Trump Defends His Cabinet of Billionaires: ‘I Just Don’t Want a Poor Person’ Running the Economy

Donald Trump on Wednesday defended his decision to appoint cabinet members with significant personal wealth, arguing he doesn’t “want a poor person” in charge of the economy.

Trump was speaking about Gary Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs banker the president appointed as his chief economic advisor—despite promising to “drain the swamp” during his presidency.

“I love all people,” Trump said during a campaign-style rally in Cedar Rapids, IA. “Rich or poor. But in those particular positions I just don’t want a poor person. Does that make sense?”

Trump has received significant criticism for his appointment of Cohn, as well as Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. Although he ran on a populist platform, Trump’s cabinet has a combined net worth of $6 billion.

[Raw Story]

Trump seeks sharp cuts to housing aid, except for program that brings him millions

President Trump’s budget calls for sharply reducing funding for programs that shelter the poor and combat homelessness — with a notable exception: It leaves intact a type of federal housing subsidy that is paid directly to private landlords.

One of those landlords is Trump himself, who earns millions of dollars each year as a part-owner of Starrett City, the nation’s largest subsidized housing complex. Trump’s 4 percent stake in the Brooklyn complex earned him at least $5 million between January of last year and April 15, according to his recent financial disclosure.

Trump’s business empire intersects with government in countless ways, from taxation to permitting to the issuing of patents, but the housing subsidy is one of the clearest examples of the conflicts experts have predicted. While there is no indication that Trump himself was involved in the decision, it is nonetheless a stark illustration of how his financial interests can directly rise or fall on the policies of his administration.

The federal government has paid the partnership that owns Starrett City more than $490 million in rent subsidies since May 2013, according to figures provided by a spokesman for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Nearly $38 million of that has come since Trump took office in January.

That subsidy generates steady income for Trump and his siblings, each of whom inherited an interest in the property when their father died. Although it represents a small portion of his overall wealth, it is one of the few examples of money the president derives directly from the federal government he oversees.

HUD, meanwhile, has come under fire in recent days after news of the expected nominee to lead the department in the New York region: Lynne Patton, an event planner who has no professional experience in housing but who is a former vice president of Eric Trump’s foundation and who helped plan his wedding.

The administration’s decisions on housing programs were not influenced by Trump’s interest in Starrett City, HUD spokesman Jereon Brown said Tuesday. Several experts said cutting the subsidy paid directly to landlords can be politically difficult, in part because many beneficiaries of that type of subsidized housing are elderly and in part because landlords are more likely to be politically organized.

Starrett City is a complex of 46 brick towers that stretches across 150 acres just to the west of New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport. It was built in the mid-1970s and houses nearly 15,000 people.

Trump once called Starrett City “one of the best investments I ever made,” but it was his father who was an investor in its construction, according to a representative of Starrett City.

“Upon Fred Trump’s death, his four children inherited his interests,” Bob Liff, a spokesman for Starrett City Associates, the partnership that owns the complex, said in a statement to The Washington Post. “There’s been no change, except that Donald Trump’s holding was placed in a revocable trust upon becoming president.”

Placing his stake in a revocable trust allows it to be managed by others. Trump has not divested himself of his assets but has said he has turned over management to his sons.

Liff declined to say how large a stake Trump’s three surviving siblings own today.

The more than $5 million the president reported earning from Starrett City was part of nearly $600 million in gross revenue he claimed from January 2016 through mid-April, records show.

“It’s a conflict, and it’s why everyone has pushed Trump to not only step away from his business interests but to divest them,” said Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, an independent watchdog organization.

A White House spokeswoman declined to respond to detailed questions from The Post and directed inquiries to the Trump Organization, which did not respond to messages Monday and Tuesday.

Starrett City provides more than 3,500 subsidized housing units to low-income residents under a program that makes payments directly to landlords. Under the “project-based rental assistance program,” residents contribute 30 percent of their income toward rent, and the federal government pays the rest.

The project-based rental assistance program is one of only a few HUD programs that would be spared steep cuts under Trump’s proposed budget, which housing advocates have said would carry devastating consequences for the poor and the homeless.

The administration has proposed reducing HUD’s overall budget by $7 billion, or about 15 percent. That includes cuts to two of the other programs that, together with the program that pays landlords directly, serve the vast majority of people who get federal housing assistance.

The budget calls for a nearly 29 percent cut, or $1.8 billion, to public housing and a 5 percent drop, or nearly $1 billion, in vouchers that allow tenants to use the aid on the housing of their choice, according to Douglas Rice, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In contrast, the program that directs money to Starrett City and other privately owned housing would see a reduction of about half a percent, or $65 million, from its $10.8 billion allocation.

“It certainly raises questions as to why that remained relatively flat while there were other cuts,” Amey said.

But Amey and others cautioned against assuming that Trump’s holdings were a factor in the decision, noting that Starrett City represents a relatively small portion of the president’s income.

Ben Carson, the HUD secretary, has said that “no one is going to be thrown out on the street” if the proposed cuts take effect. Congress has ultimate say on the budget, but the Trump spending plan lays out the president’s priorities.

Compounding the questions swirling around HUD this week were reports that Carson was poised to name Patton, who spoke at the Republican National Convention, to the position of regional administrator overseeing the New York area. No formal announcement has been made, but Armstrong Williams, a longtime friend and adviser to Carson, defended Patton in an interview Monday evening.

Williams, a conservative commentator, said Patton earned Carson’s trust in just a few months while serving as his $160,000-a-year senior adviser. “She has shown a capacity not only to learn but to regurgitate, to put together tours where she shows she has a knowledge of HUD,” Williams said. “She has done a great job of briefing the secretary.”

Patton previously worked as an event planner for the Trump Organization and “a senior aide to the Trump family.” She organized “upscale events and celebrity golf tournaments at multiple Trump properties” and handled “celebrity talent acquisition for various marketing projects,” according to an online résumé on the website LinkedIn.

She told the Daily Mail earlier this year that she was entrusted by Eric and Lara Trump to help plan their wedding in Palm Beach, Fla. She also served as an unpaid vice president for the Eric Trump Foundation, a charity that raised money for children with leukemia.

The New York Daily News first reported her expected appointment late last week and raised questions about claims she made on her LinkedIn profile. Under “education” she lists a law degree from the Quinnipiac University School of Law, along with the notation “N/A.” After the controversy erupted, she explained that “N/A,” short for “not applicable,” was meant to signify that she did not finish law school.

Williams said that she dropped out before earning a degree but that she had been truthful with Carson about her background, including a history of substance abuse.

Patton has “been a lot of dark places” but has overcome them, Williams said. “She has a keen insight into people who overcome mental illness and addiction,” he said, adding that this will help her relate to people HUD serves.

As one of 10 regional administrators, Patton would serve as a liaison to local and state officials in the New York area and oversee HUD programs there. She did not respond to requests for comment through a person who answered her cellphone Monday.

Some New York City officials scoffed at her prospective appointment.

“Folks in that role historically have had substantial background in government or in housing,” Mayor Bill de Blasio, who served in that position previously, said during a radio program this week.

Michael Bodaken, president of the National Housing Trust, said the regional administrator would not have authority to make budget decisions or issue waivers that could benefit Starrett City. He added, “We would have been happier with someone with substantial housing experience because it’s such an important job.”

Williams dismissed criticism about Patton’s lack of experience.

“Whatever Lynne Patton was in the past doesn’t matter,” he said. “What she is today matters, and Dr. Carson has tremendous trust in her.”

He said that neither the president nor anyone in the Trump family had urged Carson to recommend her for the position and that her closeness to the family was not a factor.

“It did not help her with Dr. Carson,” Williams said. “He was skeptical, too, just like anyone else. He didn’t realize she had the intellect and the knowledge and work ethic she has.”

[Washington Post]

Trump Blames Obama for Not Doing More to Bring Otto Warmbier Home Sooner

President Donald Trump on Tuesday appeared to blame former President Barack Obama for not bringing Otto Warmbier home from North Korea sooner.

“It’s a disgrace what happened to Otto,” Trump said to reporters. “It’s a total disgrace what happened to Otto.”

“It should never, ever be allowed to happen. And frankly, if he were brought home sooner, I think the results would have been a lot different. He should have been brought home that day.”

Trump added that he had spoken with Warmbier’s family.

When asked if Obama had done enough to secure Warmbier’s release during a June 16 press conference, Otto’s father, Fred, echoed Trump’s sentiments saying the results “speak for themselves.”

Warmbier, a student at the University of Virginia, was detained in March 2016 after North Korean officials accused him of attempting to steal a propaganda poster from his hotel. He was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

US officials negotiated his release earlier this month, though Warmbier was in a coma by the time he arrived in the US. While North Korean officials said he had fallen into a coma after contracting botulism, US doctors who examined Warmbier said he suffered severe neurological trauma while in detention and showed no traces of the toxin.

Warmbier died at age 22 on Monday.

The White House released a statement on Monday offering Trump and first lady Melania’s “deepest condolences” to Warmbier’s family.

“The United States once again condemns the brutality of the North Korean regime as we mourn its latest victim,” the statement reads.

Warmbier’s family also released a statement on Monday announcing his death.

“It would be easy at a moment like this to focus on all that we lost — future time that won’t be spent with a warm, engaging, brilliant young man whose curiosity and enthusiasm for life knew no bounds,” the statement reads. “But we choose to focus on the time we were given to be with this remarkable person.”

[Business Insider]

Reality

Former President Barack Obama has issued a statement about Otto Warmbier, the American college student who died this week, days after being released from North Korea in a coma after more than a year in captivity.

“During the course of the Obama Administration, we had no higher priority than securing the release of Americans detained overseas,” Obama spokesman Ned Price said in the statement. “Their tireless efforts resulted in the release of at least 10 Americans from North Korean custody during the course of the Obama administration.”

Added Price, who was National Security Counsel spokesperson during Obama’s administration: “It is painful that Mr. Warmbier was not among them, but our efforts on his behalf never ceased, even in the waning days of the administration. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Warmbier’s family and all who had the blessing of knowing him.”

Trump says he is under investigation, lashes out at Justice Department

President Donald Trump tweeted on Friday that he is under investigation in the probe into Russia’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

He also appeared to criticize Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed a special counsel to oversee the investigation.

Special counsel Robert Mueller is seeking to determine whether Trump attempted to obstruct justice, following the president’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey, who had been leading the investigation of Russian interference, The Washington Post reported this week.

Rosenstein wrote the memo that suggested that Trump fire Comey over his handling of an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State. Trump later contradicted his administration’s rationale, saying he had been thinking about the Russia investigation when he fired Comey.

In a striking testimony before Congress last week, Comey said he believed Trump had sought to persuade him to drop an investigation into then National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s ties to Russia.
Trump’s acknowledgement of the reported obstruction of justice investigation came after a series of tweets in which he renewed his assertions that he is the subject of a “witch hunt.”

The Washington Post cited unidentified officials when it reported Mueller is investigating Trump. Rosenstein issued a statement on Thursday warning Americans to “be skeptical of anonymous allegations.”

“Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch or agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated,” Rosenstein said.

A senior Justice Department official told NBC News that no one pushed Rosenstein to issue the statement.

“This was 100 percent Rod. He’s tired of reading all these stories based on anonymous sources claiming to know what the Justice Department and the FBI are doing,” the official said.

[NBC News]

 

Trump Tweets His Frustration with Russia Investigation

President Donald Trump is beginning his day with a stream of tweets defending his record and lashing out at the investigation into Russian interference in the election.

In a two-part tweet posted before 7 a.m. Sunday, Trump wrote: “The MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN agenda is doing very well despite the distraction of the Witch Hunt.”

He continued by saying: “Many new jobs, high business enthusiasm …massive regulation cuts, 36 new legislative bills signed, great new S.C.Justice, and Infrastructure, Healthcare and Tax Cuts in works!”

“Witch hunt’ is how Trump characterizes the probe into Russia’s election interference and possible ties to his campaign associates.

Trump advisers describe the president as increasingly angry over the investigation, yelling at television sets carrying coverage and insisting he is the target of a conspiracy.

[ABC News]

Trump has made the Department of Health and Human Services a center of false science on contraception

Contraception policy may not be the biggest target of the anti-science right wing — climate change and evolution probably rank higher — but it’s the field in which scientific disinformation has the most immediate consequences for public health.

So it’s especially disturbing that President Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price have stocked the corridors of health policy with purveyors of conclusively debunked claptrap about contraception, abortion, pregnancy and women’s reproductive health generally.

That’s the conclusion of a new article in the New England Journal of Medicine identifying four Trump appointees as carriers of the disinformation virus. What makes them especially dangerous, says the author, bioethicist R. Alta Charo of the University of Wisconsin law school, is that the “alternative facts” they’re purveying could influence an entire generation’s attitude toward contraception, for the worse.

Among their themes is that condoms don’t protect against HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases and that abortions and contraceptives cause breast cancer, miscarriages and infertility. None of these assertions is true.

“The move toward misinformation at the level of sex education is dangerous,” Charo told me, “because you form instincts about what is safe very early in life.”

These appointments are all of a piece with Trump’s habit of staffing federal agencies with people actively in opposition to those agencies’ goals and statutory responsibilities — climate change deniers at the Environmental Protection Agency, corporate executives at the Department of Labor, and so on.

They’re also consonant with policies from the White House and Price’s office aimed at narrowing access to contraceptives by reducing government assistance to obtain them.

As Charo observes, the rate of unintended pregnancies has come down sharply, especially since the advent of the Affordable Care Act, which mandated that health plans make birth control available without co-pays or deductibles.

Price has defended reducing government assistance for contraception on the ground that “there’s not one” woman who can’t afford it on her own, but that’s plainly untrue; some long-lasting contraceptives such as Nexplanon or IUDs, can cost hundreds of dollars, a discouraging obstacle for many low-income patients.

Let’s take a look at the four horsewomen of disinformation on Charo’s list. What characterizes their approach to human reproduction, she says, is “rejection of the scientific method as the standard for generating and evaluating evidence.”

(We’ve asked both Charmaine Yoest, now the assistant secretary for public affairs at Health and Human Services, and the department for comment but have received no reply.)

Charmaine Yoest

Charmaine Yoest is now the assistant secretary for public affairs at HHS. Yoest is the former head of Americans United for Life, a prominent anti-abortion group. She and the organization promoted the claim that abortion increases a woman’s chance of breast cancer, a claim that was conclusively debunked by medical authorities years ago. The National Cancer Institute (a government body), declared in 2003 that thorough scientific studies “consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.”

The same goes for the claim by Yoest’s group that abortion increases the risk of “serious mental health problems.” This notion is the basis for state laws requiring counseling before a patient is allowed to undergo an abortion. A study by UC San Francisco published last year found that the “greater risk” of “adverse psychological outcomes is faced by women denied an abortion. These findings do not support policies that restrict women’s access to abortion on the basis that abortion harms women’s mental health,” the study concluded.

Yoest was an architect of the strategy that led Texas to enact an anti-abortion law so extreme that it was slapped down by the Supreme Court last year on a 5-3 vote. The law placed heavy restrictions on abortion clinics, ostensibly to protect women’s health, that effectively shut many down. In his majority opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer essentially called that a subterfuge: “There was no significant health-related problem that the new law helped to cure,” he wrote.

Teresa Manning

Teresa Manning was appointed as HHS’ deputy assistant secretary for population affairs. Manning is a former lobbyist for the National Right to Life Committee and a legislative analyst for the Family Research Council. During a 2003 NPR interview, she said: “Of course, contraception doesn’t work. … Its efficacy is very low.” In fact, as Charo observes, hormonal methods are 91% effective, and IUDs are 99% effective.

In 2001, then as Teresa Wagner, Manning was quoted in a Family Research Council news release attacking prescriptions for the morning-after pill, which she characterized as an abortion method. She said doctors prescribing the pill were “accepting — and, in effect, — promoting promiscuity — the cause of the STD explosion, as well as the well known social problems of out of wedlock pregnancy and illegitimacy. We expect more from our doctors than collaboration with abortion advocates!”

Valerie Huber

Valerie Huber was appointed earlier this month as chief of staff to the assistant secretary for health at HHS. Huber is an abstinence advocate and the president of Ascend, a Washington group that advocates for abstinence-only sex education.

The problem there is that birth control experts have consistently found that abstinence education is ineffective at preventing teen pregnancies. In fact, just the opposite — a 2011 study at the University of Georgia reported that the “data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy … may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.”

Huber’s approach is moralistic. “As public health experts and policymakers, we must normalize sexual delay more than we normalize teen sex, even with contraception,” she told PBS last year. But studies consistently show that what reduces teen pregnancies is increased use of contraceptives.

Katy Talento

Katy Talento was named to Trump’s Domestic Policy Council. Talento has been the author of frequent anti-birth control screeds, including several that appeared on the Federalist, a right-wing website. Among them was an article whose headline called birth control “the mother of all medical malpractice,” and another asserting that women who took chemical forms of birth control risked “breaking your uterus for good,” ruining it “for baby-hosting altogether.”

Talento’s basis for this claim was what she called a “ground-breaking 2012 study” ostensibly showing that women who used birth control pills for several years had higher rates of infertility and miscarriage than those who did not. But as Jon Cohen of Science Magazine showed earlier this year, the study reported nothing of the kind — as its lead author confirmed. In fact, the researchers cited a study indicating that long-term use of the pill — five years — actually increased a woman’s subsequent fertility.

The lead author, Robert Casper, a Toronto fertility doctor, told Cohen that while his study found that using the pill sometimes led to thinner uterus linings, that wasn’t associated with more infertility or miscarriages — his study group was small and predisposed to fertility problems, he explained.

“The benefits of the birth control pill in preventing unwanted pregnancy or in treating painful menstrual periods far outweighs the rare possible case of thin endometrium,” Cohen wrote. “There is no evidence that the birth control pill is ‘seriously risky’ in terms of future reproductive health.”

As Charo observes, the “alternative science” underlying these appointees’ approach has infected public discussions of birth control and the courts. “Legislatures and even the Supreme court have tolerated individuals making up their own definitions for abortifacient [that is, abortion-producing] and pregnancy,” she writes, and then using them to justify refusing to fill prescriptions or offer insurance coverage for contraceptives.”

That was glaringly true in the Supreme Court’s egregious 2014 Hobby Lobby decision, which allowed owners of private companies to refuse to cover contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act. The Hobby Lobby plaintiffs specifically objected to four birth control methods — including IUDs and the morning-after pill because they produced abortions, which the plaintiffs found objectionable supposedly on religious grounds. But neither medical authorities nor the federal government classified those methods as abortifacients; the plaintiffs’ definition was accepted as gospel by Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the opinion, which became the basis for allowing businesses to exclude all birth control methods from their health plans.

With adherents of similar viewpoints now ensconced in positions of responsibility in the Trump administration, their approach threatens to spread throughout government policy. But it’s no more based on legitimate science than it ever was.

[The Los Angeles Times]

Trump: Why is Clinton Not Investigated But I Am?

President Trump on Thursday questioned why Hillary Clinton isn’t the subject of Russia-related investigations but he is.

“Why is that Hillary Clintons family and Dems dealings with Russia are not looked at, but my non-dealings are?” Trump tweeted.

“Crooked H destroyed phones w/ hammer, ‘bleached’ emails, & had husband meet w/AG days before she was cleared- & they talk about obstruction?” he added, in reference to the investigation into Clinton’s private email server.

Trump has previously called into question the Clinton campaign, referencing potential contacts between her campaign staff and the Kremlin.

“What about all of the contact with the Clinton campaign and the Russians? Also, is it true that the DNC would not let the FBI in to look?”  Trump asked on March 20.

Later that month, Trump asked why the “fake news” did not cover “ties” between the Kremlin and Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta.

“Why doesn’t Fake News talk about Podesta ties to Russia as covered by @FoxNews or money from Russia to Clinton – sale of Uranium?” Trump tweeted at the time.

The president has also accused former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who presided over the Justice Department while it conducted the investigation into Clinton’s private server use, of making “law enforcement decisions for political purposes.”

The U.S. intelligence community concluded last year that Russia interfered in the presidential election specifically to help Trump defeat Clinton, the Democratic nominee.

The Justice Department, FBI and Senate and House Intelligence committees are investigating Russian election meddling, including possible ties between Trump’s team and Russia.

In addition, a special counsel is reportedly probing whether Trump obstructed justice by firing former FBI Director James Comey last month. Comey testified that Trump leaned on him to “let go” of the bureau’s probe into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

[The Hill]

Reality

Okay let’s step through these one at a time.

Clinton did not sell a uranium mine to Russia, she was Secretary of the State Department when they and, this is important, 9 total agencies signed-off on a sale of an energy company to a Canadian-based Russian subsidiary. Again, very important, she didn’t have the power to approve or reject the deal.

Hillary Clinton destroyed her old phones “with a hammer” because destroying old devices is standard operating procedure, and state.gov emails would have been on government servers, not on her phone.

You can’t “bleach” emails, that’s not a thing.

Yes Bill Clinton met with Lorretta Lynch on a tarmac, they probably didn’t just talk about their grandkids, but Lynch recused herself from the Hillary Clinton private email server investigation immediately afterwards. That’s why the investigation then fell to James Comey, who found so little wrongdoing he could not imagine a reasonable prosecutor could bring a case.

Trump Conflates ‘Phony Collusion’ And Possible Obstruction Of Justice Investigation

President Trump dismissed a potential obstruction of justice investigation into his conduct, calling allegations of collusion between him, his campaign or people associated with him and Russia a “phony story.”

Of course, it’s possible to obstruct justice without colluding.

Trump was responding to a Washington Post report that special counsel Robert Mueller, who is overseeing the Department of Justice Russia investigation, is looking into whether Trump attempted to obstruct justice. An hour later, Trump was back at it, calling the investigation the “single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history.” (People who followed McCarthyism closely might disagree.)

The president also appeared to undermine Mueller’s leadership, saying the “witch hunt” was being “led by some very bad and conflicted people!”

There has been an effort on the right to try to undermine Mueller to de-legitimize his potential findings…:

… even though some of the same people just a month earlier had been praising the former FBI director for his esteem:

News of Mueller looking into potential obstruction comes after former FBI Director James Comey testified last week. He said he didn’t know if Trump obstructed justice, but said it was for Mueller to decide.

Comey testified that he told the president he was not personally under investigation three times and confirmed that Trump was not under investigation at the time of his firing on May 9.

But, “Officials say that changed shortly after Comey’s firing,” the Post reports.

It stands to reason that the circumstances surrounding Comey’s firing would now be at the center of Mueller’s query. That’s particularly the case since other high-ranking administration officials have declined under oath in open testimony to provide more details about whether Trump asked them in any way to influence Comey or the investigation.

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers and Rogers’ former deputy, Richard Ledgett, agreed to be interviewed as part of Mueller’s investigation, according to five people “briefed on the requests” who were “not authorized to discuss the matter publicly,” the paper reports.

Officially, Mueller spokesman Peter Carr told NPR’s Carrie Johnson, “We’ll decline to comment.”

NSA spokeswoman Vanee Vines told NPR’s Phil Ewing, “NSA will fully cooperate with the special counsel. We are not in a position to comment further.”

A spokesman for Trump’s personal lawyer in the Russia matter, Marc Kasowitz, said, “The FBI leak of information regarding the president is outrageous, inexcusable and illegal.”

Comey’s firing is a “central moment that’s being looked at” in the investigation, Post reporter Devlin Barrett told NPR’s Ari Shapiro on All Things Considered, “but it’s not the only thing.” Investigators are also considering the conversations Comey and the president had leading up to that point.

In his testimony on June 8, Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee that he believed Trump had fired him over his role as lead of the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. election and Trump campaign associates’ possible ties to Russia.

The White House has been inconsistent with its public messaging about the dismissal — initially saying Trump took the recommendations of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein about Comey’s management of the FBI and his handling of the Clinton email investigation. But then the president himself said he had made up his mind prior to receiving the recommendations from the two top lawyers at the Department of Justice.

Comey testified that initial explanations that he was fired because of poor leadership were “lies, plain and simple.” He also said Trump had privately urged him to pull back on the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn — a claim that the president has denied. Comey said he declined to tell agents working on the case about his conversation with Trump to shield them.

The Washington Post previously reported that Trump also asked Rogers and Coats to push back against the FBI’s investigation. The intelligence chiefs declined to discuss their private conversations with Trump during a Senate panel hearing on June 7.

Asked whether Trump’s actions rose to the level of obstruction of justice, Comey testified last week: “I don’t know. That’s Bob Mueller’s job to sort that out.” But Comey did lay out facts that a prosecutor could use to try to prove obstruction.

Trump and his supporters cast Comey’s testimony that he had told the president he was not personally under investigation as vindication. Trump disputed, though, Comey’s assertion he had asked for a pledge of loyalty. After Comey’s much-watched Senate testimony, the president said in a press conference that he would testify under oath regarding his interactions and conversations with the former FBI director.

“I think, frankly, our story shows that the president is by no means out of the woods as far as the investigation goes,” the Post’s Barrett told NPR.

Chatter surfaced earlier this week that the president was considering firing Mueller. After a day of speculation, White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, “While the president has the right to, he has no intention to do so.” The New York Times reported that Trump had been waved off the idea by advisers.

Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller on May 17, testified on Tuesday that he would not fire the special counsel without “good cause.”

Trump is not the only one under scrutiny, Barrett said: Investigators are also looking into the finances of Trump associates.

“Oftentimes what happens, frankly, in counterintelligence investigations is you start looking at sort of a core intelligence question — What did the Russians do and did they do it with any Americans? — and it grows into: What did any of those Americans do in their financial matters that may also raise alarms with the FBI?” Barrett said.

Mueller’s investigative team has expanded in recent weeks. The National Law Journal reported on June 9 that Mueller has brought Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben onto the team on a part-time basis. Reporter Tony Mauro noted the addition of Dreeben may signal that “Mueller may be seeking advice on complex areas of criminal law, including what constitutes obstruction of justice.” At the end of May, the chief of the Justice Department’s Fraud Section, Andrew Weissman, also joined the team, NPR’s Carrie Johnson reported at the time.

Justice Department policy is that a sitting president cannot be indicted by a grand jury, the Post also reported Wednesday. Any findings by the department’s investigation would be referred to Congress, where lawmakers would determine whether to impeach the president.

[NPR]

 

 

 

Trump Gives Pentagon Authority to Determine Troop Levels in Afghanistan

Defense Secretary James Mattis confirmed Wednesday that President Trump has granted him the authority to set troop levels in Afghanistan. The move means Mattis will decide whether to send 2,000 to 4,000 more American troops to Afghanistan as has been recommended by U.S. military commanders.

“At noon yesterday, President Trump delegated to me the authority to manage troop numbers in Afghanistan,” Mattis told the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee in his opening statement.

Mattis said the decision does not mean a change in troop numbers will happen right now, though he indicated he might have an idea of how many in a few weeks time.

He indicated that additional U.S. troops could be directed towards specific tasks to help the Afghan military like more air power and more intelligence support.

“The delegation of this authority, consistent with the authority President Trump granted me two months ago for Iraq and Syria does not, at this time, change the troop numbers for Afghanistan,” Mattis told the committee.

“Together in the interagency, we will define the way ahead and I will set the U.S. military commitment, consistent with the commander in chief strategic direction and the foreign policy as dictated by secretary of state Tillerson,” said Mattis. “This ensures the department can facilitate our missions and nimbly align our commitment to the situation on the ground.”

In late April, Trump gave Mattis the authority to manage the U.S. troop levels in Iraq and Syria.

Defense Secretary James Mattis confirmed Wednesday that President Trump has granted him the authority to set troop levels in Afghanistan. The move means Mattis will decide whether to send 2,000 to 4,000 more American troops to Afghanistan as has been recommended by U.S. military commanders.

While a similar delegation of authority to the Pentagon for Afghanistan troop levels had been expected, it had been anticipated that it would occur after the Trump administration concluded its Afghanistan strategy review.

On Tuesday, Mattis told a congressional panel that the review will be completed in mid-July.

“We are not winning in Afghanistan right now, and we will correct this as soon as possible,” Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

There are about 8,400 American troops in Afghanistan advising and assisting the Afghan military in its fight against the Taliban and the ISIS affiliate in Afghanistan.

In February, General John Nicholson, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, described the military situation there as “a stalemate” and acknowledged the need for additional troops to assist the Afghan military.

U.S. officials have said that as part of the strategy review the U.S. military had proposed sending 2,000 to 4,000 more American troops to Afghanistan.

The delegation of troop level authority to Mattis means that the defense secretary will decide how many additional American troops could be headed to Afghanistan.

The move restores the process that had been in place prior to the Bush and Obama administrations.

Defense Department officials portrayed the return to the Pentagon of control over Iraq and Syria troop levels as giving military commanders more flexibility and better management of their operations.

[ABC News]

Trump Blocks National Veteran Group on Twitter

On Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump started out the day as he has in the past: by tweeting criticisms of the news media and courts that have blocked his travel ban.

But he also took time to block the Twitter account of VoteVets.org, an organization that represents around 500,000 U.S. military veterans and their families.

Trump first tweeted that the “Fake News Media has never been so wrong or so dirty” and accused journalists of using “phony sources to meet their agenda of hate.”

VoteVets.org responded to Trump in a tweet that said, “You’re describing your road to the White House to a T” and accusing the president of “colluding with an adversary of the United States,” in reference to concerns about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Will Fischer, director of government affairs for VoteVets, told NBC News that he had written the tweets criticizing Trump when the account was suddenly blocked.

“He has no interest in hearing any type of dissent,” said Fischer.

VoteVets.org has been critical of Trump before, most recently in a television ad featuring a veteran of the war in Afghanistan speaking directly to the president about stripping healthcare from vets.

“There’s not an issue being debated that doesn’t affect military families and vets,” said Fischer. “There are nearly 2 million veterans and their spouses on Medicaid. 500,000 veterans are served by Meals on Wheels each year.”

“This is part of a long narrative of Trump’s disregard for veterans and military families,” Fischer said of the blocking.

“Trump only wants to surround himself with Yes-men,” said Fischer, citing a video of Monday’s cabinet meeting in which the attendees praised Trump in an effusive way that was mocked by some.

It’s not the first time the president has blocked his critics on social media. Also on Tuesday, he blocked noted science fiction and horror novelist Stephen King, Center for American Progress fellow Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza, and March for Truth organizer Jordan Uhl.

The president appeared to go on a blocking spree throughout the day, also blocking former Guantanamo Bay guard Brandon Neely. In a tweet about being blocked by Trump Tuesday, Neely suggested the president could be “blocking all veterans.”

So many people have been blocked from reading or responding to the president’s tweets that the hashtag #BlockedByTrump began to take off on Tuesday. Because Trump has blocked so many users, there are several other accounts — like @subtrump and @unfollowtrump — that retweet all of his posts on the platform.

Trump’s blocking has caused concern in legal circles, where some have raised questions about whether it could be illegal for a sitting U.S. President to intentionally hide his statements from members of the public.

On June 6, attorneys from the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University sent a letter to Trump asking him to unblock users. The letter says that an elected president’s Twitter account is a “designated public forum” — similar to a school board or city council meeting — and blocking Americans from seeing and responding to it based on their viewpoints is a violation of the First Amendment.

That same day, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that Trump’s tweets are “considered official statements by the president of the United States.”

The Knight First Amendment Institute is currently soliciting submissions from other people who have been blocked by the president.

Fischer said that he wasn’t very surprised about VoteVets.org getting the president’s block treatment.

“If the campaign taught us anything,” said Fischer, “It’s that the days of disbelief and shock are over.”

[NBC News]

 

 

1 246 247 248 249 250 340