulted women three decades ago. He emphatically denied the allegations.
The FBI conducted a original background investigation into Kavanaugh that consisted of interviews with 49 people over the course of five days, Wray said. The bureau then did a supplemental background check after new information arose about a woman, Christine Blasey Ford, who alleged that Kavanaugh had assaulted her when they were teens. As part of that process, Wray said, the FBI interviewed 10 people over six days.
But, he stressed, the inquiry was limited in nature, without the “authorities, policies and procedures” that would be used for an FBI criminal investigation.
Lawyers for Ford said in a statement that the FBI’s letter established that the investigation was a “sham and a major institutional failure” and chastised the bureau for not interviewing Ford or acting on the thousands of tips it received about Kavanaugh.
“Instead, it handed the information over to the White House, allowing those who supported Kavanaugh to falsely claim that the FBI found no wrongdoing,” said the lawyers, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks.
____
Follow Eric Tucker on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP
https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-acd4945bda57be8c1d1c9ac43398b5f7
Trump’s PAC collected $75 million this year, but so far the group has not put money into pushing for the 2020 ballot reviews he touts
By Josh Dawsey and Rosalind S. Helderman
Yesterday at 6:05 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-pac-ballot-reviews/2021/07/22/d451fcaa-e596-11eb-934f-7e6c1927f261_story.html
Former president Donald Trump’s political PAC raised about $75 million in the first half of this year as he trumpeted the false notion that the 2020 election was stolen from him, but the group has not devoted funds to help finance the ongoing ballot review in Arizona or to push for similar endeavors in other states, according to people familiar with the finances.
Instead, the Save America leadership PAC — which has few limits on how it can spend its money — has paid for some of the former president’s travel, legal costs and staff, along with other expenses, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the group’s inner workings. The PAC has held onto much of its cash.
Even as he assiduously tracks attempts by his allies to cast doubt on the integrity of last year’s election, Trump has been uninterested in personally bankrolling the efforts, relying on other entities and supporters to fund the endeavors, they said.
The tactic allows Trump to build up a war chest to use in the 2022 midterms on behalf of candidates he favors — and to stockpile cash for another potential White House run, an unprecedented maneuver for a former president.
In the meantime, the months-long audit of Maricopa County’s ballots in Arizona — which is expected to cost millions — is being paid for primarily by nonprofit entities that do not disclose their donors and private individuals such as former Overstock chief executive Patrick Byrne. A lawsuit seeking a similar audit in Fulton County, Ga., has been financed by small donations, according to the group that brought the claim.
A spokeswoman for Trump did not answer questions on whether the group is considering putting money into the ballot review efforts. The group will have to publicly disclose its fundraising and spending for the first half of the year by July 31.
Since leaving office, Trump has repeatedly pushed for various states to overturn the election results, sending out a blizzard of statements with unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. He has consulted with state officials in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia, and has described state ballot reviews as the key to prove he won the 2020 election. And his political group has repeatedly urged donors to give by claiming that Trump is working to protect their vote — fundraising pitches that his advisers say remain the most lucrative.
“We need you to join the fight to SECURE OUR ELECTIONS!” reads one Facebook ad.
On Saturday, Trump is scheduled to speak in Phoenix at an event called the “Protect our Elections Rally,” hosted by a group founded by conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The former president has repeatedly made false claims of irregularities in the Arizona vote, asserting in a statement this month that it amounted “to hundreds of thousands of votes or, many times what is necessary for us to have won.”
“There was no victory here, or in any other of the Swing States either,” he added in one of the statements put out by the Save America PAC.
Trump launched the group after the election, and it quickly raised $31.5 million last year as he blasted the integrity of the vote, but had spent little of its haul by Jan. 1, according to its public disclosure for that period
Trump has told some advisers that he wants to keep a large bank account to show strength for a potential 2024 campaign. He continues to tell advisers that he will probably run for president again, though some in his orbit suspect he will not. Some advisers have also urged him to save the money for travel next year to barnstorm the country on behalf of candidates he has endorsed.
“That is probably the most lucrative thing he’s had in terms of cash flow since the Plaza casino in Atlantic City,” said Tim O’Brien, a Trump biographer and frequent critic. “This is just as lucrative. He has recognized because of what happened after the election — he can make money as a candidate.”
Besides fundraising, Trump has begun renting the massive trove of data that his campaign amassed to other candidates he supports in exchange for a share of their fundraising revenue, according to people familiar with the deal. That could ultimately prove another valuable cash flow for him.
A Trump adviser said he had not ruled out spending money on ballot review efforts in states such as Arizona and Georgia “at some point down the road.”
Organizers of the Arizona ballot review have not revealed the full costs of the intensive process that is now in its third month, but they acknowledged it is likely to climb into the millions. The Republican-led state Senate agreed to put $150,000 in taxpayer dollars into the effort, but the remainder of the cost is being covered by private donations.
Nonprofits have sprung up that are devoted to financing the Arizona endeavor, which Trump allies claim will show irregularities in the vote, which narrowly gave the win to President Biden. Those assertions have been repeatedly disputed by election officials and failed in court.
Among those fundraising for the audit are Voices and Votes, a group founded by One America News network host Christina Bobb, who frequently uses her on-air reports about the audit to encourage viewers to donate.
Byrne, who attended a chaotic Oval Office meeting with Trump in December to discuss ways to overturn the election, founded another group, the America Project, which Byrne said has raised $1.2 million to help pay for the Arizona review. Byrne also told The Washington Post that he personally donated an additional $500,000. Because the group is not required to disclose information about its donors or spending, it is not possible to corroborate those assertions.
Supporters of a different group — Election Integrity Funds for the American Republic, which has been promoted by Michigan attorney Matthew DePerno — have in recent weeks taken to the social media platform Telegram, popular among Trump allies, to allege that Byrne had not followed through on his funding promises. They pushed allies to donate to their group instead. Byrne has strongly denied those claims.
In an email, DePerno said he had no formal role with the group but said he had raised $276,900 through it for the Arizona audit “in just a couple of days.” DePerno said that when he started raising money for the organization, others “wrongly assumed” that if he was raising money, then Byrne was not. But he said he has never said anything negative about Byrne.
“People and the media should have focused on the good work I was doing, not twisting it into a negative,” he wrote.
Additional details about the financing of the Arizona audit could emerge in coming weeks. Last week, an Arizona judge found that records and correspondence related to Cyber Ninjas, the private contractor hired to conduct the audit, should be considered public documents under state law, including information related to audit funding. The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by the group American Oversight.
The litigation is ongoing, but in denying a motion by the Senate to dismiss the case, Judge Michael Kemp wrote, “It is difficult to conceive of a case with a more compelling public interest demanding public disclosure and public scrutiny.”
Trump supporters have been agitating to mimic the Arizona effort in multiple places.
In Pennsylvania, for instance, state Sen. Doug Mastriano (R), a Trump ally who has repeatedly questioned the election outcome, sent letters on July 7 to three Pennsylvania jurisdictions — the city of Philadelphia, as well as the Republican-leaning counties of York and Tioga — requesting that they turn over to the legislature a long list of voting-related items, including all of their voting machines, tabulators and ballots from the 2020 election.
Citing his role as chairman of the state Senate’s Intergovernmental Operations Committee, which he wrote has the power to subpoena documents from government agencies, Mastriano told the counties that if they did not provide a plan to comply with his request by July 31, subpoenas could be forthcoming.
State officials have warned that turning over voting equipment could result in counties footing the bill to replace them. York and Tioga counties have already told Mastriano they do not plan to comply voluntarily. Philadelphia has not yet responded.
Mastriano has not said who would pay for the audit if he is able to obtain the information he is seeking from the three localities.
Trump allies have also been seeking an audit in Georgia, though so far unsuccessfully. Activists who have been hoping a judge in Fulton County would order that they be given access to ballots and equipment have so far instead settled for examining computerized images of ballots, which are accessible in Georgia via a public records request.
Garland Favorito, who leads the activist group that brought the lawsuit, has said his effort is being funded entirely by small-dollar donors to his organization, and he has received no other outside funding.
Amy Gardner contributed to this report.
By Josh Dawsey
Josh Dawsey is a political enterprise and investigations reporter for The Washington Post. He joined the paper in 2017 and previously covered the White House. Before that, he covered the White House for Politico, and New York City Hall and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie for the Wall Street Journal. Twitter
By Rosalind Helderman
Rosalind Helderman is a political enterprise and investigations reporter for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2001. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-pac-ballot-reviews/2021/07/22/d451fcaa-e596-11eb-934f-7e6c1927f261_story.html
Congress And COVID-19: Members' Cases And Quarantines
Updated July 20, 20213:02 PM ET
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/15/833692377/how-the-coronavirus-has-affected-individual-members-of-congress?t=1627019795707
In July, Congress saw a months-long streak with no COVID-19 cases among its member ranks during the pandemic come to a halt, and a rise in the new Delta variant threatens progress made this year.
This month, Republican Rep. Vern Buchanan said he had tested positive for the illness, despite being fully vaccinated. Buchanan, who lost a staffer to the illness last year, said he was experiencing "very mild flu-like symptoms."
A day later, on July 20, a senior communications staffer for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tested positive for the illness, the office said. And it apparently was one of multiple recent cases.
Dr. Brian Monahan, the Capitol's attending physician, issued new guidance noting that "several" staff members had been infected in addition to the one member of Congress. Monahan warned that the Delta variant had indeed been detected in the Washington, D.C. area and the Capitol buildings.
"Future developments in the coronavirus Delta variant local threat may require the resumption of mask wear for all as now seen in several counties in the United States," Monahan wrote in a guidance notes to the Capitol community. The Centers for Disease Control does not generally require vaccinated individuals to wear a mask indoors at this time.
The positive result for the Pelosi staffer follows the aide's meeting with members of a group of Texas state Democrat lawmakers who have seen at least five cases in their ranks. The lawmakers, who are in Washington, D.C. to evade a special Texas legislative session to approve new voting restrictions in the state, have met without masks with Vice President Kamala Harris, members of Congress and staffers. The group issued a statement stating that they were all vaccinated.
Before these latest cases Congress' nearly six-month pause for lawmakers dealing with the virus began after a majority of more than 500 lawmakers were fully vaccinated by January 2021, and the Capitol's attending physician lifted much of the mask mandates that dominated the past year. However, a minority of House Republican members have refused to seek vaccination.
Lawmakers impact by the coronavirus
This threat arrives after the coronavirus already exacted a large toll on the Capitol.
Last year, the pandemic upended daily work for months, sickening dozens of members and hundreds of workers. A sitting congressman, a member-elect and an aide died.
By February 2021, more than 60 lawmakers and 360 Capitol Hill workers had tested positive, or were presumed so, for the coronavirus, according to NPR's tracker and congressional aides.
-----
January 6 insurrection caused spike in cases on Capitol Hill
Up until this summer the most recent outbreak of cases on Capitol Hill for members was triggered by the Jan. 6 insurrection, which forced members to cluster together in rooms for several hours. Some House Republicans were seen refusing to wear masks during the ordeal.
Later, Monahan told Congress that at least one of these holding rooms for House members included a lawmaker who was already positive.
More than a half-dozen members quarantined as a result, and several tested positive, including Democratic Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey and Brad Schneider of Illinois.
In all, January proved to be one of members' worst month for the coronavirus, with at least 16 lawmakers testing positive. Before the insurrection, the House met to launch a new session before reinstating rules allowing proxy voting.
This, as congressional leaders and lawmakers received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, which became available to members in December. The doses were provided to meet long-standing requirements for continuity of government operations, Monahan told members in a Dec. 17 note.
MUCH MORE
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/15/833692377/how-the-coronavirus-has-affected-individual-members-of-congress?t=1627019795707
Ex-Army Ranger used his military training during Capitol riot, judge says
Video appears to show former military member handing out stolen police shields
Gino Spocchia
9 hours ago
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/capitol-riot-army-ranger-robert-morss-b1888879.html
A federal judge ordered a former US Army Ranger accused with rioting on 6 January to remain behind bars before his trial, after he was accused of using his training amid the attack.
Magistrate Judge Michael Harvey said on Tuesday that Robert Morss was “willing to use his training or experience to organise with the rioters on January 6 ... thereby making their actions more effective, more forceful and more violent”, in remarks reported by CNN.
The judge added that rioters had “appeared disorganised” until Mr Morss began issuing instructions and organising others amid the attack on the US Capitol. A total of five people died amid the violence, and hundreds more were injured.
Mr Harvey described Mr Morss as having been “in his element”, and as CBS Pittsburgh reported, was seen in videos shared to social media successfully stealing a fence, baton and protective shields from Capitol police.
He has pleaded not guilty.
“While 6 January may have passed, the fight for Mr Morss continues,” Mr Harvey added.
Among the items found by FBI investigators following Mr Morss arrest include an unconstructed Lego set of the Capitol building, and a notebook containing a “step-by-step” guide on how to form a “hometown militia”, it was reported.
Mr Harvey’s ruling followed the release of footage of the former Army Ranger from 6 January by the US Justice Department. That appeared to confirm the judge’s ruling that Mr Morss was dangerous, and so will remain behind bars until his trial.
In one of the videos released on Tuesday, Mr Morss was seen talking with other rioters before stealing a fence and a baton from Capitol police, who were defending the building from more rioters wanting to overturn the result of the 2020 election in favour of former US president Donald Trump.
In an another video, Mr Morss was reportedly seen handing stolen police shields to others.
The former Army Ranger is facing charges of civil disorder, theft of US property, and of assaulting officers. His lawyers reportedly argue that he suffers with PTSD from three combat tours in Afghanistan and has no criminal record.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/capitol-riot-army-ranger-robert-morss-b1888879.html
Trump unloads on Kavanaugh in new Michael Wolff book - Jul 13, 2021
Mike Allen, author of AM
Jul 13, 2021 - Politics & Policy
https://www.axios.com/trump-kavanaugh-supreme-court-michael-wolff-fd429590-57ab-4a7f-a648-9a3fd50d25f3.html
Former President Donald Trump, in a book out Tuesday by Michael Wolff, says he is "very disappointed" in votes by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, his own hard-won nominee, and that he "hasn’t had the courage you need to be a great justice."
Driving the news: "There were so many others I could have appointed, and everyone wanted me to," Trump told Wolff in an interview for the cheekily titled "Landslide."
"Where would he be without me? I saved his life. He wouldn't even be in a law firm. Who would have had him? Nobody. Totally disgraced. Only I saved him."
Between the lines: After the election, as Axios' Jonathan Swan reported in his "Off the Rails" series, Trump saved his worst venom for people who he believed owed him because he got them their jobs.
He would rant endlessly about the treachery of Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, reminding people of how he shot up in the primary polls after Trump endorsed him.
Over lunches in the private dining room adjoining the Oval Office, Trump used to reminisce about how he saved Kavanaugh by sticking by him.
For Kavanaugh to not do Trump’s bidding on the matter of ultimate importance — overturning the election — was, in Trump's mind, a betrayal of the highest order.
Wolff writes that Trump feels betrayed by all three justices he put on the court, including Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, but "reserved particular bile for Kavanaugh."
Recalling the brutal confirmation fight, Trump said: "Practically every senator called me ... and said, 'Cut him loose, sir, cut him loose. He’s killing us, Kavanaugh.' ... I said, 'I can’t do that.'"
"I had plenty of time to pick somebody else," Trump continued. "I went through that thing and fought like hell for Kavanaugh — and I saved his life, and I saved his career. At great expense to myself ... okay? I fought for that guy and kept him."
"I don’t want anything ... but I am very disappointed in him, in his rulings," Trump said.
"I can’t even believe what's happening. I'm very disappointed in Kavanaugh. I just told you something I haven’t told a lot of people. In retrospect, he just hasn't had the courage you need to be a great justice. I’m basing this on more than just the election."
Wolff gives an entertaining account of what it was like for the book authors who were given Trump interviews at Mar-a-Lago:
It's called the Living Room, but it's in fact the Mar-a-Lago lobby, a vaulted-ceiling rococo grand entrance, part hunting lodge, part Renaissance palazzo. But it is really the throne room. ... He sits, in regulation dark suit and shiny baby-blue or fire-red tie, on a low chair in the center of the room, his legs almost daintily curled to the side, seeing a lineup of supplicants or chatting on the phone, all public conversations.
And why would Trump talk to Wolff, who wrote two earlier bestsellers with devastating accounts of Trump dysfunction?
"The fact that he was talking to me might only reasonably be explained by his absolute belief that his voice alone has reality-altering powers," Wolff writes.
Trump told Wolff: "I don’t blame you. I blame my people"
https://www.axios.com/trump-kavanaugh-supreme-court-michael-wolff-fd429590-57ab-4a7f-a648-9a3fd50d25f3.html
Details on F.B.I. Inquiry Into Kavanaugh Draw Fire From Democrats
The F.B.I. said some of the 4,500 tips it received about Justice Brett Kavanaugh were given to the Trump White House, leading some Democrats to call the process a sham.
By Kate Kelly
July 22, 2021 Updated 3:30 p.m. ET
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/22/us/politics/kavanaugh-fbi-investigation.html
Nearly three years after Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s tumultuous confirmation to the Supreme Court, the F.B.I. has disclosed more details about its efforts to review the justice’s background, leading a group of Senate Democrats to question the thoroughness of the vetting and conclude that it was shaped largely by the Trump White House.
In a letter dated June 30 to two Democratic senators, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Chris Coons of Delaware, an F.B.I. assistant director, Jill C. Tyson, said that the most “relevant” of the 4,500 tips the agency received during an investigation into Mr. Kavanaugh’s past were referred to White House lawyers in the Trump administration, whose handling of them remains unclear.
The letter left uncertain whether the F.B.I. itself followed up on the most compelling leads. The agency was conducting a background check rather than a criminal investigation, meaning that “the authorities, policies, and procedures used to investigate criminal matters did not apply,” the letter said.
Ms. Tyson’s letter was a response to a 2019 letter from Mr. Whitehouse and Mr. Coons to the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, posing questions about how the F.B.I.’s review of Mr. Kavanaugh was handled.
In an interview, Mr. Whitehouse said the F.B.I.’s response showed that the F.B.I.’s handling of the accusations into misconduct by Mr. Kavanaugh was a sham. Ms. Tyson’s letter, Mr. Whitehouse said, suggested that the F.B.I. ran a “fake tip line that never got properly reviewed, that was presumably not even conducted in good faith.”
Mr. Whitehouse and six of his Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee replied to the F.B.I.’s letter on Wednesday with demands for additional details on the agreement with the White House that governed the inquiry. They also pressed for more information on how incoming tips were handled.
“Your letter confirms that the F.B.I.’s tip line was a departure from past practice and that the F.B.I. was politically constrained by the Trump White House,” the senators wrote. Among those signing the letter were Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the committee’s chairman, Mr. Coons and Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey.
Donald F. McGahn, the White House’s general counsel at the time, and the F.B.I. did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Former President Donald J. Trump has long taken credit for Mr. Kavanaugh’s confirmation, which was almost derailed over allegations by a California professor that Mr. Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her during a high school gathering in the early 1980s.
Despite widespread concern over the claims — which were followed by other allegations of sexual misconduct, all of which Mr. Kavanaugh has consistently denied — Mr. Trump steadfastly backed the judge. He deployed Mr. McGahn to shepherd Mr. Kavanaugh through the unusually fraught confirmation, which culminated in a heated, daylong hearing in September of 2018.
Both Christine Blasey Ford, the professor who said she was assaulted, and Mr. Kavanaugh were grilled by Senators on the Judiciary Committee.
In a recent interview with the author Michael Wolff, Mr. Trump put his handling of Justice Kavanaugh into stark terms, asking “Where would he be without me? I saved his life.”
But in addition to offering shows of support, the Trump White House carefully controlled the investigations into Mr. Kavanaugh’s past. After Dr. Ford came forward, Mr. Trump’s staff tried to limit the number of people the F.B.I. interviewed as part of that probe. Only after an outcry from Democrats over the president’s approach did the administration say the agency could conduct a more open investigation.
Ultimately, 10 witnesses were interviewed by the F.B.I., according to the F.B.I.’s recent letter. Dr. Ford and Mr. Kavanaugh themselves were never interviewed by the F.B.I.
Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, who signed Wednesday’s letter to the F.B.I., called the process “an injustice in fact orchestrated by the White House under Donald Trump, an injustice that frankly was a disservice to the F.B.I.”
Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, the lawyers who represented Dr. Ford, said in a statement that the nation “deserved better” when it came to the inquiry into Justice Kavanaugh.
Kate Kelly is a business reporter, covering big banks, trading and key financial-policy players. She is also the co-author of “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh” and the author of “Street Fighters.” @katekelly
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/22/us/politics/kavanaugh-fbi-investigation.html
In a new letter sent to the Senate, the FBI admits it never meaningfully investigated the claims against Brett Kavanaugh because it was only empowered to talk to people that were approved by the Trump White House.
Details on F.B.I. Inquiry Into Kavanaugh Draw Fire From Democrats
The F.B.I. said some of the 4,500 tips it received about Justice Brett Kavanaugh were given to the Trump White House, leading some Democrats to call the process a sham.
nytimes.com
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/22/us/politics/kavanaugh-fbi-investigation.html
5:47 PM · Jul 22, 2021·Twitter Web App
2,949
THREAD
In a new letter sent to the Senate, the FBI admits it never meaningfully investigated the claims against Brett Kavanaugh because it was only empowered to talk to people that were approved by the Trump White House.https://t.co/pWg8Dmod8N
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) July 22, 2021
07.22.21 AFTER NEW DETAILS ON KAVANAUGH INVESTIGATION SURFACE, SENATORS CALL ON FBI FOR ANSWERS ON HANDLING OF ‘TIP LINE’
4,500 tips to FBI went uninvestigated following supplemental investigation, newly released FBI letter shows
https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/after-new-details-on-kavanaugh-investigation-surface-senators-call-on-fbi-for-answers-on-handling-of-tip-line
Washington, DC – Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Cory Booker (D-NJ) wrote to FBI Director Christopher Wray last evening requesting additional information on the FBI’s 2018 supplemental background investigation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The senators’ request follows a letter from the Bureau to Whitehouse and Coons revealing new details on the Kavanaugh background investigation, including that the FBI gathered over 4,500 tips in relation to the investigation without any apparent further action by FBI investigators. The Bureau also confirmed that tips from the tip line were instead provided to the Trump White House Counsel’s office, where their fate is unknown.
“The admissions in your letter corroborate and explain numerous credible accounts by individuals and firms that they had contacted the FBI with information ‘highly relevant to . . . allegations’ of sexual misconduct by Justice Kavanaugh, only to be ignored,” the senators write in their letter sent today. “If the FBI was not authorized to or did not follow up on any of the tips that it received from the tip line, it is difficult to understand the point of having a tip line at all.”
Whitehouse and Coons initially raised the lackluster supplemental background investigation in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with Director Wray in July 2019. Whitehouse observed during the hearing the clear lack of process through which the public or members of Congress could relay information to the FBI after the troubling allegations against Kavanaugh made headlines nationwide. Coons likewise pressed Wray for a clear procedure. As both senators noted, the only conduit for information potentially relevant to the allegations was a “tip line,” the product of which was apparently never pursued by the Bureau. During the hearing, Wray echoed Republican claims that the FBI conducted the investigation “by the book,” while asserting that supplemental background investigations are less rigorous than criminal and counterintelligence investigations.
On August 1, 2019, Coons and Whitehouse wrote to Wray asking for a complete picture of how the FBI handled the supplemental background investigation of Kavanaugh. They asked why the FBI failed to contact witnesses whose names were provided to the FBI as possessing “highly relevant” information; how involved the Trump White House was in narrowing the scope of the investigation; whether the FBI had used a tip line in previous background investigations to manage incoming allegations and information regarding a nominee; and more.
Nearly two years later and after repeated follow-up requests, the FBI finally responded to Whitehouse and Coons’s questions. The June 30, 2021 letter from the FBI Office of Congressional Affairs revealed new information on the Kavanaugh investigation: that Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination “was the first time that the FBI set-up a tip line for a nominee undergoing Senate confirmation,” and that tip line received “over 4,500 tips, including phone calls and electronic submissions.” The FBI apparently pursued none of these tips. Instead, by the FBI’s own account, it merely “provided all relevant tips” to Trump’s Office of White House Counsel, the very office that had constrained and directed the limited investigation.
Whitehouse, Coons, Durbin, Leahy, Blumenthal, Hirono, and Booker call on the FBI to answer a range of outstanding questions surrounding the Bureau’s use of the tip line and the relevant information it yielded. The senators press the Bureau for any records and communications related to the tip line investigation, including “all relevant tips” described in Wray’s letter that the FBI “provided . . . to the Office of White House Counsel.”
Full text of the senators’ letter yesterday is available below. Also available as PDFs are:
• Senators’ letter sent yesterday;
• June 30 FBI letter to Whitehouse and Coons;
• Whitehouse and Coons August 2019 letter to Wray.
July 21, 2021
The Honorable Christopher A. Wray
Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20535
Dear Director Wray:
Thank you for the FBI’s June 30, 2021 response to our August 1, 2019 letter regarding the supplemental background investigation of then-Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh. Your letter confirms that the FBI’s tip line was a departure from past practice and that the FBI was politically constrained by the Trump White House. It also belies the former president’s insistence that his administration did not limit the Bureau’s investigation of Justice Kavanaugh, and his claim that he “want[ed] the FBI to interview whoever [sic] they deem appropriate, at their discretion.”[1]
According to your letter, Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination “was the first time that the FBI set-up a tip line for a nominee undergoing Senate confirmation,” and that tip line received “over 4,500 tips, including phone calls and electronic submissions.” Your letter fails to explain how the FBI reviewed and assessed these tips or whether the Bureau conducted any interviews related to information received through the tip line or otherwise pursued the tips. Indeed, your letter does not describe any FBI investigation of the tips, and only states that the FBI “provided all relevant tips to the Office of White House Counsel,” the very office that appears to have constrained the FBI from conducting a thorough investigation. The admissions in your letter corroborate and explain numerous credible accounts by individuals and firms that they had contacted the FBI with information “highly relevant to . . . allegations” of sexual misconduct by Justice Kavanaugh, only to be ignored.[2] If the FBI was not authorized to or did not follow up on any of the tips that it received from the tip line, it is difficult to understand the point of having a tip line at all.
There remain questions unanswered from our August 2019 letter, and your June 2021 response raises significant additional questions:
1. Your letter notes that “the FBI follows the standard process established pursuant to a March 10 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Department of Justice and the White House.” Please provide a copy of that MOU.
2. Your letter notes that “Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination was the first time that the FBIs set-up a tip line for a nominee undergoing Senate Confirmation,” and states that “it was established at the direction of the FBI’s Security Division.” However, your letter does not identify or describe the policies or procedures that applied to the tip line. Therefore, please identify: (a) when the decision was made to use a tip line for Judge Kavanaugh’s investigation; (b) who the senior-most official authorizing the tip line was; (c) whether the tip line was set up through an already existing standard FBI open line or established as a dedicated independent tip line; (d) how the tip line was staffed (how many individuals and what level of training and experience was required); (e) how the “over 4,500 tips, including phone calls and electronic submissions” were recorded or preserved; (f) what policies or procedures governed or applied to the creation, operation, and documentation of the tip line; and (g) whether the White House Counsel’s instruction for any additional limited inquiry required or requested the use of a tip line.
3. Your letter notes that “[t]he FBI received over 4,500 tips, including phone calls and electronic submissions[,]” and that the FBI “provided all relevant tips to the Office of White House Counsel,” [3] but fails to explain how any individual tip was evaluated or categorized as “relevant” and how those tips were delivered to the White House. Therefore, please explain: (a) what criteria or standard applied to tips to determine relevancy; (b) how many tips the FBI deemed “relevant,” and how many tips the FBI “provided . . . to the Office of White House Counsel”; (c) whether FBI Security Division personnel or any other FBI personnel sorted, vetted, verified, or investigated the tips to determine whether they were relevant; (d) what policies or procedures governed the FBI process of investigating or vetting the tips; (e) the nature and extent of review or investigation per tip before they were made available to the White House Counsel; (f) how tips were formatted and delivered to the White House Counsel; and (g) whether the FBI maintained a copy or record of each tip after provision to the Office of White House Counsel.
4. Your letter indicated that the FBI interviewed ten individuals as part of several limited inquiries, but failed to explain whether these ten interviews were conducted as a result of tips received on the tip line. Therefore, please explain: (a) whether any potential witnesses were identified as having “relevant” information on the basis of tips received but not interviewed by the FBI; (b) if relevant witnesses were identified by the FBI through the tip line but not interviewed, explain the policy, procedure, or instruction, from the FBI, White House Counsel, or otherwise, that directed that witnesses with “relevant” information not be interviewed; (c) if the failure to interview was a matter of discretion, identify the individual responsible for making that determination.
5. Was the FBI directed by the White House not to interview either Dr. Blasey Ford or then-Judge Kavanaugh as part of its limited inquiries? If yes, please describe the directive and produce any relevant communications. If no, why did the FBI fail to interview Dr. Ford and then-Judge Kavanaugh?[4]
We ask that you answer these questions no later than August 31, 2021, and to the extent not already requested above, promptly produce all records and communications related to the tip line investigation, including but not limited to: the White House-DOJ MOU referenced in your letter; all communications regarding the establishment and parameters of the tip line; all documents related to the selection and parameters of the ten interviews conducted as part of the supplemental background investigations; and “all relevant tips” described in your letter that the FBI “provided . . . to the Office of White House Counsel.” In order to minimize the discovery burden of this request and advance our comprehension of the process, we ask that someone familiar with the Kavanaugh investigations provide a briefing to explain what took place and the existence and nature of documents responsive to our requests. We ask further that the Department of Justice identify someone tasked with overseeing and facilitating the responses to these requests, given the long delay we have already experienced.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
CC: Hon. Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States
https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/after-new-details-on-kavanaugh-investigation-surface-senators-call-on-fbi-for-answers-on-handling-of-tip-line
GOP Not Sold on Lindsey Graham’s Plan to Leave Washington to Block Budget Bill
Senator cites Texas Democrats in quorum-busting pitch that gets mixed reception from GOP colleagues
By Lindsay Wise
July 22, 2021 10:00 am ET
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lindsey-graham-urges-republicans-to-leave-washington-to-block-budget-bill-11626962401?mod=politics_lead_pos1
WASHINGTON— Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) is pitching fellow Republican senators on a last-ditch gambit to block Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget resolution: Skip town.
Mr. Graham believes a united Republican caucus can deny Democrats the 51 votes needed for quorum by leaving the capital en masse, citing the example of Texas Democrats, who fled their state to prevent the GOP-controlled legislature from enacting stricter voting laws. He said he is driven by his opposition to immigration provisions that Democrats might include in their resolution.
“If they put in amnesty in…that’s an assault on the system as we know it,” Mr. Graham said. “We should use any tool in our box to stop it.”
The Democrats’ plan is expected to set aside $120 billion for establishing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers—immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children—as well as other groups that could include farmworkers, according to Senate aides.
Some GOP senators are open to the quorum-busting idea, but others are skeptical, leaving Mr. Graham with a lot of convincing to do. When senators tried a similar trick decades ago, Capitol Police physically carried one of the fugitive lawmakers back onto the floor. Senate Democrats scoff at the threat.
Mr. Graham’s notion, put into play by the current 50-50 split in the Senate, has surfaced as longstanding norms and decorum are eroding on Capitol Hill.
Normally, under the Senate’s filibuster rule, the minority can prevent legislation from getting the 60 votes needed to advance. But a process called reconciliation allows budget-related bills to pass by simple majority, enabling Democrats to push through their $3.5 trillion package without any Republican support, if all 50 stick together. Vice President Kamala Harris could break a tie.
There is no precedent under which Ms. Harris would count toward quorum, however. Given that math, and the Constitution’s requirement that the Senate have a quorum to do business, some Republicans say they are intrigued by Mr. Graham’s plan to leave town. The senator first floated it on Fox News Channel last weekend and started reaching out to colleagues to gauge support.
“I agree with him,” said Sen. John Boozman (R., Ark.), who said he had a long visit with Mr. Graham to discuss the proposal. GOP Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Kevin Cramer of North Dakota and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin all said they would consider participating. Sen. John Kennedy (R., La.) is keeping an open mind but urged caution: “It’s a serious step.”
Democrats ridiculed Mr. Graham’s exit strategy.
“Hallelujah,” quipped Sen. Jon Tester (D. Mont.), when asked what he thought about the possibility of Republicans leaving D.C. “This is goofy,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D., Hawaii). “I think Lindsey was just being Lindsey.”
Asked about Mr. Graham’s tactics at a press conference on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) was dismissive. “That speaks for itself,” he said.
Denying quorum, known as “quorum-breaking” or “disappearing quorum,” was a common filibustering technique during the 19th century. Today, Senate rules allow the sergeant at arms to arrest absent senators and make them come to the floor.
While the sergeant at arms occasionally has been dispatched to corral senators, it is rare for a member to be physically forced into the chamber. The last time it happened was in 1988, when Capitol Police carried Sen. Bob Packwood (R., Ore.) onto the floor feet first at 1:17 a.m. to compel a quorum for a campaign finance bill.
“It was turmoil,” said Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.), who was presiding when it happened. Mr. Shelby is undecided whether he would join in Mr. Graham’s plan. “Generally, I would not like to just run on any fight.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) said Senate Republicans would face the same problem as the Democratic House members in Texas: “Eventually they’re going to have to go back,” he said. “So all it does is delay it.”
Mr. Graham’s plan might not work, even temporarily. Quorum is assumed in the Senate unless someone asks for a quorum call, so Republicans would need at least one GOP senator in the chamber to make the request.
That Republican could duck out and hide, but then Democrats could request unanimous consent to end the quorum call, a senior Democratic aide said. With no Republican present to object, quorum would be assumed again, and Democrats would be free to pass any bills they wanted unilaterally, the aide said.
As of Wednesday, Mr. Graham still had work to do in his own caucus. “Probably not,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R., S.D.), when asked if he would leave Washington to deny Democrats a quorum. “I’m not a big fan of those kinds of things,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.). Sen. Steve Daines (R., Mont.) was unequivocal: “No.”
Mr. Graham also has yet to convince Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.).
“Republicans tend to show up and vote in person unlike Texas Democrats, or our Democratic colleagues in the House for most of the past year,” Mr. McConnell said, referring to proxy voting during the pandemic.
—Kristina Peterson and Siobhan Hughes contributed to this article.
Write to Lindsay Wise at lindsay.wise@wsj.com
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lindsey-graham-urges-republicans-to-leave-washington-to-block-budget-bill-11626962401?mod=politics_lead_pos1
WSJ NEWS EXCLUSIVE NATIONAL SECURITY U.S. Expands Efforts to Relocate Afghans at Risk of Taliban Vengeance
American bases in Kuwait, Qatar to be temporary homes for thousands of Afghan interpreters, family members before they resettle in U.S.
By Gordon Lubold and Courtney McBride
July 22, 2021 2:10 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-expands-efforts-to-relocate-afghans-at-risk-of-taliban-vengeance-11626977411?mod=e2tw
WASHINGTON—The U.S. military is preparing to house as many as 35,000 Afghan interpreters and family members at two American bases, in Kuwait and in Qatar, in an expanding effort to aid those who face Taliban retribution for helping American forces, U.S. officials said.
Plans are under way to build temporary housing and other facilities at Camp As Sayliyah in Qatar and Camp Buehring in Kuwait that would be designed to house the interpreters for at least 18 months. Thousands of welcome packages, containing health and comfort items and packaged military meals that don’t contain pork, to accommodate Muslim dietary requirements, are being positioned at the bases, officials said.
The plans are to accommodate the interpreters and their families as they await processing for American visas to be permanently resettled in the U.S. Construction and other preparations at the two bases are expected to cost the U.S. government several hundred million dollars, officials said.
The plans build on similar preparations elsewhere. A first group of about 2,500 Afghan interpreters and their families are expected to arrive at Fort Lee, Va. in coming days, officials said. Those people, who include 750 applicants and family members, will stay at Fort Lee for a week to 10 days before being resettled in the U.S. permanently, officials said.
Thousands of other interpreters and their families aren’t as far along in the Special Immigrant Visa application process, which can take several years to complete. As Taliban fighters make gains across Afghanistan, officials cite a growing need to evacuate those interpreters and their families from the country as soon as possible to protect them from potential retaliation.
In third countries, such as Qatar and Kuwait, the Afghans can complete security vetting and other application procedures before resettlement in the U.S., officials said. Officials said arrangements with Kuwait and Qatar weren’t final, and State Department officials have yet to determine the scale of the operation, which it is calling Operation Allies Refuge.
“We are conducting planning for multiple scenarios, including the potential for tens of thousands of people,” said one U.S. official. “Though it’s unclear for how many, and how soon and for how long.”
While the military is preparing for as many as 35,000 evacuees, other administration officials said talks under way with the potential host nations encompass lower possible numbers of Afghans.
President BIden’s announcement in April that he was ending the U.S. role in the nearly 20-year conflict added momentum to a continuing Taliban offensive, officials have said. That put in peril the tens of thousands of Afghan interpreters and others who had helped the U.S. over the years.
Aiding them is a bipartisan cause; Republican and Democratic leaders, as well as top U.S. military officials, have urged the Biden administration to move faster on the evacuation plans.
Mr. Biden in recent weeks grew frustrated at the pace of progress, and directed officials to move more quickly, according to a U.S. official.
At least one of the two bases, Camp As Sayliyah in Qatar, had been slated for closure before military officials began preparing it for the possibility of housing interpreters. The base played a central role in the war in Iraq in 2003 and after. It was considered a base for rest and relaxation for American troops, equipped with pools, other recreation facilities and higher-caliber residential housing. Camp Buehring in Kuwait, built as a waystation for U.S. troops transiting into the war in Iraq, has some of the same kind of features and recreational facilities, officials said.
The Biden administration is working to compress the time it takes for people to apply for the Special Immigrant Visas. About 70,000 Afghans have received such visas since 2008, State Department officials said Wednesday.
The State Department has identified 4,000 principal applicants and families whose visa applications are in early stages, making them ineligible for transfer directly to the U.S. like some of the others.
State Department officials said they would be transported to third countries, without confirming that Qatar and Kuwait are the destinations. Those people will complete the Special Immigrant Visa process in the third countries and won’t need to spend time at Fort Lee or another U.S. facility, officials said.
Applications for Special Immigrant Visas, known as SIVs, total more than 20,000, with approximately half of those still in the initial phases of the process, according to State Department officials. Advocacy groups such as No One Left Behind estimate that as many as 300 Afghans have been killed by the Taliban for their association with the U.S. since 2009. Advocates think tens of thousands more interpreters and others should be eligible for the program.
U.S. officials said some Afghans who assisted the U.S. government have been unable to meet the documentation and other requirements of the SIV program; they said the Defense Department is helping people who may have lost touch with contractors who employed them in years past.
For those people who aided the U.S. government and other organizations, but may not be eligible for the SIV program, officials said the administration is considering several options, including the U.S. refugee program.
The department has accelerated SIV processing by increasing staff at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, said Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources Brian McKeon, with 2,500 visas approved since January. Processing for applications was stalled when the U.S. Embassy in Kabul had to suspend in-person interviews during the Covid-19 pandemic.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-expands-efforts-to-relocate-afghans-at-risk-of-taliban-vengeance-11626977411?mod=e2tw
Rep. Eric Swalwell @RepSwalwell The House voted 407-16 to pass the ALLIES Act to help Afghans who face retribution for aiding our troops. The 16 nays, all from @HouseGOP :
Biggs
Boebert
Brooks
DesJarlais
Duncan
Good
Gosar
Greene
Hern
Hice
Massie
Moore
Perry
Posey
Rosendale
Roy
8:25 PM · Jul 22, 2021·Twitter Web App
The House voted 407-16 to pass the ALLIES Act to help Afghans who face retribution for aiding our troops. The 16 nays, all from @HouseGOP:
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) July 22, 2021
🚫Biggs
🚫Boebert
🚫Brooks
🚫DesJarlais
🚫Duncan
🚫Good
🚫Gosar
🚫Greene
🚫Hern
🚫Hice
🚫Massie
🚫Moore
🚫Perry
🚫Posey
🚫Rosendale
🚫Roy
Tommy Robinson ordered to pay £100,000 to Syrian refugee after losing libel case
The English Defence League founder’s viral Facebook videos led to Jamal Hijazi ‘facing death threats and extremist agitation'
By India McTaggart
22 July 2021 • 2:58pm
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/22/tommy-robinson-ordered-pay-100000-syrian-refugee-losing-libel/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1626962389
Tommy Robinson has lost a libel case brought against him by a Syrian schoolboy who was filmed being attacked at school.
The English Defence League founder linked with far-Right extremism, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has been ordered to pay £100,000 in damages to the schoolboy, Jamal Hijazi.
The 17-year-old was filmed being attacked in the playground at Almondbury School in Huddersfield in November 2018.
Shortly after the video of the incident went viral, Mr Robinson claimed in two Facebook videos that Jamal was "not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school".
In the clips viewed by nearly one million people, the 38-year-old also claimed Jamal "beat a girl black and blue" and "threatened to stab" another boy at his school, allegations the teenager denies.
At a four-day trial in April, Jamal's lawyers said that Mr Robinson's comments had "a devastating effect" on the schoolboy and his family who had come to the UK as refugees from Homs, Syria.
Mr Robinson, who represented himself, argued his comments were substantially true, claiming to have "uncovered dozens of accounts of aggressive, abusive and deceitful behaviour" by Jamal.
However, in a judgment delivered on Thursday, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled in Jamal's favour and granted him £100,000 in damages.
Catrin Evans QC, for Jamal, previously said that Robinson's comments led to the teenager "facing death threats and extremist agitation" and that he should receive damages of between £150,000 and £190,000.
During the trial, Ms Evans described Mr Robinson as "a well-known extreme-right advocate" with an "anti-Muslim agenda" who used social media to spread his views.
She added that Mr Robinson's videos "turned Jamal into the aggressor and the bully into a righteous white knight".
However, Mr Robinson maintained he was an independent journalist during the trial, telling the court: "The media simply had zero interest in the other side of this story, the uncomfortable truth."
A hearing will follow Thursday's judgment to consider the consequences of the ruling.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/22/tommy-robinson-ordered-pay-100000-syrian-refugee-losing-libel/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1626962389
Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq 1/BREAKING NEWS - STATEMENT BY ATTORNEYS FOR @CapitolPolice OFFICER #HARRYDUNN
Responding to @TuckerCarlson & @FoxNews
.
#January6thInsurrection #January6thSelectCommittee
David Laufman and Bradley P. Moss
3:40 AM · Jul 22, 2021·Twitter Web App
THREAD
1/BREAKING NEWS - STATEMENT BY ATTORNEYS FOR @CapitolPolice OFFICER #HARRYDUNN
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) July 22, 2021
Responding to @TuckerCarlson & @FoxNews.#January6thInsurrection #January6thSelectCommittee pic.twitter.com/OOWsb6Md0C
Robert J. DeNault @robertjdenault ·Jul 20 Thinking about Qatar bailing out Jared Kushner’s business in 2018 after some strange meetings between Jared and Saudi Arabian leaders, and then Trump announcing support for a Saudi blockade of Qatar, for no particular reason today.
Kushners Near Deal With Qatar-Linked Company for Troubled Tower
By Charles V. Bagli and Jesse Drucker
May 17, 2018
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/nyregion/kushner-deal-qatar-666-5th.html
Robert J. DeNault @robertjdenault ·
It’s been seven months since he left office and Trump’s CFO and one of his closest business associates have now been indicted on criminal charges related to fraud or foreign influence on US policy. Worth thinking about that for a second.
THREAD
https://twitter.com/robertjdenault/status/1417975546617683970
Michael Cohen thinks Jared Kushner may have already flipped
Bill Palmer | 8:00 pm EDT July 21, 2021
https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/michael-cohen-thinks-jared-kushner-may-have-already-flipped/40317/
When former Trump administration money man Tom Barrack was indicted and arrested yesterday, we noticed something interesting. Even though Barrack is a west coast guy, it was the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York – based in Brooklyn – who ran the criminal investigation into him.
There are numerous reasons for how and why jurisdiction can play out the way that it does. But we did find it interesting that the EDNY who charged Barrack yesterday is the same EDNY that – according to the New York Times – was investigating Jared Kushner’s finances back in late 2017. Barrack and Kushner’s financial interests in the Middle East always seemed to be intertwined, particularly back in 2017.
The EDNY’s Kushner investigation apparently didn’t go anywhere; perhaps the Trump administration put a freeze on it. But now that the Department of Justice is free from Trump’s meddling, we’re suddenly seeing the EDNY charging Tom Barrack. We wondered if perhaps the EDNY has brought its Kushner case back to life, and is nailing Barrack to try to get him to flip on Kushner.
But Michael Cohen, who knows the Trump family better than just about anyone, has a different take. He tweeted this today: “Interesting how Jared Kushner (#SecretaryOfEverything) name appears to be absent from all the controversy, indictments and arrests. Is he next to fall or a cooperating witness? Knowing what a snake he is, I bet the latter!”
This is an intriguing possibility, to say the least. Now that Trump is out of power, various prosecutors are known to be investigating Trump and his associates left and right. The EDNY is targeting Tom Barrack. The SDNY is targeting former Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Victoria Toensing. New York State is targeting the Trump family, the Trump Organization, and Allen Weisselberg, and so on. Yet in all of these Trump-centric criminal probes in 2021, Kushner’s name hasn’t publicly surfaced in any of them?
It’s also worth a reminder that just as the initial Trump Organization indictments were coming down, CNN ran a surreal story claiming that Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump had decided to “distance” themselves from Donald Trump. The story obviously came from Jared and Ivanka’s camp, and it was clear that they were trying to signal to someone, somewhere, that they wanted no part of the indictments that were coming down the pike.
So it raises some interesting questions. Has the EDNY indicted Tom Barrack because it wants to flip him against Jared Kushner? Has Kushner flipped, and helped the EDNY with its case against Barrack? There’s no way to know what’s going on yet. But Michael Cohen is correct in that Kushner’s seeming absence from any of these cascading Trump-related criminal investigations is certainly conspicuous. If Kushner did flip, he wouldn’t stop with Barrack, right? How far would he go?
https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/michael-cohen-thinks-jared-kushner-may-have-already-flipped/40317/
UK ‘pingdemic’ spreads as record 600,000 people told to self-isolate
Threat to food and fuel supplies prompts business leaders to call for quarantine restrictions to be loosened
Tim Bradshaw, Jim Pickard and David Sheppard in London AN HOUR AGO
https://www.ft.com/content/1bdef6b5-672d-46e0-9502-492a432a51af
A record 600,000 people were ordered to self-isolate by the NHS Covid-19 app in the week to July 14 as worker shortages caused by the latest wave of the pandemic in the UK threatened to disrupt food and fuel supplies.
The number of “pings” from the NHS Covid Test and Trace app telling people who have been in close contact with someone testing positive for coronavirus rose by about 17 per cent on the previous week’s total to 607,486 in England.
A further 11,417 contact-tracing alerts were sent in Wales, the latest figures released by the Department of Health revealed on Thursday. However, the rate of growth has slowed over the previous week, when the number of alerts jumped 46 per cent to more than 520,000.
During the same week ending July 14, daily Covid-19 cases in the UK rose by more than 60 per cent, reaching their highest point since mid-January.
British business leaders have become increasingly agitated about the impact of the “pingdemic” on staffing, which has exacerbated existing problems caused by Brexit and a shortage of lorry drivers.
On Thursday BP said it had closed a “handful of sites” due to a lack of unleaded petrol and diesel while the business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said the government was “monitoring” the situation as supermarkets apologised for empty shelves.
“We are experiencing some fuel supply issues at some of our retail sites in the UK and unfortunately have therefore seen a handful of sites temporarily closed due to a lack of both unleaded and diesel grades,” BP said.
While the company said the “vast majority of these temporary issues” would be resolved within a day, it added that problems caused by UK driver shortages had been made worse by the closure last week of a distribution terminal due to Covid-19 isolations.
Responding to pictures of empty supermarket shelves on social media and the front pages of some of Britain’s newspapers on Thursday morning, Kwarteng said the government was “very concerned about some developments”.
“I know we are seeing shortages,” the minister told BBC Radio 4. “I’ve seen the pictures today.”
Business groups have called for the government to bring forward its plan to exempt all doubled-jabbed people from self-isolation from August 16, even if they are “pinged” by the NHS Test and Trace app and advised to self-isolate.
The government has announced exemptions for some sectors identified as critical, including health and transport. Kwarteng indicated that further details will be set out on Thursday afternoon.
The British Retail Consortium said the “pingdemic” was putting pressure on retailers’ ability to maintain opening hours and keep aisles stocked, adding: “Government needs to act fast.”
Meanwhile, Iceland Foods said more than 1,000 workers, 3 per cent of its total UK staff, have been asked to self-isolate, after being pinged by the app, forcing it to reduce trading hours and shut stores.
It plans to recruit 2,000 additional staff to cover absences due to self-isolation. But Richard Walker, managing director of Iceland, told the BBC that the photographs of empty shelves were “isolated incidents” and warned the public against panic-buying.
Kwarteng insisted that the food shortages were “not a universal thing”.
“I don’t want people to get the impression that every shelf in every supermarket is bare. That’s not the case,” he said.
“But we are certainly concerned about incidents of shortages and looking at the supply chains of critical industries. We are reviewing that situation,” he added.
According to the health department the number of people using the NHS Test and Trace app to register at pubs, shops and other venues fell 10 per cent compared with the previous week. The fall suggests more people may have deactivated or deleted the app to avoid being put into isolation if they came close to someone who later tested positive for the virus.
A recent survey by YouGov suggested that one in 10 previous users of the app had deleted it, while one in five who still had the app installed had turned off its contact-tracing capabilities.
The app sends out a notification recommending self-isolation, after using a smartphone’s Bluetooth signals to anonymously detect when a user has spent time close to someone who subsequently tested positive for the virus. More than 4m such alerts have now been sent by the NHS Covid app in England and Wales since its launch last September.
Kwarteng insisted individuals should still quarantine if they are contacted through the system. “I would strongly recommend that they continue to do that,” he said.
https://www.ft.com/content/1bdef6b5-672d-46e0-9502-492a432a51af
Self-proclaimed ‘incel’ planned to kill sorority girls at an Ohio university, feds say
By Jaclyn Peiser
Reporter on the Morning Mix team
Today at 5:48 a.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07/22/incel-tres-genco-ohio/
Weeks after Tres Genco returned to Ohio after being kicked out of Army basic training last January, federal investigators say he penned a letter with a chilling warning.
“If you’re reading this, I’ve done something horrible,” Genco, now 21, wrote in the document entitled “isolated,” according to court documents. “Somehow you’ve come across the writings of the deluded and homicidal.”
He signed the letter, “Your hopeful friend and murderer.”
Four days later, Genco searched online for “planning a shooting crime,” prosecutors said, and drove to an unnamed university in Ohio to scope out the campus, where he was allegedly planning to shoot students in sororities. His goal, investigators say, was to kill as many as 3,000 people.
Law enforcement arrested Genco at his home in Hillsboro, Ohio, on Wednesday and charged him with attempting to conduct a mass shooting of women — a hate crime — and illegally possessing a machine gun.
Genco’s attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Wednesday.
Genco self-identified as an “incel” or “involuntary celibate,” an online movement made up of predominantly White men who “seek to commit violence in support of their belief that women unjustly deny them sexual or romantic attention to which they believe they are entitled,” prosecutors said.
The group gained national attention in May 2014 when 22-year-old Elliot Rodger used guns, a knife and his car to kill six people and injure 13 others in the Isla Vista neighborhood near Santa Barbara, Calif. Two of the victims had been walking by a sorority house at the University of California at Santa Barbara when he opened fire. Rodger fatally shot himself after the attack.
Rodger’s actions inspired similar attacks from other self-proclaimed incels. In 2015, a 26-year-old student at an Oregon community college fatally shot nine people and wounded seven others before he was killed in a shootout with police. He mentioned Rodger in a racist manifesto where he lamented that he was a virgin with no girlfriend.
In 2018, a then-25-year-old man also claiming to be an incel rammed a van into a crowd of pedestrians, killing 10. He was found guilty in March and faces a life sentence.
Genco openly expressed his admiration for Rodger online, prosecutors said. From July 2019 through March 2020, Genco actively used popular incel websites, where he posted that he felt “spiritually connected” to Rodger and called him a “saint.” Genco said he was inspired to follow Rodger’s example, specifically noting an incident in 2012 when Rodger sprayed a group of college kids at a park with orange juice from a water gun. Genco said he did the same, but to a group of women, court documents said.
“I suggest it to all incels,” Genco wrote, according to the indictment, “extremely empowering action.”
Over the span of five months in 2019, Genco purchased “two factory Glock 17 magazines and [a] 9mm Glock 17 clip,” prosecutors said. He also allegedly got tactical gloves, a bulletproof vest and a Bowie knife, often used for hunting or in combat.
In the summer of 2019, Genco wrote down the name of an Ohio university and a list that appeared to refer to plans for an attack on May 23, 2020. The note referenced weapons and a “KC,” or kill count, of potentially 3,000 people, according to court documents.
On Aug. 3, 2019, Genco wrote a manifesto entitled “A Hideous Symphony” by “Tres Genco, the socially exiled incel,” in which he explained why he signed up for Army training camp.
“This training will be for the attainment of one reality, the death of what I have been deprived most, but also cherish and fantasize at the opportunity of having but has been neglected of: Women,” he wrote, according to court documents. “I will slaughter out of jealousy, hatred, and revenge.”
Incels, 4chan and the Beta Uprising: making sense of one of the Internet’s most-reviled subcultures
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/10/07/incels-4chan-and-the-beta-uprising-making-sense-of-one-of-the-internets-most-reviled-subcultures/?noredirect=on&itid=lk_interstitial_manual_27
Later that day, Genco allegedly conducted an online search for sororities and the university in Ohio. Other online searches in August 2019 showed he “researched gun modifications and saved illustrated guides to constructing M-16s,” information on Rodger and a homemade stun grenade.
He left for boot camp in Georgia later that month but never finished. He returned to Ohio in December 2019 after being discharged for conduct and performance issues, according to court documents.
On March 11, 2020, Genco allegedly searched online for police scanner codes for Columbus, Ohio, police and university police.
The next day, an informant identified as “Individual-1” in court documents called the Highland County Sheriff’s Office and reported that Genco was making threats and “locked himself out of his bedroom with a gun,” the affidavit said.
The informant told law enforcement that Genco had “become erratic and somewhat violent over the past several months” and warned that Genco was “planning to hurt someone.”
Officers soon arrived at Genco’s home and arrested him.
Police then searched Genco’s home and car. In his trunk, law enforcement found a firearm with a bump stock attached, several loaded magazines, some boxes of ammunition and body armor. Police also found a semiautomatic pistol with no serial number or manufacturer’s mark hidden in a heating vent in Genco’s bedroom.
Genco is due in court on Friday. If convicted, he could face up to 10 years for the machine gun charge and up to life in prison for the attempted hate crime.
By Jaclyn Peiser
Jaclyn Peiser is a reporter on the Morning Mix team. She previously covered the media industry for the New York Times. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07/22/incel-tres-genco-ohio/
‘I don’t care if you think I’m Satan reincarnated’: Biden says no excuse for people underplaying Capitol riot
‘You can’t say nothing happened on 6 January,’ says Biden
Mayank Aggarwal @journomayank
2 hours ago
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/capitol-riot-biden-cnn-townhall-b1888390.html
President Biden on Wednesday said he doesn’t care if someone thinks he is “Satan reincarnated” but there is no looking away from the 6 January Capitol riots.
“I don’t care if you think I’m Satan reincarnated, the fact is you can’t look at that television and say nothing happened on the 6th (January)”, said Joe Biden at a town hall in Cincinnati, Ohio, organised by CNN News.
“You can’t listen to people who say this was a peaceful march,” he said.
The US president also said that no matter the party, there is only one way to view the 6 January assault on the Capitol by Trump supporters.
On 6 January, a mob, allegedly incited by former president Donald Trump, stormed the Capitol Hill. It attacked police officers tasked to protect the building, entered the premises, and forced lawmakers to take shelters.
Prior to the riots, Mr Trump had been continuously alleging fraud in the November 2020 presidential elections without offering any evidence to back those claims.
Since the riots, more than 500 people have been arrested and recently, five from a family who took part in the riots were charged by federal authorities.
In the November 2020 elections, President Biden had won 81.2 million votes compared to 74.2 million votes in favour of Donald Trump. With this, Joe Biden had become the first US presidential candidate to have received more than 80 million votes.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations, in 2020 presidential elections, more than 159.63 million people voted – which was the largest total voter turnout in the history of the US and it was also the first time that more than 140 million people voted.
On Wednesday, during the town hall, President Biden said, “more people voted last time than any time in American history in the middle of the worst pandemic in history... They’re going to show up again.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/capitol-riot-biden-cnn-townhall-b1888390.html
Former Advisor to Presidential Candidate Among Three Defendants Charged with Acting as Agents of a Foreign Government
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-advisor-presidential-candidate-among-three-defendants-charged-acting-agents-foreign
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, July 20, 2021
Former Advisor to Presidential Candidate Among Three Defendants Charged with Acting as Agents of a Foreign Government
Defendants Allegedly Acted and Conspired to Act at the Direction of Senior United Arab Emirates Officials to Influence a Presidential Campaign, Public Opinion and the U.S. Government
A seven-count indictment was unsealed today in a New York federal court relating to the defendants’ unlawful efforts to advance the interests of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in the United States at the direction of senior UAE officials by influencing the foreign policy positions of the campaign of a candidate in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and, subsequently, the foreign policy positions of the U.S. government in the incoming administration, as well as seeking to influence public opinion in favor of UAE interests.
Thomas Joseph Barrack, 74, of Santa Monica, California; Matthew Grimes, 27, of Aspen, Colorado; and Rashid Sultan Rashid Al Malik Alshahhi, aka Rashid Al Malik and Rashid Al-Malik, 43, a UAE national, are accused of acting and conspiring to act as agents of the UAE between April 2016 and April 2018. The indictment also charges Barrack with obstruction of justice and making multiple false statements during a June 20, 2019, interview with federal law enforcement agents.
“The defendants repeatedly capitalized on Barrack’s friendships and access to a candidate who was eventually elected President, high-ranking campaign and government officials, and the American media to advance the policy goals of a foreign government without disclosing their true allegiances,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Mark Lesko of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “The conduct alleged in the indictment is nothing short of a betrayal of those officials in the United States, including the former President. Through this indictment, we are putting everyone — regardless of their wealth or perceived political power — on notice that the Department of Justice will enforce the prohibition of this sort of undisclosed foreign influence.”
“As alleged, the defendants, using their positions of power and influence in a presidential election year, engaged in a conspiracy to illegally advance and promote the interests of the United Arab Emirates in this country, in flagrant violation of their obligation to notify the Attorney General of their activities and in derogation of the American people’s right to know when a foreign government seeks to influence the policies of our government and our public opinion,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Jacquelin M. Kasulis for the Eastern District of New York. “These arrests serve as a warning to those who act at the direction of foreign governments without disclosing their actions, as well as those who seek to mislead investigators about their actions, that they will be brought to justice and face the consequences.”
“Today’s indictment confirms the FBI’s unwavering commitment to rooting out those individuals who think they can manipulate the system to the detriment of the United States and the American people,” said Assistant Director Calvin Shivers of the FBI's Criminal Investigative Division. "Barrack is alleged to have abused his access to government officials to illegally advance the interests of foreign governments. The FBI stands in concert with our external partners to ensure all who seek to wield illegal influence are charged for their crimes.”
“American citizens have a right to know when foreign governments, or their agents, are attempting to exert influence on our government,” said Assistant Director in Charge William F. Sweeney Jr. of the FBI’s New York Field Office. “This is especially important to Americans during a presidential election year, and the laws on the books were created to protect our nation from such untoward influence. This case is about secret attempts to influence our highest officials, and when that corrupt behavior was discovered, we allege Mr. Barrack went even further, obstructing and lying to FBI special agents. In case it needs repeating, each of those bad choices is a federal felony, and each now comes with significant consequences – the first being today’s indictment.”
According to court documents, between April and November 2016, Barrack served as an informal advisor to the campaign of the candidate in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Between November 2016 and January 2017, Barrack served as Chairman of the Presidential Inaugural Committee. Beginning in January 2017, Barrack informally advised senior U.S. government officials on issues related to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Barrack also sought appointment to a senior role in the U.S. government, including the role of Special Envoy to the Middle East. Barrack served as the Executive Chairman of a global investment management firm headquartered in Los Angeles, and Grimes was employed at the firm and reported directly to Barrack. During the relevant time period, Alshahhi worked as an agent of the UAE and was in frequent contact with Barrack and Grimes, including numerous in-person meetings in the United States and the UAE.
As alleged in the indictment, the defendants used Barrack’s status as a senior outside advisor to the campaign and, subsequently, to senior U.S. government officials, to advance the interests of and provide intelligence to the UAE while simultaneously failing to notify the Attorney General that their actions were taken at the direction of senior UAE officials. Barrack – directly and through Alshahhi and Grimes – was regularly and repeatedly in contact with the senior leadership of the UAE government. On multiple occasions, Barrack referred to Alshahhi as the UAE’s “secret weapon” to advance its foreign policy agenda in the United States.
Barrack, Alshahhi and Grimes allegedly took numerous steps in the United States to advance the interests of the UAE. For example, in May 2016, Barrack inserted language praising the UAE into a campaign speech to be delivered by the candidate about U.S. energy policy in May 2016 and emailed an advance draft of the speech to Alshahhi for delivery to senior UAE officials. Similarly, throughout 2016 and 2017, the defendants sought and received direction and feedback, including talking points, from senior UAE officials in connection with national press appearances Barrack used to promote the interests of the UAE. After one appearance in which Barrack repeatedly praised the UAE, Barrack emailed Alshahhi, “I nailed it. . . for the home team,” referring to the UAE. Barrack and Grimes also solicited direction from senior UAE officials in advance of the publication of an op-ed authored by Barrack and published in a national magazine in October 2016 and removed certain language at the direction of senior UAE officials, as relayed by Alshahhi.
Following the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the defendants repeatedly acted at the direction of UAE officials to influence the foreign policy positions of the incoming administration in favor of UAE interests. For example, in December 2016, Barrack attended a meeting with Grimes, Alshahhi and senior UAE government officials, during which he advised them to create a “wish list” of U.S. foreign policy items that the UAE wanted accomplished in the first 100 days, six months, year and four years of the incoming administration of the U.S. President-elect.
In March 2017, Barrack and his co-defendants agreed to promote the candidacy of an individual favored by senior UAE officials for the position of U.S. Ambassador to the UAE. In May 2017, Barrack agreed to provide Alshahhi with non-public information about the views and reactions of senior U.S. government officials following a White House meeting between senior U.S. officials and senior UAE officials.
In September 2017, Alshahhi communicated with Barrack about the opposition of the UAE to a proposed summit at Camp David to address an ongoing dispute between the State of Qatar, the UAE and other Middle Eastern governments, after which Barrack sought to advise the President of the United States against holding the Camp David summit. The summit never happened.
In furtherance of the alleged criminal conspiracy and conduct, Barrack and Grimes, with the assistance of Alshahhi, acquired a dedicated cellular telephone and installed a secure messaging application to facilitate Barrack’s communications with senior UAE officials.
Neither Alshahhi nor Barrack nor Grimes provided the required notification to the U.S. Attorney General that they were acting in the United States as agents of a foreign government.
On June 20, 2019, Barrack voluntarily met with FBI special agents. During the interview, Barrack allegedly made numerous false statements, including falsely denying that Alshahhi had ever requested that he take any actions on behalf of the UAE.
Barrack and Grimes were arrested this morning and are scheduled to be arraigned this afternoon in the Central District of California. Alshahhi remains at large.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Nathan Reilly, Ryan Harris, Samuel Nitze and Hiral Mehta of the Eastern District of New York and Trial Attorney Matthew McKenzie of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control are prosecuting the case.
The charges in the indictment are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Attachment(s):
Download Barrack et al. Indictment
Topic(s):
Counterintelligence and Export Control
National Security
Component(s):
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
National Security Division (NSD)
USAO - New York, Eastern
Press Release Number:
21-670
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-advisor-presidential-candidate-among-three-defendants-charged-acting-agents-foreign
The Matt Gaetz-Marjorie Taylor Greene Fundraising Tour Is Actually a Cash Fire
Roger Sollenberger
Thu, July 22, 2021, 10:05 AM
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/matt-gaetz-marjorie-taylor-greene-090547750.html
At the height of the controversy surrounding Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and the revelations that he’s under investigation for sex trafficking, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) bet big on a nationwide joint fundraising tour with her embattled colleague. But new campaign filings show that not only did the gamble not pay off, but that the much-maligned Republicans actually spent four times as much as they raised.
Greene, the House GOP’s top fundraiser, is now faced with a decision: She can continue to join forces with her beleaguered ally at the expense of her campaign war chest, or she can cut bait and let Gaetz fend for himself.
Since Gaetz and Greene kicked off their joint fundraising committee with a May 7 event at The Villages in central Florida, their campaigns and joint fundraising committee have posted a combined loss of $342,000. And according to recent filings with the Federal Election Commission, that joint fundraising effort, “Put America First,” reported only $59,345.54 in contributions.
That sort of meager haul would be fine for a dinner or one-time event, but Gaetz and Greene have repeatedly held high-profile events and spent a whopping $287,036.19 to hold them—meaning they’re in the hole by more than $225,000.
Both Gaetz and Greene contributed $150,000 apiece from their own campaigns to the joint fundraising committee. And they’ve raised money almost entirely from small-dollar donors. Only four people gave $500 or more to the shared committee. But their campaign tour of some of the most Trump-friendly areas in the nation has been inordinately expensive.
In fact, the big winner from the Gaetz and Greene barnstorming appears to be Gaetz’s PR firm.
The Logan Circle Group, which the campaign hired in early April, made off with more than a million dollars in the second quarter of 2021. While the majority of that money came from Gaetz—$825,000 over the course of one month—the firm nudged past the million-dollar mark with the $250,000 it received from Put America First. Those payments, nearly 90 percent of the committee’s total budget, were for “event production and management,” according to FEC filings.
A Gaetz campaign spokesperson told The Daily Beast that all donations raised on the tour had gone to Put America First. Asked again if that was correct, the spokesperson said it was. Upon double-checking with the campaign’s finance team, the spokesperson would only say that, “Our filings speak for themselves.”
But if the filings speak for themselves, then they’re not saying many good things.
Individually, Gaetz and Greene raised $1.34 million and $1.31 million in the second quarter of 2021, respectively. Those totals are certainly impressive, and Gaetz and Greene could argue that the publicity from their circuit is helping them fundraise individually. Except, they’re not making that argument, and both candidates have actually raised less in this most recent quarter than they did in the first.
Matt Gaetz’s Wingman Paid Dozens of Young Women—and a 17-Year-Old
Gaetz slipped from $1.82 million in the first months of the year, his personal best. He also spent $1.95 million along the way, the majority of it on fundraising and a pricey public relations scramble to push back against reports about the investigation.
But Greene—whose campaign is easily the biggest money draw among the House GOP—plummeted, coming $1.9 million short of her eye-popping $3.2 million first-quarter haul. After expenses, including travel and fundraising costs, she closed the second quarter with only a $300,000 net gain. She had ended the first quarter up $1.8 million.
A Gaetz spokesperson—who was not affiliated with the Logan Circle Group—defended the three-term congressman’s fundraising performance.
“Despite an endless stream of lies from the media, Congressman Gaetz continues to be among the most prodigious fundraisers in Congress and is the only Republican who doesn’t accept donations from federal lobbyists or PACs,” the spokesperson said in a text message. Gaetz, a three-term congressman representing a deep-red district in the Florida panhandle, hadn’t raised more than a million dollars in a quarter until October 2020.
“He thanks his tens of thousands of donors and promises to always fight for them,” this spokesperson added.
New Docs Show Matt Gaetz Campaign in Full Damage-Control Mode
Greene and Gaetz, arguably the two most controversial House Republicans, were united this spring by scandals that had not only alienated them from the mainstream, but left them isolated within their own party.
At the time, Gaetz was the focus of a string of media reports revealing details about his role in a federal sex crimes investigation, which in addition to the trafficking allegations reportedly extends to a sweeping public corruption probe.
Soon after The New York Times broke the news of the investigation, Gaetz—a self-identifying “Florida man” who wears his loneliness among D.C. colleagues as a badge of courage—found himself even further marooned politically. Only Greene and longtime ally Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) were willing to speak up in his defense.
“When I first got to Washington, the party leaders said ‘Gaetz, it seems to us you’re not really a team player,’ and I said ‘I am, but you’re not my team,’” Gaetz told supporters in his district the day before the Times story ran.
Greene, for her part, had just been bitten twice by her GOP colleagues. In February, House Republicans stripped the conspiracy theorist of her committees, and in April, she was forced to cancel her proposed “America First” caucus amid criticism for its white nationalist rhetoric. Gaetz had signed on to the caucus, and the pair later applied the same moniker to their tour.
Two months in, however, their joint effort appears primarily concerned with fighting gravity. Venues have canceled events in response to public outcry, and after the launch at The Villages the media has largely ignored their whistle-stops.
But Greene, who has shown GOP leadership her value as a fundraising powerhouse, still apparently sees reason to go forward, at least according to the Gaetz campaign. A spokesperson for the Florida Republican told The Daily Beast that Greene had personally committed to future events benefiting the joint committee.
“Congressman Gaetz and Congresswoman Greene look forward to announcing new stops on the America First tour in the coming weeks,” the spokesperson said.
The Greene campaign did not reply to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
Read more at The Daily Beast.
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/matt-gaetz-marjorie-taylor-greene-090547750.html
Audio: Trump says he spoke to a ‘loving crowd’ at Jan. 6 rally
The former president described the atmosphere on Jan. 6 as largely friendly and peaceful in exclusive interview for the new book ‘I Alone Can Fix It.’
By Carol D. Leonnig and Philip Rucker
Today at 10:48 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/21/trump-interview-i-alone-can-fix-it/
AUDIO file
When former president Donald Trump sat down for an interview in late March at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., he described the events of Jan. 6 as largely peaceful and his supporters as friendly, saying the audience he addressed at a rally on the Ellipse before the attack on the U.S. Capitol was a “loving crowd.”
Five people later died after thousands of his supporters beat back police to storm through barricades and charge inside the Capitol, and hundreds of lawmakers and their staffers were forced to scramble for safety. But Trump, speaking in an exclusive interview for the new book “I Alone Can Fix It,” said the mob was “ushered in” by police.
‘I Alone Can Fix It’ book excerpt: The inside story of Trump’s defiance and inaction on Jan. 6
“Personally what I wanted is what they wanted,” he said of the crowd. “They showed up just to show support because I happen to believe the election was rigged at a level like nothing has ever been rigged before.”
He also detailed his disappointment in and anger with then-Vice President Mike Pence and would not commit to selecting Pence as his running mate if he runs again in 2024. “I’m not locked into anything,” he said.
Listen to the audio clips above and below.
AUDIO file
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/21/trump-interview-i-alone-can-fix-it/
Pennsylvania decertifies county voting system following private company audit promoted by pro-Trump state senators
By Eugene Scott
Yesterday at 5:32 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pennsylvania-decertifies-county-voting-system-following-private-company-audit-promoted-by-pro-trump-state-senators/2021/07/21/cee5bf38-ea4e-11eb-97a0-a09d10181e36_story.html
Pennsylvania’s acting secretary of state has decertified a county’s voting system for future elections after it was subjected to a review by a private company in an effort promoted by a group of state senators supporting former president Donald Trump’s baseless claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 election.
Acting secretary of state Veronica W. Degraffenreid said in a statement Wednesday that Wake TSI’s examination of the Fulton County ballots earlier this year violated the state’s election code.
Pennsylvania is the second state where officials have decertified election equipment because of questionable audits requested by Republicans. Arizona’s Maricopa County said in June that it will replace voting equipment that was turned over to a private contractor for a Republican-commissioned review of the 2020 election.
Trump backers in multiple states are trying to launch post-election audits in an effort to overturn President Biden’s election victory.
According to a statement from Degraffenreid’s office, Fulton County officials allowed Wake TSI, of West Chester, Pa., “to access certain key components of its certified system, including the county’s election database, results files, and Windows systems logs. The county officials also allowed the company to use a system imaging tool to take complete hard drive images of these computers and other digital equipment.”
The statement called Wake TSI “a company with no knowledge or expertise in election technology.”
“These actions were taken in a manner that was not transparent or bipartisan,” Degraffenreid wrote in a letter to county officials. “As a result of the access granted to Wake TSI, Fulton County’s certified system has been compromised and neither Fulton County; the vendor, Dominion Voting Systems; nor the Department of State can verify that the impacted components of Fulton County’s leased voting system are safe to use in future elections.”
Neither Wake TSI executives nor Fulton County officials immediately responded to requests for comment.
A group of GOP state senators had asked three counties, including Fulton — a rural county on the Maryland border that overwhelmingly backed Trump in 2020 — to participate in their voluntary audit. Fulton is the only county known to have agreed.
‘It was like this rogue thing’: How the push by Trump allies to undermine the 2020 results through ballot reviews started quietly in Pennsylvania
According to a county document obtained by The Washington Post, Wake TSI was “contracted” to a nonprofit group run by Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump lawyer. Wake TSI submitted a draft report in February saying the election had been “well run” and “conducted in a diligent and effective manner,” county documents show.
However, before the final version was posted to the county website, it was revised. The new version included this statement: “This does not indicate that there were no issues with the election, just that they were not the fault of the County Election Commission or County Election Director,” it read, before flagging potential problems with the county voting machines and other aspects of the election.
Rosalind S. Helderman contributed to this report.
By Eugene Scott
Eugene Scott is a national political reporter on The Post's breaking news team. He previously wrote about identity politics for The Fix. And he also hosted "The Next Four Years" podcast available exclusively on Amazon Music. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pennsylvania-decertifies-county-voting-system-following-private-company-audit-promoted-by-pro-trump-state-senators/2021/07/21/cee5bf38-ea4e-11eb-97a0-a09d10181e36_story.html
Italian blood samples revive debate over first signs of Covid in Europe
New research suggests coronavirus could have been in Italy in October 2019 but is not conclusive
Donato Paolo Mancini in Athens JULY 20 2021
https://www.ft.com/content/505fe8c4-ef70-4ab0-a978-321c9199af4a
Renewed tests of blood samples collected in Italy as early as October 2019 have revived a debate over whether coronavirus was circulating in Europe before Chinese authorities confirmed the first case in Wuhan.
Scientists from Milan’s Istituto Nazionale Tumori, a cancer research centre, wrote in a new paper, published on Monday, that retesting of a small number of pre-pandemic blood samples by two laboratories had indicated the presence of antibodies normally observed after coronavirus infections.
“The results of this retesting suggest that what we previously reported in asymptomatic patients is a plausible signal of early circulation of the virus in Italy,” Giovanni Apolone, one of the researchers, told the Financial Times.
“If this is confirmed, this would explain the explosion of symptomatic cases observed in Italy [in 2020]. Sars-Cov-2, or an earlier version, circulated silently, under the surface,” he said.
The Italian researchers originally screened 959 individuals for lung cancer before the pandemic. Last year they tested the samples again, looking for coronavirus-linked antibodies, and said they had found traces of infection.
At the request of the World Health Organization those samples were retested by the VisMederi laboratory in Siena, Italy, and a WHO-affiliated facility at Erasmus University in the Netherlands.
Marion Koopmans, head of virology at Erasmus, said the new results were “interesting”. However, she cautioned that while there was some evidence of antibodies, none of the samples provided conclusive proof of prior infection with Covid-19, based on the university’s strict criteria.
“We use a rather stringent threshold and cannot rule out that some of the observed reactivity is real,” she said. “However, for confirmation of earlier circulation we would recommend studies of patients with unexplained illness for virological confirmation.”
The laboratories retested 29 of the original Italian samples, some positive and some negative, along with 29 control cases from 2018.
From these tests, three samples were found by both Erasmus and VisMederi to be positive for a type of coronavirus-linked antibody, IgM, that typically indicates recent infection. The earliest was collected on October 10 2019. One of the samples, from February 5 2020, was also positive for so-called neutralising antibodies.
However, none of the samples contained high enough levels of each of the three types of antibodies that Erasmus requires to be considered proof of infection — IgM, neutralising antibodies and a third antibody known as IgG.
In another nine samples that VisMederi said were positive for infection, levels of IgM antibodies were below the cut-off point set by Erasmus, Gabriella Sozzi, one of the Italian researchers, said.
Sozzi argued that in the pre-pandemic period, the virus may have been less aggressive or contagious, which made it “necessary to use highly sensitive tests despite the risk of finding ‘false positive’ cases”.
Koopmans said Erasmus University’s stringent criteria were necessary to conclusively state whether the pandemic started earlier than currently thought. “That does not mean it is impossible,” she said. “Just that you would like to see other pieces of evidence.”
The Italian paper, which has not been peer-reviewed, did not address the question of where the novel coronavirus originated, but the findings are likely to stoke the debate over whether Covid-19 was circulating in Italy or elsewhere before the first confirmed case in Wuhan in December 2019. Other studies have placed the first cases in Europe as early as November 2019, including one in Milan.
The WHO said it was not part of the laboratory analysis and that the results highlighted the challenge of conducting antibody tests on samples from 2019. It said it was “grateful” to scientists trying to advance the understanding of the origins of Covid-19.
Additional reporting by Yuan Yang in Beijing and Clive Cookson in London
https://www.ft.com/content/505fe8c4-ef70-4ab0-a978-321c9199af4a
How Kevin McCarthy is boosting the integrity of the Jan. 6 investigation
Opinion by Greg Sargent and Paul Waldman
The Washington Post
Yesterday at 5:08 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/21/how-kevin-mccarthy-is-boosting-integrity-jan-6-investigation/
We should be thankful that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) just pulled Republicans out of any involvement in the select committee to examine the Jan. 6 insurrection. In so doing, he ensured that the committee’s investigation will both have more integrity and be more likely to undertake a valuable accounting.
Which goes to a larger truth about this moment: Efforts at a real examination of arguably the worst outbreak of political violence in modern times — and efforts to protect our democracy more broadly — will not be bipartisan. These things will be done by Democrats alone.
McCarthy’s handling of the Jan. 6 committee illustrates the point. It comes after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced that she is nixing two of McCarthy’s picks to serve on it: Reps. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
McCarthy mustered great outrage about this, railing that it was an “abuse of power” that had cost the committee “all legitimacy and credibility.”
In fact, precisely the opposite is true: By pulling out, McCarthy has boosted the committee’s legitimacy and credibility immeasurably. The less involved McCarthy is with this committee, the more likely it will be to undertake a genuine and comprehensive accounting.
McCarthy’s picks were expressly designed to prevent that accounting. This is not speculation or a mere guess at McCarthy’s motives. It is unavoidably clear from the public statements and conduct of Banks and Jordan themselves.
Banks’s first act on getting named by McCarthy was to release a statement declaring that the committee must investigate the “hundreds of violent political riots” in which “many more innocent Americans and law-enforcement officers were attacked.”
That’s an explicit declaration that the insurrection and President Donald Trump’s incitement of it should not be the focus of the committee and is a less serious matter than those riots.
Similarly, after Jordan was picked, he immediately declared he wants to serve on the committee because “this is impeachment Round 3,” unwittingly revealing — or perhaps unabashedly declaring — that he saw his role as solely a means for working to exonerate Trump.
What’s more, Jordan had already played a prominent role in spreading the very lies about the 2020 election that helped inspire the insurrection the committee will be investigating. Given that the committee is charged with probing the causes of the violence — and that those lies are a major cause — any real accounting must also implicate Republicans such as Jordan.
On top of all this, remember that McCarthy could have exercised even more control over the investigation — yet declined. Back in May, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), the Homeland Security Committee chair, announced an agreement with the ranking Republican on an evenly divided 10-member bipartisan commission, with both parties having veto power over subpoenas.
Guess who voted against that commission? McCarthy, Banks and Jordan did.
All three also voted to object to President Biden’s electors, a vote that represented the culmination of the lies this committee will investigate as a cause of the violence.
There’s another hidden dynamic here, too: McCarthy and Jordan are very likely witnesses themselves. McCarthy made a frantic appeal to Trump to call off the rioters; he likely has firsthand experience of Trump’s truly sociopathic and insurrectionist intentions that day.
And Jordan was present in a Dec. 21 White House meeting with Trump and others, at which they discussed how to overturn Biden’s electors on the day of what would become the insurrection. What was said at that meeting will be of great interest to the committee.
“Anyone who is a material witness to the key events leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection doesn’t really belong on the committee,” Rep. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the select committee, told us.
“The investigative inquiry is being shaped right now,” Raskin continued, “but those are likely to be key events in the chronology.”
Here’s the bottom line: By nixing Banks and Jordan, Pelosi actually protected the integrity of the committee’s investigation, from their openly advertised intention to misdirect, disrupt and sabotage it. By appointing publicly committed saboteurs, McCarthy openly advertised the same intention.
The conventions of political reporting are such that this basic and obvious truth will not be faithfully rendered in press accounts. But it follows from a straightforward interpretation of the statements and conduct of those Republicans themselves.
Opinion by Greg Sargent
Greg Sargent writes The Plum Line blog. He joined The Post in 2010, after stints at Talking Points Memo, New York Magazine and the New York Observer. Twitter
Opinion by Paul Waldman
Paul Waldman is an opinion writer for the Plum Line blog. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/21/how-kevin-mccarthy-is-boosting-integrity-jan-6-investigation/
Alex Mallin @alex_mallin The FBI arrested Michael Brock of Mississippi yesterday on charges he assaulted officers during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot with a four foot long metal rod, per newly unsealed charging docs.
THREAD
The FBI arrested Michael Brock of Mississippi yesterday on charges he assaulted officers during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot with a four foot long metal rod, per newly unsealed charging docs. pic.twitter.com/KrzLQToLp1
— Alex Mallin (@alex_mallin) July 21, 2021
The FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19 in individuals 16 years of age and older under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)...
https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-legal-regulatory-and-policy-framework/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions#:~:text=On%20May%2010%2C%202021,be%20distributed%20in%20the%20US
The emergency use authorization allows the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine to be distributed in the U.S for use in individuals 18 years of age and older....
https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/moderna-covid-19-vaccine
Indicted Trump Organization executive may have defended his Mercedes perks in custody, court documents show
By Shayna Jacobs and David A. Fahrenthold
Yesterday at 11:10 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/indicted-trump-organization-executive-may-have-defended-his-mercedes-perks-in-custody-court-documents-show/2021/07/19/493544ca-e8b0-11eb-ba5d-55d3b5ffcaf1_story.html
NEW YORK — Indicted Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg may have offered an unprompted early defense to investigators on the day he was charged in a 15-year tax avoidance scheme involving unreported perks such as free cars and high-end apartments for executives at former president Donald Trump's company, according to court documents.
“In sum and substance, defendant Allen Weisselberg stated that the commute to work from Long Island was difficult,” said a defendant statement disclosure from district attorney investigators Anthony DiCaprio and Ethan Zubkoff that was filed in New York Supreme Court after Weisselberg’s arrest.
There was no additional context for his apparent words about grueling rush-hour travel in New York City, a remark cited in a publicly filed disclosure from prosecutors, a mandatory notice given to defense attorneys after an arrest.
Weisselberg previously kept his legal address at a small home in the Long Island town of Wantagh, N.Y., until he sold it in 2013. But prosecutors allege he actually lived in a Manhattan apartment paid for by the Trump Organization and avoided several years of New York City taxes by concealing his status as a city resident.
He made the comments as he sat for arrest processing with investigators on July 1, hours before he pleaded not guilty to charges including scheme to defraud and grand larceny. The day of his surrender, he also told the arresting investigators that he has lived in his Upper West Side apartment since 2005.
The commute from his Riverside Boulevard home is less than two miles — and he was recently seen on multiple weekdays driving a Mercedes to Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue, the headquarters of Trump Organization, where Trump himself has been spending time in recent weeks.
The Trump Organization allegedly footed the bill for the Weisselberg family’s luxury vehicles for many years in lieu of paying him a higher salary, allowing him to claim significantly lower income than he was actually bringing in. The company “paid the annual lease expenses on two Mercedes-Benz automobiles for Weisselberg and his wife” from 2005 to 2017, according to the indictment.
It is unclear whether Weisselberg was trying to say that he commuted — at least at some point — to Manhattan from the suburbs, necessitating a vehicle.
Defenders of the Trump Organization and Weisselberg, including Trump, have said that the case is politically motivated. Eric Trump, one of the former president’s sons who is also a Trump Organization executive, said in a Fox News appearance the day of Weisselberg’s arraignment that “everybody has” a corporate car.
But prosecutors say that the company’s longtime chief financial officer personally benefited from the Trump Organization’s long-running scam, getting indirect compensation worth more than $1.7 million. He avoided paying about $900,000 to the local and federal governments in doing so, said an indictment recently filed by the Manhattan district attorney and the New York attorney general.
Weisselberg’s comment about his commute is likely to have been made without prompting by investigators because he was in custody and had legal representation. It would have been illegal for law enforcement to interrogate Weisselberg in that scenario.
When an arrest is being processed, fingerprints are taken and investigators collect biographical information. Questioning was probably strictly related to the booking process and would not have touched on anything related to the substance of the charges.
Weisselberg’s words could be used as evidence at a future trial.
An attorney for Weisselberg did not respond to requests for comment, and a spokesman for Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. declined to comment.
Weisselberg, who is said to have been in the know on all of the Trump Organization’s financial transactions for decades, has declined to cooperate with prosecutors, who believe he could be key in building a case against the former president, people familiar with the case have said.
In recent weeks, the Trump Organization has removed Weisselberg from leadership roles at dozens of subsidiaries, although a person familiar with the company said Weisselberg is still employed at the company “and is going to remain at the company.”
By Shayna Jacobs
Shayna Jacobs is a federal courts and law enforcement reporter on the national security team at The Washington Post, where she covers the Southern and Eastern districts of New York. Twitter
By David Fahrenthold
David A. Fahrenthold is a reporter covering the Trump family and its business interests. He has been at The Washington Post since 2000, and previously covered Congress, the federal bureaucracy, the environment and the D.C. police. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/indicted-trump-organization-executive-may-have-defended-his-mercedes-perks-in-custody-court-documents-show/2021/07/19/493544ca-e8b0-11eb-ba5d-55d3b5ffcaf1_story.html
U.S., Germany reach agreement on Russian gas pipeline, ending dispute between allies
By John Hudson
Today at 2:35 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/nord-stream-pipeline-germany-russia/2021/07/21/c8788eda-ea4b-11eb-84a2-d93bc0b50294_story.html
The Biden administration reached an agreement with Germany on Wednesday that allows for the completion of a controversial natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany, ending a heated dispute between the two allies that overlapped three successive U.S. administrations.
In exchange for an end to U.S. efforts to block the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, Germany will invest in Ukraine’s green technology infrastructure and Berlin and Washington will work together on other initiatives to mitigate Russia’s energy dominance in Europe.
The decision drew immediate criticism from Russia hawks in Congress who hoped the United States could find a way to block the nearly-completed multibillion-dollar project they say gives Moscow leverage over U.S. allies in Europe.
The Biden administration viewed the project as a dilemma that forced it to choose between restoring its beleaguered relationship with Berlin and keeping its public promise to oppose the project. U.S. officials doubted that U.S. sanctions could ultimately prevent its completion and argued that a deal with Germany rather than a protracted fight offered the best outcome.
“Look, this is a bad situation and a bad pipeline,” Victoria Nuland, the No. 3 official at the State Department, told senators in Washington on Wednesday. “But we need to help protect Ukraine. And I feel that we have made some significant steps in that direction with this agreement.”
The administration planned to provide additional details of the arrangement later Wednesday.
Because the Nord Stream 2 pipeline circumvents Ukraine, a current transit partner with Moscow, Kyiv could lose about $2 billion in annual payments from Moscow as part of a transit contract for Russian gas that’s set to end in 2024.
But it’s the prospect of the Kremlin feeling more emboldened in its dealings with Ukraine that is driving the Ukrainians’ greatest opposition to the project. In an attempt to smooth over the decision, State Department Counselor Derek Chollet traveled to Kyiv on Tuesday to discuss the issue. He then travels to Warsaw to discuss the policy with Polish officials, who have also been critical of the Russian pipeline.
In recent weeks, Russia has increased its diplomatic pressure against Ukraine, which included publication of a lengthy article by President Vladimir Putin in which he claimed that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people.”
If their country no longer serves as a transit country for Russian gas, Ukraine’s authorities fear that Moscow will feel less constrained in the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine, where Ukrainian regular forces are battling Kremlin-directed separatists.
At the very least, Ukrainians say, the Kremlin could feel less pressure to reach a compromise with Kyiv in negotiations to end the seven-year-old war.
Robyn Dixon in Moscow and David Stern in Mukachevo, Ukraine, contributed to this report.
By John Hudson
John Hudson is a national security reporter at The Washington Post covering the State Department and diplomacy. He has reported from a mix of countries including Ukraine, Pakistan, Malaysia, China, and Georgia. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/nord-stream-pipeline-germany-russia/2021/07/21/c8788eda-ea4b-11eb-84a2-d93bc0b50294_story.html
Aaron Rupar @atrupar Replying to @atrupar Asked about his mysterious phone call with Trump while the insurrection was ongoing, McCarthy quickly changes the topic to law enforcement failures
VIDEO
Asked about his mysterious phone call with Trump while the insurrection was ongoing, McCarthy quickly changes the topic to law enforcement failures pic.twitter.com/uYxjU1Un00
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 21, 2021
Asked about his mysterious phone call with Trump while the insurrection was ongoing, McCarthy quickly changes the topic to law enforcement failures pic.twitter.com/uYxjU1Un00
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 21, 2021
States Announce $26 Billion Settlement to Resolve Opioid Lawsuits
Deal could bring an end to thousands of lawsuits blaming Johnson & Johnson and the nation’s largest drug distributors for an epidemic in painkiller addiction
By Sara Randazzo
July 21, 2021 2:03 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-announce-26-billion-settlement-to-resolve-opioid-lawsuits-11626890613?mod=e2tw
States unveiled a historic $26 billion settlement with drug companies to resolve thousands of opioid-crisis lawsuits, paving the way for communities across the country to secure a jolt of funding to address an epidemic in painkiller addiction that hasn’t abated.
The nation’s three largest drug distributors— McKesson Corp. , AmerisourceBergen Corp. , and Cardinal Health Inc.—and drugmaker Johnson & Johnson have been negotiating the deal for more than two years, but Wednesday’s announcement signifies an important milestone that could clear the way for money to be received by states as soon as early next year.
An opioid crisis that has claimed half a million lives in the U.S. has triggered more than 3,000 lawsuits filed by states, local governments, Native American tribes, hospital groups and others against players in the pharmaceutical industry. The lawsuits allege drugmakers pushed their painkillers for uses far beyond what was medically necessary and that distributors and pharmacies didn’t do enough to halt masses of pills from flowing into communities.
The companies pushed back, saying they made and distributed a medically necessary and federally regulated product. But at the same time, the burdens of litigation—like turning over millions of internal documents, making employees available for depositions, and preparing for complex trials—has sent many of the companies to the negotiating table.
The attorneys general from Tennessee, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New York, Louisiana, Delaware and Connecticut jointly announced the completed deal Wednesday, which had been rumored earlier this week.
The broad terms call for the three distributors to pay up to $21 billion collectively over a period of 18 years, and for Johnson & Johnson to contribute $5 billion over nine years. The amounts could decrease if not enough states sign on, and the companies can still walk away if they decide the level of participation doesn’t buy them the global peace they are seeking to put the lawsuits behind them.
Completing the complex deal took thousands of hours of negotiations between private plaintiffs’ lawyers representing communities, state attorneys general, and lawyers for the four companies. Frequent in-person meetings gave way to nightly Zoom calls held for months during the pandemic.
The final details came together as opioid lawsuits went to trial in three states, putting pressure on both sides.
The settlements, if completed, would resolve the opioid lawsuits for these four companies, but several other targets remain. Trials are under way in California and New York against drugmakers Teva Pharmaceutical Ltd. , AbbVie Inc.’s Allergan, and Endo International PLC. National pharmacy chains have also been named in hundreds of suits and are scheduled to go to trial in October. Two other companies that were targets of the suits, including OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma LP, filed for bankruptcy to handle the liability and are negotiating their own settlements with states.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-announce-26-billion-settlement-to-resolve-opioid-lawsuits-11626890613?mod=e2tw
“Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts,” McCarthy said.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar ·1m Kevin McCarthy says that Republicans will run their own investigation into the insurrection instigated by the leader of their party
THREAD
Kevin McCarthy says that Republicans will run their own investigation into the insurrection instigated by the leader of their party pic.twitter.com/SkclfTS3hg
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 21, 2021
Allen Weisselberg resigned from the top of the Trump Organization. So who’s running the company now?
By David A. Fahrenthold, Josh Dawsey and Jonathan O'Connell
Today at 6:00 a.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/21/weisselberg-trump-organization-eric-donald-ivanka/
Earlier this month, Allen Weisselberg — the Trump Organization’s most powerful employee not named “Trump” — resigned his post in the company’s leadership.
Weisselberg had been one of two trustees at the trust that owns and controls former president Trump’s company. But Weisselberg gave up that post, and dozens of others at Trump subsidiaries, after he was charged with running a tax-fraud scheme inside the company.
Weisselberg still works at the company, according to one person familiar with the Trump Organization. But his resignation from those formal posts means that the company’s already small executive ranks have shrunk even further, at a time when the company faces a raft of financial and legal problems.
Here’s what we know — and what we don’t — about what’s happening at the Trump Organization now:
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
* Who is in charge of the Trump Organization now?
* Why is Trump’s business still run by a trust?
* If Trump can control his company now, why doesn’t he?
* What about Ivanka Trump?
* What is the Trump Organization doing now?
* is in charge of the Trump Organization now?
Officially, its most powerful officer is now Donald Trump Jr.
The Trump Organization is controlled by the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust — a legal entity to which Trump transferred his hundreds of companies when he took office in 2017. The trust, in turn is controlled by trustees. Previously, there were two. But after Weisselberg resigned, just one was left: Trump Jr., according to papers the company filed in New Jersey this month.
In a practical sense, people familiar with the company say, the company’s day-to-day leaders are Trump Jr., 43, and his younger brother Eric, 37. Eric, who lives in New York, usually plays a more active role, the people said, since Trump Jr. has moved to Florida and become more involved in politics. Despite his rise to the top of the company’s formal hierarchy, Trump Jr. has not listed an office address at New York’s Trump Tower — instead asking for his mail to be sent care of a Trump golf course near his new home in Florida, 1,200 miles away.
Why is Trump’s business still run by a trust?
In 2017, Trump’s attorneys said Trump would put his assets in a trust so that he could “relinquish management” of his businesses and avoid conflicts of interest as president. After leaving the White House earlier this year, he opted to leave the arrangement in place.
Why? The Trump Organization did not respond to that question, or any others that The Washington Post asked for this story.
But experts said that there was little reason for Trump to take his companies back from the trust. That’s because he never really gave up control of them in the first place.
“Why should he leave it in there? Why not? It does no harm,” said T. Randolph Harris, a partner specializing in trusts and estates at the New York law firm McLaughlin and Stern. “He has not in any way, shape or form given up control.”
Although Trump claimed the trust would keep his businesses at arm’s length while president, the kind of trust he used — a revocable trust — still left Trump himself with all the power. He could tell the trustees how to run the company. He could fire them if they disobeyed. And he could shut down the trust and take his businesses back whenever he wanted.
“The fact that it’s in a revocable trust means nothing,” in terms of ceding power, said Bridget J. Crawford, a law professor at New York’s Pace University. “That’s the equivalent of passing something from the right hand to the left hand.”
Legal experts said that revocable trusts offer another benefit — but one that will only matter after Trump’s death. They allow wealthy people greater control over how their assets are distributed after they die.
“Anyone who’s the head of a large real estate operation is going to get advice to do exactly what” Trump has done, said William P. LaPiana, a professor who teaches trust and estates law at New York Law School.
If Trump can control his company now, why doesn’t he?
It’s unclear, from the outside, why the former president has not retaken his role as the company’s daily leader. Neither Trump’s company nor his post-presidential office have responded to questions about his role.
A person close to Trump said he appeared informed about some of the company’s businesses, bragging to associates about a remodeling project at one golf club and the profits being made at others.
But, the person said, Trump still appears more focused on politics than business — and focused on some lines of business more than others.
“You don’t hear him talk about the hotels, really. It’s the golf courses,” said this person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private interactions.
What about Ivanka Trump?
]Ivanka Trump was a top executive at the Trump Organization before she joined her father in the White House. But she does not appear to have retaken any formal role at the company since she left, according to recent filings reviewed by The Washington Post. She has moved to Florida with her husband, Jared Kushner, whose family has its own real estate empire.
A spokesperson for Ivanka Trump declined to comment.
What is the Trump Organization doing now?
Trump’s company is still running 10 hotels, 12 stand-alone golf courses, various commercial and residential buildings and a website selling Trump-branded T-shirts and candles.
The company’s holdings declined during Trump’s presidency, as four hotels closed, the Trump merchandising empire shrank, and buildings took down the Trump name. The company was hurt by the coronavirus pandemic, by its politically toxified brand, and by the indictments of Weisselberg and two Trump corporate entities.
While Trump was in office, his sons said that they had placed restraints on their business — avoiding signing new deals to build Trump-branded buildings, to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest.
Eventually, they said, the Trump Organization would lift those self-imposed restraints and start to grow again.
“When politics are over, we will resume doing what we do best which is building the best and most luxurious properties in the world — the interest in the Trump brand has never been stronger,” Donald Trump Jr. said in a 2019 statement, announcing that the company had shelved plans for a line of lower-cost hotels called Scion.
The company has not announced any new Trump-branded projects. It allowed the Scion trademarks to lapse. Instead of growing, it appears that thnce Trump left office, however, there has been little sign of that expe Trump Organization is in danger of shrinking further: in New York, the city is seeking to evict Trump’s company from a publicly owned golf course, and in Washington, the company has put its own D.C. hotel up for sale.
Since Trump left office, however, there has been little sign of that expansion. The company has not announced any new Trump-branded projects. It allowed the Scion trademarks to lapse. Instead of growing, it appears that the Trump Organization is in danger of shrinking further: in New York, the city is seeking to evict Trump’s company from a publicly owned golf course, and in Washington, the company has put its own D.C. hotel up for sale.
By David Fahrenthold
David A. Fahrenthold is a reporter covering the Trump family and its business interests. He has been at The Washington Post since 2000, and previously covered Congress, the federal bureaucracy, the environment and the D.C. police. Twitter
By Josh Dawsey
Josh Dawsey is a political enterprise and investigations reporter for The Washington Post. He joined the paper in 2017 and previously covered the White House. Before that, he covered the White House for Politico, and New York City Hall and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie for the Wall Street Journal. Twitter
By Jonathan O'Connell
Jonathan O'Connell is a reporter focused on business investigations and corporate accountability. He has covered economic development, commercial real estate and President Donald Trump's business. He joined The Post in 2010. Twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/21/weisselberg-trump-organization-eric-donald-ivanka/
Pelosi rejects GOP's Banks, Jordan for Jan. 6 select committee, saying they may jeopardize 'integrity of the investigation'
By Marianna Sotomayor
Today at 12:50 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-mccarthy-jan6-committee/2021/07/21/21722d44-ea41-11eb-84a2-d93bc0b50294_story.html
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has rejected two of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) picks to serve on the Jan. 6 select committee, citing that the outspoken Republicans may jeopardize “the integrity of the investigation.”
McCarthy announced Monday that he would recommend Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Banks (R-Ind.), noting that the two Republicans and three others represent an array of viewpoints and opinions. Both Jordan and Banks voted against certifying the election of President Biden.
“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” Pelosi said in a statement. “The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision.”
Pelosi, who as Speaker has final say on who can serve on a committee, said that she was “prepared to appoint Representatives Rodney Davis, Kelly Armstrong and Troy E. Nehls.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-mccarthy-jan6-committee/2021/07/21/21722d44-ea41-11eb-84a2-d93bc0b50294_story.html
Dirk Schwenk (Esq) @DirkSchwenk Replying to @DirkSchwenk The UAE blockades an ally - Qatar - where we have a major military base. Barrack serves as a secret agent for the UAE, and promises to serve the UAE against the US and its ally Qatar. Hmmm ... that kinda sounds like treason.
THREAD
Kushner orchestrated the blockade of Qatar, and then took a bribe to lift it. Barrack ran interference against Qatar in their efforts to lift the blockade. THE SHARKS ARE CIRCLING, JARED. https://t.co/kL7sMIFhgJ
— Dirk Schwenk (Esq) 🎵 (@DirkSchwenk) July 21, 2021
Capitol attack committee chair vows to investigate Trump: ‘Nothing is off limits’
Hugo Lowell in Washington
Wed 21 Jul 2021 02.00 EDT
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/21/capitol-attack-committee-chair-bennie-thompson
Bennie Thompson tells Guardian he will pursue wide-ranging inquiry to uncover root causes of January 6 attack
Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the new House select committee to scrutinize the Capitol attack, says he will investigate Donald Trump as part of his inquiry into the events of 6 January – a day he sees as the greatest test to the United States since the civil war.
In an interview with the Guardian, Thompson said that he is also prepared to depose members of Congress and senior Trump administration officials who might have participated in the insurrection that left five dead and nearly 140 injured.
“Absolutely,” Thompson said of his intent to pursue a wide-ranging inquiry against the former president and some of his most prominent allies on Capitol Hill. “Nothing is off limits.”
The aggressive move to place Trump in the crosshairs of the select committee underscores Thompson’s determination to uncover the root causes of 6 January, even after Senate Republicans, fearing political damage, blocked the creation of a 9/11-style commission.
The move comes at the same time as many Republicans have been seeking to downplay the attack on the Capitol – in which five people died – or, in the case of Trump himself, cast its protagonists in a more positive light.
But there is no doubt in Thompson’s mind of the seriousness of the event. Addressing some of the key questions at the heart of the select committee’s investigation into the attacl, Thompson characterized the inquiry as an undertaking to safeguard the peaceful transition of power and the future of American democracy.
“The issues of January 6 are one of the most salient challenges we have as a nation, to make sure that this democracy does not fall prey to people who don’t really identify with democracy,” Thompson said.
The central thrust of the investigation will focus on the facts and circumstances surrounding the Capitol attack, Thompson said, and the first hearing scheduled for 27 July will feature current and former US Capitol police and DC Metro police officers.
But in pursuing a broad mandate to also examine the root causes of the insurrection, Thompson reiterated that he remains prepared to issue subpoenas to compel testimony from an array of Trump officials connected to the attack should they refuse to appear voluntarily.
Trump and McCarthy among top witnesses
Thompson indicated that Trump and the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, are among the top witnesses for his investigation, in large part because McCarthy was on the phone with the former president as the riot unfolded.
McCarthy called Trump in a panic as rioters breached the Capitol and begged him to call off his supporters, only for Trump to chastise the top Republican in the House for not doing more to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
“There will not be a reluctance on the part of the committee to pursue it,” Thompson said of McCarthy’s call. “The committee will want to know if there is a record of what was said.”
The exchange between McCarthy and Trump is of singular importance, since it provides a rare window into what Trump, sequestered in the West Wing, was privately thinking and saying as the Capitol was invaded.
But Thompson went further, and said that he expects anyone – whether a sitting member of Congress or former White House official – who may have spoken to Trump on 6 January to become the subject of the select committee’s investigation.
That prospect took on added significance on Monday, after McCarthy named House judiciary committee chairman Jim Jordan as one of his picks for the panel. Jordan has previously suggested he may have also spoken to Trump as the assault took place.
“If somebody spoke to the president on January 6, I think it would be important for our committee to know what was said. I can’t imagine you talk about anything else to the president on January 6,” Thompson said.
He also warned Republicans against attempting to stymie the committee’s investigation, saying that it had no deadline to furnish a report and as a result, would be immune to delay tactics previously deployed during the first Trump impeachment inquiry.
“Notwithstanding elections next year, we will not stop until our investigation is complete,” Thompson said.
Subpoenas to be enforced in court
Against that backdrop, Thompson said he expects to demand testimony from senior Trump administration officials who were in the Oval Office as the riot unfolded, from the then White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to Trump’s daughter Ivanka.
If Trump administration officials refuse to appear before the committee, citing executive privilege, Thompson said he would issue subpoenas and launch lawsuits to enforce his congressional oversight authority.
“We will pursue it in court,” he said.
Thompson added that he expects the select committee and senior House investigators to meet with the attorney general, Merrick Garland, and expressed optimism for conducting his investigation in close coordination with the justice department.
He was adamant that his investigation would not overlap with existing criminal probes opened by the justice department and the US attorney for the District of Columbia. Still, he said he hoped the DoJ would cooperate with his inquiry.
“We don’t want to get in the way of indictments,” Thompson said. “But I think there could be some sharing of information that could be germane to our investigation, just like other committees have negotiated in the past.”
Thompson said that although no date has been set for a meeting with the attorney general, it will involve the 6 January select committee’s members and senior staff. The senior staff may be named as soon as this week, according to a source familiar with the matter.
To emphasize his seriousness, Thompson said the select committee would draw on legal counsel and investigative staff from existing House panels as well as the US intelligence community – including the NSA, CIA and FBI.
Thompson also said he expects the National Archives, the agency now in possession of records from the Trump White House, to make materials available for his investigation. “That should not be an issue,” he said, though he left open the possibility of subpoenas in the event of noncompliance.
And he vowed to refer criminal charges should Trump White House records, covering the period from the November election through 6 January, be missing or destroyed – a persistent worry among Democrats as Trump grew increasingly unhinged in the final weeks of the administration.
“That violates the law,” Thompson said. “I don’t see any hesitation on our part to pursue that. If the respect for the rule of law is not adhered to, that’s even more reason for this select committee to exist.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/21/capitol-attack-committee-chair-bennie-thompson
Trump’s Swamp Was Murkier Than We Ever Knew
By Rosalind Mathieson
21 July 2021, 11:03 BST
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2021-07-21/trump-s-swamp-was-murkier-than-we-ever-knew
When Donald Trump campaigned for the presidency in 2016 he famously vowed to “drain the swamp” in Washington — including the machinery that spins around the Capitol each day trying to influence policy making. Turns out the swamp got even murkier.
Trump brought a transactional approach to the White House. He was always eyeing a potential deal, and he didn’t worry too much about with whom. That meant he entertained leaders that others spurned, like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.
In particular, the Trump White House seemed keen to cut deals in the Middle East. Trump’s own family members made frequent trips there, having a very warm relationship with the now-ex Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu.
Trump defended Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan even as lawmakers in Congress demanded penalties on their countries for alleged human rights and sanctions violations. He argued the U.S. needed to keep business channels open and see the potential for investment and trade in the region.
But it seems the quietest influence building was going on behind the scenes, in the opaque world of lobbying. Trump’s former inaugural chairman Tom Barrack and two associates have been charged with failing to register as foreign agents for work they allegedly did to promote the United Arab Emirates’ policy interests.
Many countries have lobbying muscle in DC (Qatar being one), but at least make a show of going through a front door. The UAE potentially found a quiet entrance down an illegal back alley.
The question is — were they the only ones? — Rosalind Mathieson
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2021-07-21/trump-s-swamp-was-murkier-than-we-ever-knew
Ryan Grim @ryangrim On June 10, 2019, The Intercept exposed a secret UAE influence operation in the US involving Rashid Al Malik and Tom Barrack.
On June 20, 2019, the FBI interrogated Barrack, where they say he lied about it. He was arrested today.
https://theintercept.com/2019/06/10/trump-uae-businessman-spy/
12:52 AM · Jul 21, 2021·Twitter Web App
THREAD
On June 10, 2019, The Intercept exposed a secret UAE influence operation in the US involving Rashid Al Malik and Tom Barrack.
— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) July 20, 2021
On June 20, 2019, the FBI interrogated Barrack, where they say he lied about it. He was arrested today. pic.twitter.com/joL7lxIEP1
Trump inaugural committee head accused of being UAE agent
By BRIAN MELLEY and LARRY NEUMEISTER
today
https://apnews.com/article/barrack-trump-inaugural-uae-030e53361c4e6355baa7c463198a5b0b
LOS ANGELES (AP) — The chair of former President Donald Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee was arrested Tuesday on charges alleging he secretly conspired to influence U.S. policy to benefit the United Arab Emirates, even while he was seeking a position as an American diplomat.
Tom Barrack, 74, of Santa Monica, California, was among three men charged in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, with acting as unregistered foreign agents as they tried to influence U.S. policy on the UAE’s behalf while Trump was running in 2016 and later while he was president.
The indictment goes to the heart of the U.S.' longtime close relationship with the UAE and directly ties its de facto ruler, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, to Barrack’s charges.
Besides conspiracy, Barrack was charged with obstruction of justice and making multiple false statements during a June 2019 interview with federal agents. Also charged in a seven-count indictment were Matthew Grimes, 27, of Aspen, Colorado, who is a former executive at Barrack’s company, and Rashid al Malik, 43, a businessman from the United Arab Emirates who prosecutors said acted as a conduit to that nation’s rulers.
One of Trump’s close personal friends for decades, Barrack is the latest in a long line of the former president’s associates to face criminal charges, including his former campaign chair, his former deputy campaign chair, his former chief strategist, his former national security adviser, his former personal lawyer and his company’s longtime chief financial officer.
Barrack and Grimes were arrested in Southern California while al Malik was at large, believed to be living somewhere in the Middle East, authorities said. In court papers, prosecutors said al Malik was living in Los Angeles for years before fleeing the U.S. three days after an April 2018 interview by law enforcement. The UAE, which hosts thousands of U.S. troops and aircraft on the Arabian Peninsula, did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday on the indictment.
At an initial hearing in Los Angeles federal court, Barrack’s lawyer, Ronak D. Desai, agreed that his client could remain detained until a hearing next Monday after prosecutors submitted written arguments saying he should be denied bail as a risk to flee.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue called Grimes a “serious risk of flight” and also ordered him detained pending a hearing Monday.
Attorney Michael Freedman, representing Grimes, said his client had no criminal history, no longer worked for Barrack’s company and doesn’t have the access investigators allege he once had.
“He is a fairly low-level individual in all of this,” Freedman said.
Neither man entered a plea.
Barrack raised $107 million for Trump’s inaugural celebration, which was scrutinized both for its lavish spending and for attracting numerous foreign officials and businesspeople looking to lobby the new administration.
While the indictment made no allegations of wrongdoing by the inaugural committee, or by Trump — who was referenced only as “the Candidate,” the “President-Elect” and “the President” — it said Barrack boasted that he had been a 30-year partner of Trump and could help the UAE gain U.S. influence.
“The defendants repeatedly capitalized on Barrack’s friendships and access to a candidate who was eventually elected President, high-ranking campaign and government officials, and the American media to advance the policy goals of a foreign government without disclosing their true allegiances,” Acting Assistant Attorney General Mark Lesko said.
Barrack has denied wrongdoing.
“Mr. Barrack has made himself voluntarily available to investigators from the outset. He is not guilty and will be pleading not guilty,” a spokesperson said.
Emirati officials were not identified by name either, though details in the indictment link back to Sheikh Mohammed. The crown prince also found himself entangled in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in America’s 2016 election.
Prosecutors said Barrack also provided UAE government officials with sensitive information about developments within the Trump administration — including how senior U.S. officials felt about a yearslong boycott of Qatar conducted by the UAE and other Middle Eastern countries.
“Worse, in his communications with Al Malik, the defendant framed his efforts to obtain an official position within the Administration as one that would enable him to further advance the interests of the UAE, rather than the interests of the United States,” prosecutors wrote in a letter seeking his detention. They noted that he has citizenship in the U.S. and Lebanon, a country with no extradition treaty with the U.S.
When Barrack tried to get Trump to appoint him as either the U.S. ambassador to the UAE or as special envoy to the Middle East, he wrote al Malik ‘that any such appointment ‘would give ABU DHABI more power!’” prosecutors wrote.
Barrack served as an informal adviser to Trump’s campaign in 2016 before becoming the inaugural committee chair. Beginning in January 2017, he informally advised senior U.S. government officials on Middle East foreign policy, prosecutors said.
Bill Coffield, an attorney for al Malik — who was not in custody Tuesday — said his client had cooperated extensively with Mueller and that there was “nothing new here.” He said al Malik had simply tried to foster a good relationship between the country where he was born and the U.S., where he lived and worked for years, “both of which he loves.”
Noting that Forbes estimated Barrack’s net worth at $1 billion in March 2013 and his access to a private plane, prosecutors called him “an extremely wealthy and powerful individual with substantial ties to Lebanon, the UAE, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” who poses a serious flight risk in a letter filed prior to his appearance.
They said the evidence against him was “overwhelming” and his risk of fleeing was higher because he’d traveled extensively, taking more than 75 international trips in the last five years, and regularly used private jets.
Authorities cited several specific instances when Barrack or others allegedly sought to influence U.S. policies, noting that, in May 2016, Barrack inserted language praising the UAE into a campaign speech Trump delivered about U.S. energy policy and arranged for senior UAE officials to receive an advanced draft.
They said he also agreed to arrange meetings and phone calls between senior UAE officials and Trump, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation to be delivered to senior UAE officials on how to boost their influence in the U.S. with his help and repeatedly tried to conceal his conduct, even denying he’d ever been asked by al Malik to help the UAE.
Throughout 2016 and 2017, Barrack and Grimes received talking points and feedback from senior UAE officials in connection with Barrack’s national press appearances and communicated on a dedicated cellular telephone which had a secure messaging application to facilitate communications with senior UAE officials, prosecutors said.
They said that after one appearance in which Barrack repeatedly praised the United Arab Emirates, Barrack emailed al Malik, saying: “I nailed it ... for the home team,” referring to the UAE.
Prosecutors also asked that Grimes be held without bail, citing the seriousness of the crimes, overwhelming evidence of guilt, his access to Barrack’s fortune and significant ties to countries without extradition treaties with the United States.
In his statement, Lesko characterized the alleged conduct as “nothing short of a betrayal of those officials in the United States, including the former President.”
___
Neumeister reported from New York. Associated Press writers Jill Colvin, Eric Tucker and Michael Balsamo in Washington; Jim Mustian, Michael R. Sisak and Tom Hays in New York; Stefanie Dazio in Los Angeles; James LaPorta in West Jefferson, North Carolina, and Jon Gambrell in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this report.
https://apnews.com/article/barrack-trump-inaugural-uae-030e53361c4e6355baa7c463198a5b0b
Something’s Rotten Here: Trump, Kushner and Qatar
Note: This statement was updated on May 17 to correct the name of the Kushner familiy member who reportedly was seeking funding from Qatar (item No. 2).
May 17, 2018
Something’s Rotten Here: Trump, Kushner and Qatar
Statement of Robert Weissman, President, Public Citizen
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Or, more accurately, something is rotten in the state of Trump-Kushner.
The news that the Kushner family business will receive bailout funding for its distressed New York skyscraper from a company in which the Qatar Investment Authority is a major investor and partner on multiple multibillion-dollar real estate deals is jaw-dropping.
The lines between government policy and family business interests are now so hopelessly blurred that it’s virtually impossible to know the real motivations for Trump administration policy, or whether Trump or Kushner family and related business deals are predicated on Trump administration action. The past week’s events make it clear that foreign governments and giant corporations alike can’t distinguish between Trump and Kushner private family business and government policy – or believe it is a mistake to treat them as distinct categories.
An abbreviated Kushner-Trump-Qatar timeline makes this frighteningly clear.
In April 2017, the Kushner family business met with the Qatari government to discuss financing for their distressed business at 666 Fifth Ave. in New York, according to the Intercept.
Charles Kushner would subsequently confirm the meeting took place, according to the Washington Post. However, he claimed he took the meeting as a courtesy and that the family already had decided it would not accept funding from sovereign funds. The New Yorker reports that in fact Charles Kushner was seeking funding at the meeting.
In June 2017, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and other countries cut ties with Qatar and imposed a blockade. The Trump administration initially appeared divided over the conflict, but the president overtly sided with Saudi Arabia. Jared Kushner reportedly advocated for this position, according to the American Conservative and others.
While Jared Kushner’s spokespeople vehemently denied any connection between a lack of Qatar funding for the 666 Fifth Avenue property and the administration’s position, NBC News and The New Yorker report that the Qataris themselves believed to the contrary.
The Qatari government decided in January 2018 not to turn over to Special Counsel Robert Mueller evidence of claimed improper influence over Jared Kushner by UAE, according to NBC News.
On May 17, 2018, the New York Times reports that a company, one of whose major investors is the Qatar Investment Authority, will provide a “bailout” of the Kushners’ 666 Fifth Avenue property.
This is a devil of a deal for 666 Fifth Avenue.
###
https://www.citizen.org/news/somethings-rotten-here-trump-kushner-and-qatar/