pbs--2020-01-16--Giuliani associate says Trump had knowledge of Ukraine pressure

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — A close associate of President Donald Trump ’ s personal lawyer says he delivered an ultimatum in May to the incoming president of Ukraine that no senior U.S. officials would attend his inauguration and all American aid to the war-torn country would be withheld if an investigation into Joe Biden wasn ’ t announced .
Lev Parnas , an associate of Rudy Giuliani , made several potentially explosive claims in a televised interview Wednesday night with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow .
The day after Parnas said he delivered the message , the State Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer be attending the inauguration of Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskiy .
Parnas alleged that Trump ordered Pence to stay away at the behest of Giuliani to send a clear message to the incoming Ukrainian administration that they needed to take seriously the demand for an investigation into Biden , a Democratic presidential candidate seen as a potential threat to Trump ’ s 2020 reelection .
Parnas said every communication he had with Zelenskiy ’ s team was at the direction of Giuliani , whom he regularly overheard briefing Trump about their progress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly what was going on , ” said Parnas , a Soviet-born Florida businessman facing a raft of criminal charges related to campaign finance violations .
“ He was aware of all my movements .
I wouldn ’ t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani , or the President.
” If true , Parnas ’ account undercuts a key Republican defense of Trump deployed during the ongoing impeachment fight — that Trump ’ s withholding of vital military aid to Ukraine last summer wasn ’ t a quid pro quo for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know the money was being held up .
“ I feel sorry for him , ” Giuliani said Wednesday in a text message to an AP reporter .
“ I thought he was an honorable man .
I was wrong.
” Asked directly if Parnas was lying , Trump ’ s lawyer replied , “ I ’ m not responding yet.
” Parnas said he also heard Giuliani and another Trump-aligned defense lawyer , Victoria Toensing , briefing Attorney General William Barr by phone about their efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son Hunter ’ s business dealings .
“ Barr was basically on the team , ” Parnas said .
The Justice Department said in September that Trump had not spoken to Barr about having Ukraine investigate the Bidens and that the attorney general had not discussed Ukraine with Giuliani .
Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said Wednesday that Parnas ’ claims were “ 100 % false.
” The new accusations came as House Democrats made public a trove of documents , text messages and photos from Parnas ’ smartphones that appear to verify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge earlier this month ruled that Parnas could provide the materials to Congress as part of the impeachment proceedings .
Democrats voted in December to impeach Trump for abuse of power and for obstruction of Congress .
A House committee chairman said Wednesday his panel will investigate what he says are “ profoundly alarming ” text messages among the newly disclosed materials that have raised questions about the possible surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch before she was ousted by the Trump administration last spring .
The messages show that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Congress from Connecticut , disparaged Yovanovitch in messages to Parnas and gave him updates on her location and cellphone use .
Rep. Eliot Engel , a New York Democrat who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee , said Wednesday that the messages are “ profoundly alarming ” and “ suggest a possible risk ” to Yovanovitch ’ s security in Kyiv before she was recalled from her post .
“ These threats occurred at the same time that the two men were also discussing President Trump ’ s efforts , through Rudy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s reputation , ” Engel said .
He said the committee staff flagged the information for the State Department ’ s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and is seeking assurances that proper steps have been taken to ensure the security of Yovanovitch and committee staff .
He said he also wanted to know what , if anything , the State Department knew about the situation .
“ This unprecedented threat to our diplomats must be thoroughly investigated and , if warranted , prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law , ” Engel said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as they prepared to send articles of impeachment to the Senate for Trump ’ s trial .
The documents could add pressure on the Senate as it debates whether to hear witnesses in the trial .
The text and phone records show Parnas communicating with Giuliani multiple times a day before Yovanovitch ’ s removal , as well as a handwritten note that mentions asking Ukraine ’ s president to investigate “ the Biden case.
” Among the documents is a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Giuliani to Zelenskiy dated May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Zelenskiy was elected but before he took office .
In the letter , Giuliani requests a meeting with Zelenskiy “ as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent.
” The Associated Press reported in October that Zelenskiy had huddled three days earlier , on May 7 , with a small group of key advisers in Kyiv to seek advice about how to navigate the insistence from Trump and Giuliani for a probe into the Bidens .
He expressed his unease about becoming entangled in the American elections , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ details of the three-hour meeting .
They spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic sensitivity of the issue , which has roiled U.S.-Ukrainian relations .
One of the documents released by Democrats is a handwritten note on stationery from the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Vienna that says “ get Zalensky to Annonce that the Biden case will be Investigated.
” Parnas told Maddow he took the notes as he was speaking by phone to Giuliani , receiving precise instructions about the demands Trump wanted to convey to Zelenskiy ’ s team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 25 call to investigate the Bidens .
Hunter Biden served on the board of a gas company based in Ukraine .
The documents were sent to the House Judiciary Committee by three other House panels “ to be included as part of the official record that will be transmitted to the Senate along with the Articles of Impeachment , ” according to a statement .
Some of the materials were made public while others were blacked out and marked as sensitive .
Parnas and his business partner , Igor Fruman , both U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Union , were indicted last year on charges of conspiracy , making false statements and falsification of records .
Prosecutors allege they made outsize campaign donations to Republican causes after receiving millions of dollars originating from Russia .
The men have pleaded not guilty .
Parnas ’ lawyer , Joseph Bondy , told The New York Times that his client is looking to cooperate with prosecutors in his case , who are investigating Giuliani and his dealings in Ukraine .
“ We very much want to provide substantial assistance to the government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the newspaper that although he didn ’ t speak with Trump directly about the efforts , he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Giuliani that Trump was kept in the loop .
In several of the documents , Parnas communicated with Giuliani about the removal of Yovanovitch .
The ambassador ’ s ouster , ordered by Trump , was at the center of the Democrats ’ impeachment inquiry .
Yovanovitch testified in the House impeachment hearings that she was the victim of a “ smear campaign.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Yovanovitch was “ going to go through some things.
” She had been recalled from her diplomatic post roughly three months earlier .
On April 23 , just before Yovanovitch was directed to return to the United States , Giuliani texted Parnas , “ He fired her again.
” Parnas texted back , “ I pray it happens this time I ’ ll call you tomorrow my brother.
” Parnas also received messages from Hyde , who referred to Yovanovitch as a “ bitch.
” After texting about the ambassador , Hyde @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was watching her .
In one text , Hyde wrote : “ She ’ s talked to three people .
Her phone is off .
Her computer is off.
” He said she was under heavy security and “ we have a person inside.
” Hyde texted Parnas that ” they are willing to help if we/you would like a price , ” and “ guess you can do anything in Ukraine with money … is what I was told.
” Lawrence Robbins , an attorney for Yovanovitch , called for an investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post Tuesday , Hyde called Parnas a “ dweeb ” and suggested the messages about surveilling the ambassador were a joke .
He said he welcomed an investigation .
Parnas , in turn , also said Wednesday that Hyde ’ s texts shouldn ’ t be taken seriously .
The text messages show that Parnas consulted Giuliani in January 2019 after the U.S. denied a visa to former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin .
Giuliani replied : “ I can revive it.
” The following day , Giuliani told Parnas , “ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no 1 in it.
” Giuliani then predicted “ he will get one , ” before giving Parnas the phone number for Jay Sekulow , the leader of the president ’ s personal legal team .
Sekulow is expected to be part of Trump ’ s legal team during the impeachment trial .
Trump has repeatedly denied knowing Parnas and Fruman , despite numerous photos that have emerged of the men together .
Among the materials released from Parnas ’ phone this week were more photos of him with Trump , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump Jr. , first daughter Ivanka Trump , and her husband , Jared Kushner .
Asked by Maddow about Trump ’ s denials of knowing him , Parnas said he had spoken one-on-one with the president numerous times .
“ He lied , ” Parnas said of the president .
“ I mean , we ’ re not friends .
Me and him didn ’ t watch football games together , we didn ’ t eat hot dogs .
But he knew exactly who we were , who I was especially.
” Associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Zeke Miller contributed to this report .

WASHINGTON (AP) — A close associate of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer says he delivered an ultimatum in May to the incoming president of Ukraine that no senior U.S. officials would attend his inauguration and all American aid to the war-torn country would be withheld if an investigation into Joe Biden wasn’t announced.
Lev Parnas, an associate of Rudy Giuliani, made several potentially explosive claims in a televised interview Wednesday night with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. The day after Parnas said he delivered the message, the State Department announced that Vice President Mike Pence would no longer be attending the inauguration of Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskiy.
Parnas alleged that Trump ordered Pence to stay away at the behest of Giuliani to send a clear message to the incoming Ukrainian administration that they needed to take seriously the demand for an investigation into Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate seen as a potential threat to Trump’s 2020 reelection.
Parnas said every communication he had with Zelenskiy’s team was at the direction of Giuliani, whom he regularly overheard briefing Trump about their progress by phone.
“President Trump knew exactly what was going on,” said Parnas, a Soviet-born Florida businessman facing a raft of criminal charges related to campaign finance violations. “He was aware of all my movements. I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani, or the President.”
If true, Parnas’ account undercuts a key Republican defense of Trump deployed during the ongoing impeachment fight — that Trump’s withholding of vital military aid to Ukraine last summer wasn’t a quid pro quo for Biden investigations because Zelenskiy didn’t know the money was being held up.
Giuliani called Parnas’ statements “sad.”
“I feel sorry for him,” Giuliani said Wednesday in a text message to an AP reporter. “I thought he was an honorable man. I was wrong.”
Asked directly if Parnas was lying, Trump’s lawyer replied, “I’m not responding yet.”
Parnas said he also heard Giuliani and another Trump-aligned defense lawyer, Victoria Toensing, briefing Attorney General William Barr by phone about their efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to announce the investigation into Biden and his son Hunter’s business dealings.
“Barr was basically on the team,” Parnas said.
The Justice Department said in September that Trump had not spoken to Barr about having Ukraine investigate the Bidens and that the attorney general had not discussed Ukraine with Giuliani. Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said Wednesday that Parnas’ claims were “100% false.”
The new accusations came as House Democrats made public a trove of documents, text messages and photos from Parnas’ smartphones that appear to verify parts of his account.
A federal judge earlier this month ruled that Parnas could provide the materials to Congress as part of the impeachment proceedings. Democrats voted in December to impeach Trump for abuse of power and for obstruction of Congress.
A House committee chairman said Wednesday his panel will investigate what he says are “profoundly alarming” text messages among the newly disclosed materials that have raised questions about the possible surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch before she was ousted by the Trump administration last spring.
The messages show that a Robert F. Hyde, a Republican candidate for Congress from Connecticut, disparaged Yovanovitch in messages to Parnas and gave him updates on her location and cellphone use.
Rep. Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Wednesday that the messages are “profoundly alarming” and “suggest a possible risk” to Yovanovitch’s security in Kyiv before she was recalled from her post.
“These threats occurred at the same time that the two men were also discussing President Trump’s efforts, through Rudy Giuliani, to smear the ambassador’s reputation,” Engel said.
He said the committee staff flagged the information for the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and is seeking assurances that proper steps have been taken to ensure the security of Yovanovitch and committee staff. He said he also wanted to know what, if anything, the State Department knew about the situation.
“This unprecedented threat to our diplomats must be thoroughly investigated and, if warranted, prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Engel said.
Democrats released the files this week as they prepared to send articles of impeachment to the Senate for Trump’s trial. The documents could add pressure on the Senate as it debates whether to hear witnesses in the trial.
The text and phone records show Parnas communicating with Giuliani multiple times a day before Yovanovitch’s removal, as well as a handwritten note that mentions asking Ukraine’s president to investigate “the Biden case.”
Among the documents is a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Giuliani to Zelenskiy dated May 10, 2019, which was shortly after Zelenskiy was elected but before he took office. In the letter, Giuliani requests a meeting with Zelenskiy “as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent.”
The Associated Press reported in October that Zelenskiy had huddled three days earlier, on May 7, with a small group of key advisers in Kyiv to seek advice about how to navigate the insistence from Trump and Giuliani for a probe into the Bidens. He expressed his unease about becoming entangled in the American elections, according to three people familiar with the details of the three-hour meeting. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic sensitivity of the issue, which has roiled U.S.-Ukrainian relations.
One of the documents released by Democrats is a handwritten note on stationery from the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Vienna that says “get Zalensky to Annonce that the Biden case will be Investigated.”
Parnas told Maddow he took the notes as he was speaking by phone to Giuliani, receiving precise instructions about the demands Trump wanted to convey to Zelenskiy’s team.
Trump asked Zelenskiy in a July 25 call to investigate the Bidens. Hunter Biden served on the board of a gas company based in Ukraine.
The documents were sent to the House Judiciary Committee by three other House panels “to be included as part of the official record that will be transmitted to the Senate along with the Articles of Impeachment,” according to a statement. Some of the materials were made public while others were blacked out and marked as sensitive.
Parnas and his business partner, Igor Fruman, both U.S. citizens who emigrated from the former Soviet Union, were indicted last year on charges of conspiracy, making false statements and falsification of records. Prosecutors allege they made outsize campaign donations to Republican causes after receiving millions of dollars originating from Russia. The men have pleaded not guilty.
Parnas’ lawyer, Joseph Bondy, told The New York Times that his client is looking to cooperate with prosecutors in his case, who are investigating Giuliani and his dealings in Ukraine.
“We very much want to provide substantial assistance to the government,” Bondy told the Times.
Parnas told the newspaper that although he didn’t speak with Trump directly about the efforts, he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Giuliani that Trump was kept in the loop.
In several of the documents, Parnas communicated with Giuliani about the removal of Yovanovitch. The ambassador’s ouster, ordered by Trump, was at the center of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. Yovanovitch testified in the House impeachment hearings that she was the victim of a “smear campaign.”
Trump on the July call told Zelenskiy that Yovanovitch was “going to go through some things.” She had been recalled from her diplomatic post roughly three months earlier.
On April 23, just before Yovanovitch was directed to return to the United States, Giuliani texted Parnas, “He fired her again.” Parnas texted back, “I pray it happens this time I’ll call you tomorrow my brother.”
Parnas also received messages from Hyde, who referred to Yovanovitch as a “bitch.”
After texting about the ambassador, Hyde gave Parnas detailed updates that suggested he was watching her. In one text, Hyde wrote: “She’s talked to three people. Her phone is off. Her computer is off.” He said she was under heavy security and “we have a person inside.”
Hyde texted Parnas that ”they are willing to help if we/you would like a price,” and “guess you can do anything in Ukraine with money … is what I was told.”
Parnas texted back: “lol.”
Lawrence Robbins, an attorney for Yovanovitch, called for an investigation into the messages.
In a Twitter post Tuesday, Hyde called Parnas a “dweeb” and suggested the messages about surveilling the ambassador were a joke. He said he welcomed an investigation.
Parnas, in turn, also said Wednesday that Hyde’s texts shouldn’t be taken seriously.
The text messages show that Parnas consulted Giuliani in January 2019 after the U.S. denied a visa to former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. Giuliani replied: “I can revive it.”
The following day, Giuliani told Parnas, “It’s going to work I have no 1 in it.” Giuliani then predicted “he will get one,” before giving Parnas the phone number for Jay Sekulow, the leader of the president’s personal legal team. Sekulow is expected to be part of Trump’s legal team during the impeachment trial.
Trump has repeatedly denied knowing Parnas and Fruman, despite numerous photos that have emerged of the men together. Among the materials released from Parnas’ phone this week were more photos of him with Trump, as well as the president’s son Donald Trump Jr., first daughter Ivanka Trump, and her husband, Jared Kushner.
Asked by Maddow about Trump’s denials of knowing him, Parnas said he had spoken one-on-one with the president numerous times.
“He lied,” Parnas said of the president. “I mean, we’re not friends. Me and him didn’t watch football games together, we didn’t eat hot dogs. But he knew exactly who we were, who I was especially.”
Associated Press writers Michael Balsamo, Lisa Mascaro and Zeke Miller contributed to this report.


pbs--2020-01-16--WATCH: House Democrats walk articles of impeachment to Senate

The seven House Democrats selected as the managers of President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial walked the articles of impeachment across the U.S. Capitol on Thursday at noon to formally deliver them to the U.S. Senate .
The managers already walked over the articles on Wednesday , but only to notify the Senate that the articles would be delivered .
The move came after the full House voted on Wednesday afternoon to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate and after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi named the managers Wednesday morning .
Pelosi named Rep. Adam Schiff , Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Hakeem Jeffries , Rep. Val Demings , Rep. Jason Crow and Rep. Sylvia Garcia as the managers , who will serve as the prosecutors for the Senate trial .
Trump was impeached last month when the House voted to approve two articles of impeachment–abuse of power and obstruction of justice .
Pelosi delayed delivering the articles to the Senate as Democrats and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell disagreed over whether additional witnesses would be called to testify during the Senate trial .
All 100 senators who will take part in the trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time after the articles are transmitted with opening statements and further arguments beginning next week .
Republican Sen. James Inhofe did not attend the day ’ s events because he was home in Oklahoma due to a family medical issue .
WATCH LIVE : All the events on the day Trump ’ s articles of impeachment are delivered to the Senate

The seven House Democrats selected as the managers of President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial walked the articles of impeachment across the U.S. Capitol on Thursday at noon to formally deliver them to the U.S. Senate.
The managers already walked over the articles on Wednesday, but only to notify the Senate that the articles would be delivered.
The move came after the full House voted on Wednesday afternoon to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate and after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi named the managers Wednesday morning. Pelosi named Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Jerry Nadler, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Rep. Val Demings, Rep. Jason Crow and Rep. Sylvia Garcia as the managers, who will serve as the prosecutors for the Senate trial.
Trump was impeached last month when the House voted to approve two articles of impeachment–abuse of power and obstruction of justice.
Pelosi delayed delivering the articles to the Senate as Democrats and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell disagreed over whether additional witnesses would be called to testify during the Senate trial.
All 100 senators who will take part in the trial were expected to be sworn in some time after the articles are transmitted with opening statements and further arguments beginning next week. Republican Sen. James Inhofe did not attend the day’s events because he was home in Oklahoma due to a family medical issue.
WATCH LIVE: All the events on the day Trump’s articles of impeachment are delivered to the Senate


pbs--2020-01-17--Shields and Brooks on Trump impeachment evidence, Democratic debate

Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week ’ s @ @ @ @ @ opening of President Trump ’ s Senate trial and the announcement of his legal team @ @ @ @ @ , 2020 Democrats ’ final debate before the Iowa caucuses and Michael Bloomberg ’ s @ @ @ @

Judy Woodruff:
For just the third time in U.S. history, the chief justice of the United States has sworn in U.S. senators with an oath that they will conduct impartial justice in the impeachment trial of a sitting president.
The trial is set to begin next Tuesday, keeping four 2020 Democratic presidential contenders who are also senators in Washington, while other candidates continue their campaigns in Iowa ahead of the first primary contest of the year, coming in just over two weeks.
Here to assess these historic times are Shields and Brooks. That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
Hello to both of you.


pbs--2020-01-17--WATCH LIVE: Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate

Opening arguments begin Tuesday in the Republican-led Senate trial of President Donald Trump , who last year became the third president in history to be impeached by the House of Representatives .
The Senate will come to session at 12:30 p.m .
ET on Tuesday .
Watch live in our player above .
Seven Democrats have been named as managers to prosecute the House ’ s case , including Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff of California and Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York .
White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump ’ s personal lawyer , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lead in arguing the president ’ s case .
On Friday , Trump added two members to his legal team : Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr .
Both nationally known attorneys and regular pundits on Fox News , Dershowitz has a background in constitutional law , while Starr is famous for having led the investigation into former President Bill Clinton .
On Thursday , after the House managers formally delivered the two articles of impeachment to the Senate , Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn in to preside over the trial , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
New evidence has been released related to Lev Parnas , an associate of Trump ’ s lawyer Rudy Giuliani , whose activities related to Ukraine have been under scrutiny in the impeachment inquiry .
READ MORE : See all the new impeachment evidence relating to Lev Parnas The two articles of impeachment put forward by the House charges the president with abuse of presidential power and obstruction of Congress , for his actions related to the withholding of military aid for Ukraine and his request for an investigation into Democratic presidential candidate @ @ @

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-controlled Senate acquitted President Donald Trump on two impeachment charges Wednesday amid Republican complaints about what they called a rushed process and Democratic claims that Trump is a threat to democracy. The historic, three-week trial proceeded largely along partisan lines, with just one senator — Republican Mitt Romney of Utah — breaking with his party. Below, read some takeaways from just the third impeachment trial of a president in U.S. history.
Watch senators’ speeches from Tuesday, Feb. 4
Watch closing arguments and senators’ speeches from Monday, Feb. 3
Watch the debate and vote on witnesses on Friday, Jan. 31
Watch senators’ questioning from Thursday, Jan. 30
Watch senators’ questioning from Wednesday, Jan. 29
Watch the Trump team’s arguments from Tuesday, Jan. 28
Watch the Trump team’s arguments from Monday, Jan. 27
Watch the Trump team’s arguments from Saturday, Jan. 25
Watch House manager’s arguments from Friday, Jan. 24
Watch House manager’s arguments from Thursday, Jan. 23
Watch House manager’s arguments from Wednesday, Jan. 22, in the impeachment trial
Watch Tuesday’s Senate debate on the impeachment trial rules
Trump’s iron grip on GOP
Some Republican senators expressed reservations about Trump’s conduct; some even went so far as to say that House Democrats successfully made their case against him. Nonetheless, Trump’s acquittal was never truly in doubt in the Senate. Even Republicans who disapproved of Trump’s dealings with Ukraine — the heart of the House impeachment charges — said his conduct did not merit making him the first president ever removed from office.
In ways unimaginable when he was first elected as a political newcomer, Trump has come to utterly dominate the GOP. Republican lawmakers bow to his overwhelming popularity with the party’s base. “It’s not a party of ideas or ideology anymore. It’s a cult of personality,” tweeted Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
Republicans insisted they were acting in the interests of their constituents and their conscience, and they reacted with outrage when Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the lead impeachment manager, cited a media report claiming that a person close to Trump had warned Republicans their “head will be on a pike” if they voted against the president.
Trump has already shown his power to cast out dissident Republicans. Former Sens. Bob Corker of Tennessee and Jeff Flake of Arizona decided not to run for reelection rather than face voters after clashing with Trump.
McConnell delivers — again
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. R-Ky., again proved himself Trump’s most important ally. He led a drive to deny Democrats any opportunity to call witnesses before the Senate and worked closely with the White House in shepherding the case to acquittal, fulfilling a pledge he made before the trial to “take my cues from the president’s lawyers.”
McConnell slammed House Democrats’ drive to impeach Trump as “the most rushed, least fair and least thorough” in history. He said the two impeachment charges against Trump — that he abused his power and obstructed Congress’ ensuing investigation — are “constitutionally incoherent” and don’t “even approach a case for the first presidential removal in American history.”
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York accused McConnell and his GOP colleagues of sweeping Trump’s misconduct under the rug. “The administration, its top people and Senate Republicans are all hiding the truth,” Schumer said, adding that Trump tried to “blackmail a foreign country to interfere in our elections.”
Proven, but not impeachable
Republicans voted to acquit Trump, but many wanted to be on record as frowning on his conduct. Perhaps the most prominent example was retiring Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who voted against hearing from witnesses but called out Trump’s actions as “inappropriate.”
Other Republicans followed suit, insisting that their votes against witnesses or in favor of acquittal should not be interpreted as approval of his actions.
“I do not believe that the House has met its burden of showing that the president’s conduct — however flawed — warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.
“Our country is already too deeply divided and we should be working to heal wounds, not create new ones. It is better to let the people decide,” added Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio.
Romney stands alone
In an unlikely twist, Romney, the GOP’s unsuccessful 2012 presidential nominee, was the only Republican senator to break ranks in the impeachment trial and favor removing Trump from office. The well-mannered, patrician Romney stood alone in his vote to oust a Republican president who seldom hides his contempt for the senator and the establishment Romney symbolizes.
Romney’s support for removing Trump on a charge of abuse of power also denied Trump’s campaign a frequent talking point of asserting that he had full support of Republicans in the House and Senate during a strictly partisan drive to remove him.
Romney voted to acquit Trump on the second article of impeachment, obstruction of Congress, joining his 52 GOP colleagues.
Romney, a Mormon, cited his religious faith and the significance of the impeachment oath taken by senators to render “impartial justice” on impeachment. “The grave question the Constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the president committed an act so extreme, so egregious, that it rises to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor,” Romney said in a floor speech. “Yes, he did.”
GOP Sen. Steve Daines of Montana called Romney’s vote “very disappointing,” adding: “I strongly disagree. But he has to speak for what he believes.”
Democrats united
Throughout the trial, the votes of at least three Democrats were uncertain. Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Doug Jones were all considered possible votes to acquit Trump. Manchin even floated censuring Trump instead of removing him from office, though the idea did not gain much traction. In the end, all 47 Democrats voted to find Trump guilty on both articles of impeachment.
Manchin, a former governor and a rare Democrat holding office in the nation’s most pro-Trump state, said he could explain his vote for removal based on the evidence that was presented. “There was no other conclusion that I could come to, as much as I knew how divisive it would be, as difficult as it would be,” Manchin said. “It’s based on, could I go home … and face my family, my friends and the good Lord that I swore to?”
Jones, whose seat in ruby-red Alabama is in jeopardy, said impeachment has been partisan from the beginning and the country needs to figure out how to move forward together. A former federal prosecutor, Jones won a special Senate election in 2018. He said he had not thought about how his votes to convict Trump might affect his reelection chances, saying simply he was comfortable with his decision.
Sinema said in a statement that she was upholding her duty to the Constitution and putting the interests of the country ahead of partisan politics or personal interest.
“The facts are clear; security aid was withheld from Ukraine in an attempt to benefit the president’s political campaign. While White House attorneys claim this behavior is not serious, it is dangerous to the fundamental principles of American democracy to use the power of the federal government for personal or political gain,” she said.
White House lawyers also failed to assure the American people that future national security decisions will be made free from personal interests, Sinema said. “That should be gravely concerning to all of us.”
Revelations not over
The end of the Senate impeachment trial won’t bring an end to revelations about Trump’s dealings with Ukraine. There are books to be written and documents being withheld by the administration that could ultimately become public.
Former national security adviser John Bolton writes in a book due out next month that Trump tied the suspension of military aid to Ukraine to investigations that Trump wanted, just as House prosecutors alleged. The Justice Department disclosed in a court filing last weekend that it has 24 emails related to Ukraine that it has not produced.
Additional disclosures are possible from witnesses who testified in the House impeachment inquiry and may feel emboldened to share even more now that the president has been acquitted. Or witnesses unknown to the public could step forward.
Democrats are fighting to release grand jury testimony from special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and for the testimony of ex-White House lawyer Don McGahn.
That was quick
Whether rushed or not, the impeachment was the fastest impeachment ever. The House voted to impeach Trump a week before Christmas, less than three months after Pelosi launched the impeachment inquiry.
After a four-week delay while Democrats pressed for rules changes to extend the trial, House Democrats carried the formal articles of impeachment against Trump to the Senate in mid-January.
Three weeks later, the Senate voted to acquit Trump without new testimony or subpoenas.
Let voters decide
Many senators who voted to acquit Trump said they were disappointed in his conduct or disapproved of it, but that it was up to voters to decide Trump’s fate in November.
Alexander said House prosecutors had proved the charges against the president, but said they didn’t rise to an impeachable offense.
“The question is not whether the president did it,” but whether the Senate should decide what to do about it, Alexander said last week in becoming the decisive vote against witnesses and documents. “I believe the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, called the president’s actions “shameful and wrong.” But she said the proper response to Trump’s behavior was “not to disenfranchise nearly 63 million Americans” — who voted for Trump in 2016 — by removing him from the ballot.
Foreign interference permissable?
An already ill-defined area of law may be even murkier for 2020 campaigns, thanks to an answer on foreign election interference from deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin.
Democrats pressed Trump’s legal team to acknowledge that foreign election interference is not only wrong but also illegal. Asked if Trump agreed that foreign involvement in an American election is against the law, Philbin pointed out that the law only covers foreign campaign contributions or other so-called things of value. The Justice Department concluded for that reason that Trump’s call with Ukraine’s leader didn’t violate campaign finance laws.
Democrats called Philbin’s statement shocking. “The single most important lesson that we learned from 2016 was that nobody should seek or welcome foreign interference in our elections,” said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., an impeachment manager. “But now we have this president and his counsel essentially saying it is OK.”
Legal arguments are political
Trump’s lawyers, including retired Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and former independent counsel Ken Starr, presented a variety of arguments to senators. They said Trump never made military aid contingent on investigations. They painted him as beset by biased investigators and asserted that even if he did what he was accused of, it still wasn’t impeachable.
In the end, though, the argument that appeared to resonate most with senators was inherently political: impeaching a president in an election year, the argument went, invites chaos and instability, upends the will of the voters and opens the door to future presidents being tossed from office on partisan whims.
“They are asking you to tear up all of the ballots across this country, on your own initiative — take that decision away from the American people,” White House counsel Pat Cipollone said.
Read more


pbs--2020-01-17--Ex-Rep. Collins gets over 2 years in insider trading case

NEW YORK ( AP ) — A former congressman who was one of President Donald Trump ’ s first supporters was sentenced Friday to two years and two months in federal prison after admitting he helped his son and others dodge $ 800,000 in stock market losses when he learned that a drug trial by a small pharmaceutical company had failed .
Christopher Collins , 69 , was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick in Manhattan after the Republican pleaded guilty in October to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and lying to law enforcement officials .
Collins broke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his former constituents and colleagues .
“ I stand here today as a disgraced former member of Congress , ” he said .
“ My life has been shattered.
” The sentence came even after Collins ’ lawyers argued he was sorry and should face no prison time in the insider trading case .
Prosecutors , however , argued he should go to prison for nearly five years .
They said Collins and his son , Cameron , were worth a total of $ 35 million when they conspired to sell shares in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made public .
The trading , prosecutors said , enabled Cameron Collins and friends to dodge $ 800,000 in losses .
Collins ’ attorneys urged the judge for leniency , citing his contrition , advanced age , charitable works and a low chance that he would commit any more crimes .
“ This is a sad and tragic day for Chris and his family , ” defense attorney Jonathan Barr said .
“ He stands before you humbled , penitent and remorseful.
” Collins had represented western New York since his election to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2012 .
He resigned when he decided to plead guilty to a single conspiracy count , leaving the district ’ s constituents without representation in Congress .
Prosecutors faulted Collins for campaigning for a reelection race he won after his arrest and then continuing to serve .
They said Collins learned that Innate Immunotherapeutics Ltd. , whose board he sat on , had failed a drug trial when he received a telephone call while he attended the annual Congressional Picnic at the White House on June 22 , 2017 .
Knowing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news got out , Collins “ from the White House lawn ” tried to reach his son to tip him off so he could sell his shares , prosecutors said .
Prosecutors said he then conspired with family members to claim Cameron Collins and friends sold shares because they were spooked by a temporary halt in the trading of the stock rather than because they knew the stock price would fall 92 % for the company headquartered in Sydney , Australia , with offices in Auckland , New Zealand .
Assistant U.S. Attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crime was the result of a tragic and emotional moment when Collins wasn ’ t thinking straight after learning the drug trial failed .
The prosecutor noted there was a 10-month gap between his first crime when he called his son and the second when he lied to the FBI , which described as Collins “ doubling down.
” “ We do not agree this crime was emotional , ” Nicholas said .
Broderick called it baffling that Collins would exercise such poor judgment when he and his son had the financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I have a difficult time reconciling that , ” the judge said .
“ It was a stupid , impulsive action that doesn ’ t make sense , ” Barr , Collins ’ defense attorney , responded .
“ He really thought this company had something that was going to be a magic bullet for somebody with a really serious illness .
”

NEW YORK (AP) — A former congressman who was one of President Donald Trump’s first supporters was sentenced Friday to two years and two months in federal prison after admitting he helped his son and others dodge $800,000 in stock market losses when he learned that a drug trial by a small pharmaceutical company had failed.
Christopher Collins, 69, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick in Manhattan after the Republican pleaded guilty in October to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and lying to law enforcement officials.
Collins broke down and apologized to his family and his former constituents and colleagues.
“I stand here today as a disgraced former member of Congress,” he said. “My life has been shattered.”
“I stand here today as a disgraced former member of Congress,” he said. “My life has been shattered.”
The sentence came even after Collins’ lawyers argued he was sorry and should face no prison time in the insider trading case.
Prosecutors, however, argued he should go to prison for nearly five years. They said Collins and his son, Cameron, were worth a total of $35 million when they conspired to sell shares in a pharmaceutical company before devastating news was made public.
The trading, prosecutors said, enabled Cameron Collins and friends to dodge $800,000 in losses.
Collins’ attorneys urged the judge for leniency, citing his contrition, advanced age, charitable works and a low chance that he would commit any more crimes.
“This is a sad and tragic day for Chris and his family,” defense attorney Jonathan Barr said. “He stands before you humbled, penitent and remorseful.”
Collins had represented western New York since his election to the state’s 27th Congressional District in 2012. He resigned when he decided to plead guilty to a single conspiracy count, leaving the district’s constituents without representation in Congress.
Prosecutors faulted Collins for campaigning for a reelection race he won after his arrest and then continuing to serve.
They said Collins learned that Innate Immunotherapeutics Ltd., whose board he sat on, had failed a drug trial when he received a telephone call while he attended the annual Congressional Picnic at the White House on June 22, 2017. Knowing that Innate’s stock would plunge when news got out, Collins “from the White House lawn” tried to reach his son to tip him off so he could sell his shares, prosecutors said.
Prosecutors said he then conspired with family members to claim Cameron Collins and friends sold shares because they were spooked by a temporary halt in the trading of the stock rather than because they knew the stock price would fall 92% for the company headquartered in Sydney, Australia, with offices in Auckland, New Zealand.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Max Nicholas disputed the defense claim that the crime was the result of a tragic and emotional moment when Collins wasn’t thinking straight after learning the drug trial failed. The prosecutor noted there was a 10-month gap between his first crime when he called his son and the second when he lied to the FBI, which described as Collins “doubling down.”
“We do not agree this crime was emotional,” Nicholas said.
Broderick called it baffling that Collins would exercise such poor judgment when he and his son had the financial means to deal with any loss. “I have a difficult time reconciling that,” the judge said.
“It was a stupid, impulsive action that doesn’t make sense,” Barr, Collins’ defense attorney, responded. “He really thought this company had something that was going to be a magic bullet for somebody with a really serious illness.”


pbs--2020-01-17--High court to consider whether electors must support state's popular vote winner

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Supreme Court said Friday it will decide ahead of the 2020 election whether presidential electors are bound to support the popular vote winner in their states or can opt for someone else .
Advocates for the court ’ s intervention say the issue needs urgent resolution in an era of intense political polarization and the prospect of a razor-thin margin in a presidential election , although so-called faithless electors have been a footnote so far in American history .
The justices will hear arguments in April and should issue a decision by late June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote for the popular vote winner , and electors almost always do so anyway .
Under the Constitution , the country elects the president indirectly , with voters choosing people who actually cast an Electoral College ballot for president .
It takes 270 votes to win .
The case arises from the 2016 presidential election .
Three Hillary Clinton electors in Washington state and one in Colorado refused to vote for her despite her popular vote win in both states .
In so doing , they hoped to persuade enough electors in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone else and deny Trump the presidency .
The federal appeals court in Denver ruled that electors can vote as they please , rejecting arguments that they must choose the popular vote winner .
In Washington , the state Supreme Court upheld a $ 1,000 fine against the three electors and rejected their claims .
In all , there were 10 faithless electors in 2016 , including a fourth in Washington , a Democratic elector in Hawaii and two Republican electors in Texas .
In addition , Democratic electors who said they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maine and Minnesota .
In asking the Supreme Court to rule that states can require electors to vote for the state winner , Colorado urged the justices to decide the case in the next few months , “ not in the heat of a close presidential election.
” The three Washington electors , while contending they should be free to vote their conscience , also said the court should avoid the “ dangerous possibility ” of having to resolve the issue following the 2020 vote .

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Friday it will decide ahead of the 2020 election whether presidential electors are bound to support the popular vote winner in their states or can opt for someone else.
Advocates for the court’s intervention say the issue needs urgent resolution in an era of intense political polarization and the prospect of a razor-thin margin in a presidential election, although so-called faithless electors have been a footnote so far in American history.
The justices will hear arguments in April and should issue a decision by late June.
About 30 states require presidential electors to vote for the popular vote winner, and electors almost always do so anyway.
About 30 states require presidential electors to vote for the popular vote winner, and electors almost always do so anyway. Under the Constitution, the country elects the president indirectly, with voters choosing people who actually cast an Electoral College ballot for president. It takes 270 votes to win.
The case arises from the 2016 presidential election. Three Hillary Clinton electors in Washington state and one in Colorado refused to vote for her despite her popular vote win in both states. In so doing, they hoped to persuade enough electors in states won by Donald Trump to choose someone else and deny Trump the presidency.
The federal appeals court in Denver ruled that electors can vote as they please, rejecting arguments that they must choose the popular vote winner. In Washington, the state Supreme Court upheld a $1,000 fine against the three electors and rejected their claims.
In all, there were 10 faithless electors in 2016, including a fourth in Washington, a Democratic elector in Hawaii and two Republican electors in Texas. In addition, Democratic electors who said they would not vote for Clinton were replaced in Maine and Minnesota.
In asking the Supreme Court to rule that states can require electors to vote for the state winner, Colorado urged the justices to decide the case in the next few months, “not in the heat of a close presidential election.”
The three Washington electors, while contending they should be free to vote their conscience, also said the court should avoid the “dangerous possibility” of having to resolve the issue following the 2020 vote.


pbs--2020-01-17--Court to look anew at birth control rules in health care law

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Supreme Court will consider allowing the Trump administration to enforce rules that allow more employers to deny insurance coverage for contraceptives to women .
The justices agreed Friday to yet another case stemming from President Barack Obama ’ s health care overhaul , this time about cost-free birth control .
The court probably will hear arguments in April .
The high court will review an appeals court ruling that blocked the Trump administration rules because it did not follow proper procedures .
The new policy on contraception , issued by the Department of Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ categories of employers , including publicly traded companies , to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women by claiming religious objections .
The policy also would allow some employers , though not publicly traded companies , to raise moral objections to covering contraceptives .
Employers also would be able to cover some birth control methods , and not others .
Some employers have objected to covering modern , long-acting implantable contraceptives , such as IUDs , which are more expensive and considered highly effective in preventing pregnancies .
Even though the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a federal judge in Texas in June already allows most people who object to covering contraception to avoid doing so .
The issue in all the cases is the method originally adopted by the Obama administration to allow religiously affiliated organizations to opt out of paying for contraception while making sure that women under their plans would not be left with the bill .
Some groups complained that the opt-out process violated their religious beliefs and wanted to be relieved of even signaling their religious objection .
The share of female employees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pills has plunged to under 4 percent , from 21 percent , since contraception became a covered preventive health benefit under the Obama-era health law , according to the Kaiser Family Foundation .

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will consider allowing the Trump administration to enforce rules that allow more employers to deny insurance coverage for contraceptives to women.
The justices agreed Friday to yet another case stemming from President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, this time about cost-free birth control. The court probably will hear arguments in April.
The high court will review an appeals court ruling that blocked the Trump administration rules because it did not follow proper procedures. The new policy on contraception, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, would allow more categories of employers, including publicly traded companies, to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women by claiming religious objections.
The policy also would allow some employers, though not publicly traded companies, to raise moral objections to covering contraceptives.
Employers also would be able to cover some birth control methods, and not others. Some employers have objected to covering modern, long-acting implantable contraceptives, such as IUDs, which are more expensive and considered highly effective in preventing pregnancies.
Even though the Trump rules remain blocked, a ruling by a federal judge in Texas in June already allows most people who object to covering contraception to avoid doing so.
The issue in all the cases is the method originally adopted by the Obama administration to allow religiously affiliated organizations to opt out of paying for contraception while making sure that women under their plans would not be left with the bill.
Some groups complained that the opt-out process violated their religious beliefs and wanted to be relieved of even signaling their religious objection.
The share of female employees paying their own money for birth control pills has plunged to under 4 percent, from 21 percent, since contraception became a covered preventive health benefit under the Obama-era health law, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.


pbs--2020-01-17--11 U.S. troops flown to medical centers after Iran strike

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Eleven U.S. troops were flown out of Iraq for evaluation of concussion-like symptoms in the days following an Iranian missile strike that President Donald Trump had said caused no harm to American forces , officials said Friday .
The Pentagon ’ s chief spokesman , Jonathan Hoffman , said Defense Secretary Mark Esper did not know of the injuries until he was told Thursday afternoon that the 11 troops had been sent for evaluation at U.S. medical facilities — eight in Germany and three in Kuwait .
Hoffman said the notification to Esper was in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said do not require notification of service member casualties to the Pentagon unless they involve the loss of life , limb or eyesight .
As recently as Tuesday night , Trump said he had been told no American had been harmed in the Iranian missile strike on Jan. 8 .
The question of American casualties was especially significant at the time because the missile attack ’ s results were seen as influencing a U.S. decision on whether to retaliate and risk a broader war with Iran .
Trump chose not to retaliate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ somewhat .
After Esper was notified of the possible brain injuries on Thursday , U.S. Central Command put out a public statement saying “ several ” troops were treated for concussion symptoms from the missile blasts .
The AP had reported this on Monday when reporters were allowed to visit the attacked base , Ain al-Asad , in western Iraq .
Thursday ’ s statement said that “ out of an abundance of caution , ” some of the injured troops were flown out of Iraq for follow-on screening .
Medical personnel at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resonance imaging scanner , which can be used to diagnose brain injuries .
“ I think everyone would agree that we could consider this an injury , ” Hoffman said of the concussion symptoms , which he said became apparent over a period of days .
Most or all of the troops initially resumed their military duties , he said .
One service member with concussion-like symptoms was flown out of Iraq on Jan. 10 ; the rest were taken out five days later , Hoffman said .
He denied that anyone had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ missiles or delayed the reporting of the injuries out of political considerations .
“ This idea that there was an effort to de-emphasize injuries for some sort of amorphous political agenda doesn ’ t hold water , ” Hoffman said .

WASHINGTON (AP) — Eleven U.S. troops were flown out of Iraq for evaluation of concussion-like symptoms in the days following an Iranian missile strike that President Donald Trump had said caused no harm to American forces, officials said Friday.
The Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Jonathan Hoffman, said Defense Secretary Mark Esper did not know of the injuries until he was told Thursday afternoon that the 11 troops had been sent for evaluation at U.S. medical facilities — eight in Germany and three in Kuwait. Hoffman said the notification to Esper was in line with military procedures, which he said do not require notification of service member casualties to the Pentagon unless they involve the loss of life, limb or eyesight.
As recently as Tuesday night, Trump said he had been told no American had been harmed in the Iranian missile strike on Jan. 8. The question of American casualties was especially significant at the time because the missile attack’s results were seen as influencing a U.S. decision on whether to retaliate and risk a broader war with Iran.
Trump chose not to retaliate, and the tensions with Iran have eased somewhat.
After Esper was notified of the possible brain injuries on Thursday, U.S. Central Command put out a public statement saying “several” troops were treated for concussion symptoms from the missile blasts. The AP had reported this on Monday when reporters were allowed to visit the attacked base, Ain al-Asad, in western Iraq. Thursday’s statement said that “out of an abundance of caution,” some of the injured troops were flown out of Iraq for follow-on screening. Medical personnel at Ain al-Asad do not have a magnetic resonance imaging scanner, which can be used to diagnose brain injuries.
“I think everyone would agree that we could consider this an injury,” Hoffman said of the concussion symptoms, which he said became apparent over a period of days. Most or all of the troops initially resumed their military duties, he said.
One service member with concussion-like symptoms was flown out of Iraq on Jan. 10; the rest were taken out five days later, Hoffman said. He denied that anyone had downplayed the lethal potential of the Iranian missiles or delayed the reporting of the injuries out of political considerations.
“This idea that there was an effort to de-emphasize injuries for some sort of amorphous political agenda doesn’t hold water,” Hoffman said.


pbs--2020-01-17--Dershowitz, Starr join Trump impeachment legal defense

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — President Donald Trump is adding experience in constitutional law and the politics of impeachment to his legal defense team , bringing in retired law professor Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr , the independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton .
In adding the two men , Trump is turning to a pair of brand-name attorneys who have experience in some of the more consequential legal dramas of recent American history and whose presence is likely to add to the made-for-television feel of the impeachment trial .
Both are regular guests on Fox News , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and have put forth defenses of the president during their appearances .
Dershowitz , a former Harvard professor , is a constitutional expert who in recent years has supported Trump ’ s expansive view of presidential powers , while Starr is a veteran of the last partisan impeachment fight .
His investigation into Clinton ’ s relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky led to Clinton ’ s impeachment over 20 years ago .
Clinton was acquitted by the Senate .
The lead roles for Trump ’ s defense will be played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump personal lawyer Jay Sekulow .
The team will also include Pam Bondi , the former Florida attorney general and a Trump ally , according to a person who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the person wasn ’ t authorized to speak on the record .
Dershowitz confirmed his role in a series of tweets on Friday , saying , he would “ present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal.
” Dershowitz said of himself : “ While Professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Constitution — he opposed the impeachment of President Bill Clinton and voted for Hillary Clinton — he believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution.
” A Fox News host said on the air that Starr would be parting ways with the network as a result of his role on the legal team .
Other members of Trump ’ s legal defense include Jane Raskin , who was part of the president ’ s legal team during special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s Russia investigation , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the the Whitewater investigation of the Clintons .
The White House would not confirm the roster of the president ’ s attorneys , and some officials bristled that the announcement was not coordinated with them .
White House attorneys and the outside legal team were still discussing how political the formal legal brief should be .
The president faces a noon Monday deadline to file his brief in the trial , and the legal team was still being drafted , according to a person familiar with the situation .
Trump was impeached on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress , stemming from his pressure on Ukraine to investigate Democratic rivals as he was withholding security aid , and obstructing the ensuing congressional probe .
The U.S. Senate opened the trial on Thursday and senators were sworn in as jurors .
The trial resumes Tuesday .
The president insists he did nothing wrong , and he complains about his treatment daily , sometimes distracting from unrelated events .
On Friday , as Trump invited the championship LSU football team to the Oval Office for photos , he said the space had seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good , some not so good .
But you got a good one now , even though they ’ re trying to impeach the son of a bitch .
Can you believe that ?
” While he speaks dismissively of the case , new revelations are mounting about Trump ’ s actions toward Ukraine .
The Government Accountability Office said Thursday that the White House violated federal law in withholding the security assistance to Ukraine , which shares a border with hostile Russia .
At the same time , an indicted associate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Lev Parnas , has turned over to prosecutors new documents linking the president to the shadow foreign policy being run by Giuliani .
Those developments applied fresh pressure to senators to call more witnesses for the trial , a main source of contention that is still to be resolved .
The White House has instructed officials not to comply with subpoenas from Congress requesting witnesses or other information .
Besides his 1990s role as an independent counsel , Starr is also a former U.S. solicitor general and federal circuit court judge .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ University and then resigned as chancellor of the school in the wake of a review critical of the university ’ s handling of sexual assault allegations against football players .
Starr said his resignation was the result of the university ’ s board of regents seeking to place the school under new leadership following the scandal , not because he was accused of hiding or failing to act on information .
Dershowitz ’ s reputation has been damaged in recent years by his association with Jeffrey Epstein , the millionaire who killed himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on charges that he sexually abused multiple underage girls .
One of Epstein ’ s alleged victims , Virginia Roberts Giuffre , has accused Dershowitz of participating in her abuse .
Dershowitz has denied it and has been battling in court for years with Giuffre and her lawyers .
He recently wrote a book rejecting her allegations , called “ Guilt by Accusation.
” Giuffre and Dershowtiz are also suing each other for defamation , each saying the other is lying .
Associated Press writer Zeke Miller in Washington and David Caruso in @ @ @ @ @ @ @

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is adding experience in constitutional law and the politics of impeachment to his legal defense team, bringing in retired law professor Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.
In adding the two men, Trump is turning to a pair of brand-name attorneys who have experience in some of the more consequential legal dramas of recent American history and whose presence is likely to add to the made-for-television feel of the impeachment trial. Both are regular guests on Fox News, the president’s preferred television network, and have put forth defenses of the president during their appearances.
Dershowitz, a former Harvard professor, is a constitutional expert who in recent years has supported Trump’s expansive view of presidential powers, while Starr is a veteran of the last partisan impeachment fight. His investigation into Clinton’s relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky led to Clinton’s impeachment over 20 years ago. Clinton was acquitted by the Senate.
The lead roles for Trump’s defense will be played by White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump personal lawyer Jay Sekulow.
WATCH: House prosecutors read Trump impeachment charges to Senate
The team will also include Pam Bondi, the former Florida attorney general and a Trump ally, according to a person who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the person wasn’t authorized to speak on the record.
Dershowitz confirmed his role in a series of tweets on Friday, saying, he would “present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal.”
Dershowitz said of himself: “While Professor Dershowitz is nonpartisan when it comes to the Constitution — he opposed the impeachment of President Bill Clinton and voted for Hillary Clinton — he believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution.”
A Fox News host said on the air that Starr would be parting ways with the network as a result of his role on the legal team.
Other members of Trump’s legal defense include Jane Raskin, who was part of the president’s legal team during special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, and Robert Ray, who was part of the the Whitewater investigation of the Clintons.
The White House would not confirm the roster of the president’s attorneys, and some officials bristled that the announcement was not coordinated with them. White House attorneys and the outside legal team were still discussing how political the formal legal brief should be.
The president faces a noon Monday deadline to file his brief in the trial, and the legal team was still being drafted, according to a person familiar with the situation.
Trump was impeached on charges of abuse of power and obstructing Congress, stemming from his pressure on Ukraine to investigate Democratic rivals as he was withholding security aid, and obstructing the ensuing congressional probe.
The U.S. Senate opened the trial on Thursday and senators were sworn in as jurors. The trial resumes Tuesday.
Both are regular guests on Fox News, the president’s preferred television network, and have put forth defenses of the president during their appearances.
The president insists he did nothing wrong, and he complains about his treatment daily, sometimes distracting from unrelated events. On Friday, as Trump invited the championship LSU football team to the Oval Office for photos, he said the space had seen “a lot of presidents, some good, some not so good. But you got a good one now, even though they’re trying to impeach the son of a bitch. Can you believe that?”
While he speaks dismissively of the case, new revelations are mounting about Trump’s actions toward Ukraine.
The Government Accountability Office said Thursday that the White House violated federal law in withholding the security assistance to Ukraine, which shares a border with hostile Russia.
At the same time, an indicted associate of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, Lev Parnas, has turned over to prosecutors new documents linking the president to the shadow foreign policy being run by Giuliani.
Those developments applied fresh pressure to senators to call more witnesses for the trial, a main source of contention that is still to be resolved. The White House has instructed officials not to comply with subpoenas from Congress requesting witnesses or other information.
Besides his 1990s role as an independent counsel, Starr is also a former U.S. solicitor general and federal circuit court judge.
He was removed as president of Baylor University and then resigned as chancellor of the school in the wake of a review critical of the university’s handling of sexual assault allegations against football players. Starr said his resignation was the result of the university’s board of regents seeking to place the school under new leadership following the scandal, not because he was accused of hiding or failing to act on information.
Dershowitz’s reputation has been damaged in recent years by his association with Jeffrey Epstein, the millionaire who killed himself in jail last summer while awaiting trial on charges that he sexually abused multiple underage girls.
One of Epstein’s alleged victims, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, has accused Dershowitz of participating in her abuse. Dershowitz has denied it and has been battling in court for years with Giuffre and her lawyers. He recently wrote a book rejecting her allegations, called “Guilt by Accusation.” Giuffre and Dershowtiz are also suing each other for defamation, each saying the other is lying.
Associated Press writer Zeke Miller in Washington and David Caruso in New York contributed to this report.


pbs--2020-01-17--WATCH: Trump welcomes LSU Tigers to White House after college playoff win

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — President Donald Trump paid tribute to the national champion Louisiana State University football team on Friday , saying it would long be remembered as one of the greatest in college football history .
The undefeated Tigers visited the White House after defeating Clemson on Monday night in the college playoff final .
Trump noted that the team played a “ brutal schedule ” during the season that included seven teams ranked in the top 10 and the schools that have won the last four national championships .
“ You didn ’ t have too many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pushed every opponent from the breaking point and to the breaking point , ” Trump said .
Trump highlighted the work of several of the team ’ s players , including quarterback Joe Burrow , saying of Burrow “ we call him young Tom Brady.
” Of the team ’ s coach , Trump said he would have picked Ed Orgeron if he were casting actors for a movie .
“ Ed Orgeron did not let Louisiana down , ” Trump said .
Trump also noted that the team rallied around the team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , following a plane crash that killed his daughter-in-law , sports broadcaster Carley McCord , and four others , who were traveling to the team ’ s Peach Bowl playoff game against Oklahoma .
“ This team showed the world what it means to look out for one another , ” Trump said .
Trump received an enthusiastic welcome from the crowd when he attended the national championship game in New Orleans .
He watched LSU twice during the course of the season .
Burrow said the White House visit was a moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was a great season , but this was a great way to cap it off , ” he said before presenting Trump with an LSU jersey .
“ I thought he was going to give me the Heisman Trophy , ” Trump joked .
“ He ’ s just giving me a jersey.
” The president invited the team to the Oval Office after the ceremony .
He injected his own circumstance into the event as the Senate prepares to hold an impeachment trial .
He said the Oval Office has seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , some not so good .
He said the country has a “ good one now , ” but he said that there was an effort to impeach him and he included a vulgarity in his description .

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump paid tribute to the national champion Louisiana State University football team on Friday, saying it would long be remembered as one of the greatest in college football history.
The undefeated Tigers visited the White House after defeating Clemson on Monday night in the college playoff final. Trump noted that the team played a “brutal schedule” during the season that included seven teams ranked in the top 10 and the schools that have won the last four national championships.
“You didn’t have too many easy ones, but your explosive offense pushed every opponent from the breaking point and to the breaking point,” Trump said.
Trump highlighted the work of several of the team’s players, including quarterback Joe Burrow, saying of Burrow “we call him young Tom Brady.”
Of the team’s coach, Trump said he would have picked Ed Orgeron if he were casting actors for a movie. “Ed Orgeron did not let Louisiana down,” Trump said.
Trump also noted that the team rallied around the team’s offensive coordinator, Steven Ensminger, following a plane crash that killed his daughter-in-law, sports broadcaster Carley McCord, and four others, who were traveling to the team’s Peach Bowl playoff game against Oklahoma.
“This team showed the world what it means to look out for one another,” Trump said.
Trump received an enthusiastic welcome from the crowd when he attended the national championship game in New Orleans. He watched LSU twice during the course of the season.
Burrow said the White House visit was a moment the players would never forget.
“It was a great season, but this was a great way to cap it off,” he said before presenting Trump with an LSU jersey.
“I thought he was going to give me the Heisman Trophy,” Trump joked. “He’s just giving me a jersey.”
The president invited the team to the Oval Office after the ceremony. He injected his own circumstance into the event as the Senate prepares to hold an impeachment trial. He said the Oval Office has seen a lot of presidents, some good, some not so good. He said the country has a “good one now,” but he said that there was an effort to impeach him and he included a vulgarity in his description.


pbs--2020-01-17--U.S. court dismisses climate change lawsuit brought by young people

PORTLAND , Ore. ( AP ) — A federal appeals court on Friday dismissed a lawsuit by 21 young people @ @ @ @ @ ’ s climate policy harms them and jeopardizes their future .
An Oregon-based youth advocacy @ @ @ @ @ s Trust and Earth Guardians filed a lawsuit in 2015 on behalf of the youngsters @ @ @ @ @ the government to implement a plan to phase out fossil fuel emissions and draw down @ @ @ @ @ In an opinion issued Friday , the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco @ @ @ @ @ youngsters made a compelling case that action is needed .
“ We reluctantly conclude , @ @ @ @ @ ’ case must be made to the political branches or to the electorate at large @ @ @ @ @ can change the composition of the political branches through the ballot box , ” the @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Trust and Earth Guardians did not immediately respond to telephone messages seeking comment @

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A federal appeals court on Friday dismissed a lawsuit by 21 young people who claimed the U.S. government’s climate policy harms them and jeopardizes their future.
An Oregon-based youth advocacy group named Our Children’s Trust and Earth Guardians filed a lawsuit in 2015 on behalf of the youngsters, seeking an injunction ordering the government to implement a plan to phase out fossil fuel emissions and draw down atmospheric carbon dioxide emission.
In an opinion issued Friday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco wrote it recognizes that the youngsters made a compelling case that action is needed.
“We reluctantly conclude, however, that the plaintiffs’ case must be made to the political branches or to the electorate at large, the latter of which can change the composition of the political branches through the ballot box,” the opinion said.
Our Children’s Trust and Earth Guardians did not immediately respond to telephone messages seeking comment.


pbs--2020-01-17--Evelyn Yang details alleged sexual assault by doctor

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The wife of Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang says she was sexually assaulted by an obstetrician while she was pregnant with the couple ’ s first child .
Evelyn Yang said in an interview televised Thursday by CNN that the assault happened in 2012 and that she was initially afraid to tell anyone .
She and 31 other women are now suing the doctor and the hospital system , saying they conspired and enabled the crimes .
Yang said she was encouraged to speak out after seeing the positive reception she and her husband had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being open about their son ’ s autism .
“ Something about being on the trail and meeting people and seeing the difference that we ’ ve been making already has moved me to share my own story about it , about sexual assault , ” she told CNN .
Yang said she first began seeing Dr. Robert Hadden in New York in early 2012 .
As the months went on , Yang said , Hadden began asking her inappropriate questions about her sexual activity and spent more time conducting examinations .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , she believed her appointment was done and she was getting ready to leave when the doctor told her abruptly that he thought she might need a cesarean section .
She said Hadden pulled her to him and undressed her , then used his fingers to examine her internally .
“ I knew it was wrong .
I knew I was being assaulted , ” she said .
But Yang said she “ just kind of froze ” and didn ’ t react .
“ I remember trying to fix my eyes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just trying to avoid seeing his face as he was assaulting me , just waiting for it to be over , ” she told CNN .
After the doctor left the room , she left the practice and didn ’ t return .
Hadden ’ s lawyer has denied Yang ’ s allegations in legal filings .
His attorney declined a request to be interviewed by CNN .
Yang said she initially didn ’ t tell anyone what had happened to her .
She said she blamed herself , thinking she must have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of behavior.
” Months later , after the couple ’ s son was born , Yang got a letter in the mail saying Hadden had left the practice .
Curious , she looked him up online and saw that another woman had made a police report accusing him of assaulting her .
She said she realized then that she wasn ’ t to blame for his actions .
“ This was a serial predator , and he just picked me as his prey , ” she told CNN .
She said only then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to her husband .
In a statement Thursday , Andrew Yang said he was “ proud ” of his wife and no one deserves to be treated as she was .
“ When victims of abuse come forward , they deserve our belief , support , and protection , ” Yang said .
“ I hope that Evelyn ’ s story gives strength to those who have suffered and sends a clear message that our institutions must do more to protect and respond to women.
” READ MORE : Cory Booker drops out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I love my wife very very much.
” Evelyn Yang said several women came forward with similar stories about Hadden , and she learned the Manhattan district attorney ’ s office had an open case against him .
In 2016 , she said , the DA ’ s office agreed to a deal with Hadden in which he pleaded guilty to one count of forcible touching and one count of third-degree sexual assault .
He also lost his medical license and had to register as the lowest level of sex offender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plea deal , which allowed the doctor to avoid jail .
The counts he pleaded to didn ’ t involve her case , she said .
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said in a statement to CNN , “ Because a conviction is never a guaranteed outcome in a criminal trial , our primary concern was holding him accountable and making sure he could never do this again — which is why we insisted on a felony conviction and permanent surrender of his medical license.
” Yang and 31 other women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hadden worked , along with its affiliates and the doctor itself , saying they “ actively concealed , conspired , and enabled ” Hadden ’ s crimes , according to CNN .
The lawsuit claims that medical assistants who worked with the doctor knew of the abuse but didn ’ t intervene because of a power imbalance and lack of training , CNN said .
Hadden has denied the additional allegations in court papers , CNN reported .
Columbia University and the hospital system are fighting the lawsuit on procedural grounds , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CNN in response to a detailed list of questions that the accusations are “ abhorrent ” and they “ deeply apologize to those whose trust was violated .
”

WASHINGTON (AP) — The wife of Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang says she was sexually assaulted by an obstetrician while she was pregnant with the couple’s first child.
Evelyn Yang said in an interview televised Thursday by CNN that the assault happened in 2012 and that she was initially afraid to tell anyone. She and 31 other women are now suing the doctor and the hospital system, saying they conspired and enabled the crimes.
Yang said she was encouraged to speak out after seeing the positive reception she and her husband had been getting on the campaign trail by being open about their son’s autism.
This was a serial predator, and he just picked me as his prey.
“Something about being on the trail and meeting people and seeing the difference that we’ve been making already has moved me to share my own story about it, about sexual assault,” she told CNN.
Yang said she first began seeing Dr. Robert Hadden in New York in early 2012. As the months went on, Yang said, Hadden began asking her inappropriate questions about her sexual activity and spent more time conducting examinations.
When she was seven months pregnant, Yang said, she believed her appointment was done and she was getting ready to leave when the doctor told her abruptly that he thought she might need a cesarean section. She said Hadden pulled her to him and undressed her, then used his fingers to examine her internally.
READ MORE: 4 takeaways from January’s Democratic debate
“I knew it was wrong. I knew I was being assaulted,” she said.
But Yang said she “just kind of froze” and didn’t react. “I remember trying to fix my eyes on a spot on the wall and just trying to avoid seeing his face as he was assaulting me, just waiting for it to be over,” she told CNN.
After the doctor left the room, she left the practice and didn’t return.
Hadden’s lawyer has denied Yang’s allegations in legal filings. His attorney declined a request to be interviewed by CNN.
Yang said she initially didn’t tell anyone what had happened to her. She said she blamed herself, thinking she must have done something to “invite this kind of behavior.”
Months later, after the couple’s son was born, Yang got a letter in the mail saying Hadden had left the practice. Curious, she looked him up online and saw that another woman had made a police report accusing him of assaulting her.
She said she realized then that she wasn’t to blame for his actions.
“This was a serial predator, and he just picked me as his prey,” she told CNN.
She said only then was she able to reveal the abuse to her husband.
In a statement Thursday, Andrew Yang said he was “proud” of his wife and no one deserves to be treated as she was.
“When victims of abuse come forward, they deserve our belief, support, and protection,” Yang said. “I hope that Evelyn’s story gives strength to those who have suffered and sends a clear message that our institutions must do more to protect and respond to women.”
READ MORE: Cory Booker drops out of 2020 presidential race
He later tweeted, “I love my wife very very much.”
Evelyn Yang said several women came forward with similar stories about Hadden, and she learned the Manhattan district attorney’s office had an open case against him.
In 2016, she said, the DA’s office agreed to a deal with Hadden in which he pleaded guilty to one count of forcible touching and one count of third-degree sexual assault. He also lost his medical license and had to register as the lowest level of sex offender.
Yang said she felt betrayed by the plea deal, which allowed the doctor to avoid jail. The counts he pleaded to didn’t involve her case, she said.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said in a statement to CNN, “Because a conviction is never a guaranteed outcome in a criminal trial, our primary concern was holding him accountable and making sure he could never do this again — which is why we insisted on a felony conviction and permanent surrender of his medical license.”
Yang and 31 other women are now suing Columbia University, where Hadden worked, along with its affiliates and the doctor itself, saying they “actively concealed, conspired, and enabled” Hadden’s crimes, according to CNN.
The lawsuit claims that medical assistants who worked with the doctor knew of the abuse but didn’t intervene because of a power imbalance and lack of training, CNN said.
Hadden has denied the additional allegations in court papers, CNN reported. Columbia University and the hospital system are fighting the lawsuit on procedural grounds, according to CNN.
A university spokeswoman told CNN in response to a detailed list of questions that the accusations are “abhorrent” and they “deeply apologize to those whose trust was violated.”


pbs--2020-01-18--Will the GOP allow witnesses to testify after Dems release new evidence?

Apparently , that 's what 's happened with the Giuliani associate Lev Parnas in the sense that he gave his @ @ @ @ @ hour when the court finally allowed him to send them to the house .
And @ @ @ @ @ include some of that in the package that they then brought over to the Senate @ @ @ @ @ a new release yesterday from the House Judiciary Committee .
So I think that they @ @ @ @ @ supplemental documents like that .
But at the same time , there is also documents @ @ @ @ @ have not been formally presented .
And , but they 're now known and understood @ @ @ @ @ I do n't think there 's any way in which that would n't influence the @ @ @ @ @ the senators .
They 'll be informed about , for example , the unredacted e-mails @ @ @ @ @ Office of Management and Budget that are , you know , for lack of a @ @ @ @ @ .

Ryan Goodman:
Apparently, that's what's happened with the Giuliani associate Lev Parnas in the sense that he gave his documents basically at the 11th hour when the court finally allowed him to send them to the house. And the house was able to include some of that in the package that they then brought over to the Senate. And then there was a new release yesterday from the House Judiciary Committee. So I think that they'll be able to send supplemental documents like that. But at the same time, there is also documents in the public square that have not been formally presented. And, but they're now known and understood to be available. And I don't think there's any way in which that wouldn't influence the thinking on the part of the senators. They'll be informed about, for example, the unredacted e-mails between the Pentagon and the Office of Management and Budget that are, you know, for lack of a better term, highly incriminating.