thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Top FBI official who leaked secrets spent thousands to boost online reputation before name revealed

A former top FBI official found by the Justice Department ’ s watchdog to have leaked secretive investigation details to journalists likely spent thousands on online reputation services just before an inspector general ’ s report about him was released .
Bryan Paarmann , 53 , former deputy assistant director of the FBI ’ s international operations division from 2016 to 2017 , likely paid more than $ 5,000 to Net Reputation , which says its purpose is to help customers “ take control of your online reputation ” by “ working with the most trusted team in the reputation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appears to have paid the business to build him a website that praises him for his decadeslong career at the FBI and to write and promote a similarly effusive article about him .
A Net Reputation sales representative told the Washington Examiner a basic website similar to Paarmann ’ s , with blog posts , a contact page , and a place for photos , would likely cost $ 3,500 to $ 4,500 and would take one or two months to build .
Another sales representative estimated a ghost-written article and press release @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid for would likely cost an additional $ 1,000 .
Paarmann ’ s identity was revealed in a 21-page report obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request last Friday .
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz determined Paarmann “ improperly disclosed court-sealed and law enforcement sensitive information to the media , ” in violation of FBI rules .
The incident is part of what Horowitz 's lengthy June 2018 report called the FBI ’ s “ culture of unauthorized media contacts.
” Although the new report is heavily redacted , the Washington Examiner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalists Paarmann allegedly leaked to — Del Wilber of the Los Angeles Times — and three articles by the reporter about Orlando Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen , Dallas cop killer Micah Johnson , and Russian hacker Yevgeniy Nikulin .
The DOJ decided not to prosecute Paarmann .
“ I gave 35 years of faithful and devoted service to this nation , and never did I give classified or investigatively sensitive information to the press , ” Paarmann told the Washington Examiner .
“ I never endangered a prosecution and only did what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with.
” After initially agreeing to talk , Paarmann then declined to answer the Washington Examiner , saying : “ I do not wish to speak further .
That chapter is over in my life.
” Paarmann ’ s website , BryanPaarmannFBI.com , states it was designed and developed by Net Reputation in 2019 .
Its blog archives include posts from as late as last November and as recently as Monday .
The posts , written in third person , include sentences such as , “ Bryan Paarmann is protective of his country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many ways , he has faithfully and honorably served his homeland , ” and , “ Bryan Paarmann has excellent leadership skills and a steadfast allegiance to the United States.
” The post from Monday says , “ Although he has more than done his part to selflessly serve his nation and people , he is committed to a lifetime of service.
” Many of the blog posts were also posted on Parmann ’ s recently created Medium page .
The photo section of his website includes pictures of Paarmann smiling with President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Romney of Utah , as well as a photo of him as a younger , much slimmer , man in uniform , when Paarmann was a West Point graduate and U.S. Army officer .
Paarmann also appears to have paid Net Reputation to write a positive article about him and to promote it on Access Wire , an online press release service .
The early November press release says it was authored by “ Caroline Hunter ” at Web Presence , which is one of the names Net Reputation operates under .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website 's posts , including , “ After three decades of selfless service to the nation , Bryan Paarmann nobly retired from his FBI role as an expert counterterrorism practitioner and a leader in the effort to keep America safe.
” It was picked up by several websites , including Maryland-based WBOC-TV in late November and two separate Yahoo Finance pieces , one in early November and another just days ago , which was given the headline , `` Bryan Paarmann , Retired FBI Agent , Served As a Crisis Manager in Major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' By Monday evening , the third item about him on Google News was a Presswire article by `` Caroline Hunter '' with the headline : `` Bryan Paarmann FBI Continues to Serve His Country Through Educational Engagements and Professional Networks . ''
Horowitz ’ s team reviewed Paarmann ’ s communications from 2012 through 2017 , which showed “ extensive contacts ” with members of the media , especially in 2016 and early 2017 , laying out interactions with at least six reporters .
These contacts included hundreds of texts , calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rounds of golf ; private drinks and dinners ; a media member ’ s housewarming party where Paarmann brought wine as a gift ; and a $ 225-ticket dinner free of charge thanks to a member of the media , in violation of FBI rules .

A former top FBI official found by the Justice Department’s watchdog to have leaked secretive investigation details to journalists likely spent thousands on online reputation services just before an inspector general’s report about him was released.
Bryan Paarmann, 53, former deputy assistant director of the FBI’s international operations division from 2016 to 2017, likely paid more than $5,000 to Net Reputation, which says its purpose is to help customers “take control of your online reputation” by “working with the most trusted team in the reputation industry.”
The former counterterrorism special agent appears to have paid the business to build him a website that praises him for his decadeslong career at the FBI and to write and promote a similarly effusive article about him.
A Net Reputation sales representative told the Washington Examiner a basic website similar to Paarmann’s, with blog posts, a contact page, and a place for photos, would likely cost $3,500 to $4,500 and would take one or two months to build. Another sales representative estimated a ghost-written article and press release of the sort Paarmann appears to have paid for would likely cost an additional $1,000.
Paarmann’s identity was revealed in a 21-page report obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request last Friday. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz determined Paarmann “improperly disclosed court-sealed and law enforcement sensitive information to the media,” in violation of FBI rules.
The incident is part of what Horowitz's lengthy June 2018 report called the FBI’s “culture of unauthorized media contacts.” Although the new report is heavily redacted, the Washington Examiner was able to identify one of the journalists Paarmann allegedly leaked to — Del Wilber of the Los Angeles Times — and three articles by the reporter about Orlando Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen, Dallas cop killer Micah Johnson, and Russian hacker Yevgeniy Nikulin.
The DOJ decided not to prosecute Paarmann.
“I gave 35 years of faithful and devoted service to this nation, and never did I give classified or investigatively sensitive information to the press,” Paarmann told the Washington Examiner. “I never endangered a prosecution and only did what I believed my superiors had tasked me with.”
After initially agreeing to talk, Paarmann then declined to answer the Washington Examiner, saying: “I do not wish to speak further. That chapter is over in my life.”
Paarmann’s website, BryanPaarmannFBI.com, states it was designed and developed by Net Reputation in 2019. Its blog archives include posts from as late as last November and as recently as Monday.
The posts, written in third person, include sentences such as, “Bryan Paarmann is protective of his country and is a proud American. In many ways, he has faithfully and honorably served his homeland,” and, “Bryan Paarmann has excellent leadership skills and a steadfast allegiance to the United States.” The post from Monday says, “Although he has more than done his part to selflessly serve his nation and people, he is committed to a lifetime of service.” Many of the blog posts were also posted on Parmann’s recently created Medium page.
The photo section of his website includes pictures of Paarmann smiling with President George W. Bush and Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, as well as a photo of him as a younger, much slimmer, man in uniform, when Paarmann was a West Point graduate and U.S. Army officer.
Paarmann also appears to have paid Net Reputation to write a positive article about him and to promote it on Access Wire, an online press release service.
The early November press release says it was authored by “Caroline Hunter” at Web Presence, which is one of the names Net Reputation operates under. The article contains nearly identical language as the website's posts, including, “After three decades of selfless service to the nation, Bryan Paarmann nobly retired from his FBI role as an expert counterterrorism practitioner and a leader in the effort to keep America safe.”
It was picked up by several websites, including Maryland-based WBOC-TV in late November and two separate Yahoo Finance pieces, one in early November and another just days ago, which was given the headline, "Bryan Paarmann, Retired FBI Agent, Served As a Crisis Manager in Major Terrorism Events for Nearly 10 Years."
By Monday evening, the third item about him on Google News was a Presswire article by "Caroline Hunter" with the headline: "Bryan Paarmann FBI Continues to Serve His Country Through Educational Engagements and Professional Networks."
Horowitz’s team reviewed Paarmann’s communications from 2012 through 2017, which showed “extensive contacts” with members of the media, especially in 2016 and early 2017, laying out interactions with at least six reporters. These contacts included hundreds of texts, calls, and emails; over a dozen rounds of golf; private drinks and dinners; a media member’s housewarming party where Paarmann brought wine as a gift; and a $225-ticket dinner free of charge thanks to a member of the media, in violation of FBI rules.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Win and move on: White House focused on exoneration in Senate trial and little else

The White House says exoneration is the only win they are looking for when the Senate considers impeachment charges against President Trump , with the details of how an acquittal might be accomplished taking a back seat .
At different times , senior figures , including Trump himself , have said they want a full trial with witnesses and a clear vote that finds the president not guilty .
At other times , they have called for a speedy dismissal of the case so that the president can get back to work .
Those questions turn from hypothetical to real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the House votes on Wednesday to send its articles of impeachment to the Senate .
“ A win would be to get what we expect , for the president to be exonerated , and for the Senate to provide him the due process rights and representation that he was denied in the House by the Democrats , ” said a senior administration official on Tuesday as the White House continued to finalize its defense team .
“ That means he will have an opportunity to put on a defense , and he looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working on the priorities of the American people.
” Trump became the third president to be impeached last month when the House approved charges that he abused his power and obstructed Congress .
The White House is confident that Democrats will not be able to muster the two-thirds majority needed to remove him from office .
Instead , officials are developing a strategy that can deliver a political win as the country gears up for November ’ s election .
Trump offered a taste of that in a fundraising message sent to supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and citing a White House account of the contentious phone conversation with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine .
`` I did nothing wrong .
Read the transcript , '' he said .
`` Their pathetic attempts to remove me from office are not only an attack on me , but they 're an attack on YOU .
They 're trying to UNDO the 2016 election like it never happened by SILENCING MILLIONS of votes .
We ca n't let them get away on this . ''
His legal team ’ s response will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brief , '' which addresses the prosecution ’ s claims and states the defense argument .
A final draft is expected to be produced once the articles of impeachment have been transmitted to the Senate .
His team is expected to be led on the Senate floor by White House counsel Pat Cipollone with the support of his deputies and Jay Sekulow , the president ’ s personal attorney .

The White House says exoneration is the only win they are looking for when the Senate considers impeachment charges against President Trump, with the details of how an acquittal might be accomplished taking a back seat.
At different times, senior figures, including Trump himself, have said they want a full trial with witnesses and a clear vote that finds the president not guilty. At other times, they have called for a speedy dismissal of the case so that the president can get back to work.
Those questions turn from hypothetical to real this week if, as expected, the House votes on Wednesday to send its articles of impeachment to the Senate.
“A win would be to get what we expect, for the president to be exonerated, and for the Senate to provide him the due process rights and representation that he was denied in the House by the Democrats,” said a senior administration official on Tuesday as the White House continued to finalize its defense team.
“That means he will have an opportunity to put on a defense, and he looks forward to putting this behind him and working on the priorities of the American people.”
Trump became the third president to be impeached last month when the House approved charges that he abused his power and obstructed Congress.
The White House is confident that Democrats will not be able to muster the two-thirds majority needed to remove him from office. Instead, officials are developing a strategy that can deliver a political win as the country gears up for November’s election.
Trump offered a taste of that in a fundraising message sent to supporters on Tuesday, hitting back at Democrats and citing a White House account of the contentious phone conversation with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine.
"I did nothing wrong. Read the transcript," he said. "Their pathetic attempts to remove me from office are not only an attack on me, but they're an attack on YOU. They're trying to UNDO the 2016 election like it never happened by SILENCING MILLIONS of votes. We can't let them get away on this."
His legal team’s response will be laid out in a "trial brief," which addresses the prosecution’s claims and states the defense argument. A final draft is expected to be produced once the articles of impeachment have been transmitted to the Senate.
His team is expected to be led on the Senate floor by White House counsel Pat Cipollone with the support of his deputies and Jay Sekulow, the president’s personal attorney.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Warren asks SEC to investigate whether Trump tipped off associates at Mar-a-Lago prior to Soleimani

Warren asks SEC to investigate whether Trump tipped off associates at Mar-a-Lago prior to Soleimani strike

Sen. Elizabeth Warren called on the Securities and Exchange Commission to look into whether President Trump tipped off associates at Mar-a-Lago before the drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani .
The Massachusetts Democrat sent a letter with Monday ’ s date to the chairman of the SEC and the chairman of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission , according to the Daily Beast .
The letter asks the commissions to investigate “ whether there may have been any illegal trading in defense company stocks or commodities related to individuals ’ advance knowledge.
” In the days prior to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resort at Mar-a-Lago where he reportedly told some associates and visitors that something “ big ” was coming in response to Iranian aggression in the region that culminated in the killing of an American contractor .
Warren said in her letter that she wants to know if any of the attendees may have profited off of the attack , which she points out bumped defense stocks higher , including a 5 % increase for Northrop Grumman and a 3.6 % increase by Lockheed Martin .
“ Individuals who were guests at President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ market-moving information , ” the letter says .
“ These private individuals ... would have had the opportunity to obtain significant profits simply by being guests or members at President Trump ’ s private resort.
” Soleimani , 62 , was killed earlier this month in a U.S. drone strike near Baghdad ’ s airport .
Iran responded days later by firing more than a dozen short-range ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases that house American troops .
The Washington Examiner reached out to the White House for comment but did not immediately @ @ @ @

Sen. Elizabeth Warren called on the Securities and Exchange Commission to look into whether President Trump tipped off associates at Mar-a-Lago before the drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
The Massachusetts Democrat sent a letter with Monday’s date to the chairman of the SEC and the chairman of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, according to the Daily Beast. The letter asks the commissions to investigate “whether there may have been any illegal trading in defense company stocks or commodities related to individuals’ advance knowledge.”
In the days prior to the successful strike, Trump was at his resort at Mar-a-Lago where he reportedly told some associates and visitors that something “big” was coming in response to Iranian aggression in the region that culminated in the killing of an American contractor.
Warren said in her letter that she wants to know if any of the attendees may have profited off of the attack, which she points out bumped defense stocks higher, including a 5% increase for Northrop Grumman and a 3.6% increase by Lockheed Martin.
“Individuals who were guests at President Trump’s resort may have obtained confidential market-moving information,” the letter says. “These private individuals ... would have had the opportunity to obtain significant profits simply by being guests or members at President Trump’s private resort.”
Soleimani, 62, was killed earlier this month in a U.S. drone strike near Baghdad’s airport. Iran responded days later by firing more than a dozen short-range ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases that house American troops.
The Washington Examiner reached out to the White House for comment but did not immediately receive a response.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Democrats lament spending deal that paved way for Trump to transfer $7.2B to fund wall

House Democrats reacted with anger and frustration to the news Tuesday of President Trump 's plans to divert billions of dollars in military funding to border wall construction and lamented not having done more to stop it from happening .
Following a Washington Post report late Monday on the White House 's plans to take $ 7.2 billion in Pentagon funding in the fiscal 2020 budget to build more fence at the U.S.-Mexico border , Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas said Democrats should have fought harder to block Trump from redirecting appropriated money .
`` I voted against that appropriations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't contain any restraints on the president transferring the money .
I anticipated that would always be problematic , '' Castro , chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus , told reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning .
`` I think we should have fought for language that restrained the transfer of that money . ''
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz , a Florida Democrat and chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction , Veterans Affairs , and Related Agencies , said House Democrats pushed Senate Republicans `` as far as we could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` It was among the last things that were finalized .
We could not have pushed it harder , '' she said .
Lucille Roybal-Allard , chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security , said lawmakers ' hands were tied from the start .
`` It does n't matter what the Congress does .
The president does whatever he pleases , '' Roybal-Allard told reporters .
`` Hopefully , the courts will rule in our favor . ''
This year , Democrats agreed to allow wall funding and other border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levels of $ 1.375 billion , which satisfied Republicans but was far less than the $ 8 billion Trump had requested .
The bill also allowed him to transfer money from other parts of the federal budget .
Last February , Trump took more than $ 6 billion from other parts of the federal budget and used the money to construct the border wall in an effort to fulfill his campaign promise to erect more barrier along the 2,000-mile southern border between Texas and California .
Many House Democrats voted against the measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the border wall and border security funding , but it cleared Congress thanks to bipartisan support .
Part of last year 's redirected money has been stalled in court , but an appeals court judge in El Paso , Texas , earlier this month allowed the government to continue construction while the case continues .
Once the White House requests the transfer of military funds , the Trump administration will have used more than $ 18 billion for border fence construction .
To date , 100 miles of fence have gone up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replacing older fence or is a backup fence system that stands behind the original barrier .
The Department of Homeland Security has vowed 500 miles of completed fence by December , though last week , acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf promised between 400 to 450 miles .
The White House and Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment .
[ Opinion : Weekly Trump Report Card : ‘ Dizzying , ’ with wins on border wall and deregulation ]

House Democrats reacted with anger and frustration to the news Tuesday of President Trump's plans to divert billions of dollars in military funding to border wall construction and lamented not having done more to stop it from happening.
Following a Washington Post report late Monday on the White House's plans to take $7.2 billion in Pentagon funding in the fiscal 2020 budget to build more fence at the U.S.-Mexico border, Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas said Democrats should have fought harder to block Trump from redirecting appropriated money.
"I voted against that appropriations bill for one reason because it didn't contain any restraints on the president transferring the money. I anticipated that would always be problematic," Castro, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, told reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning. "I think we should have fought for language that restrained the transfer of that money."
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat and chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, said House Democrats pushed Senate Republicans "as far as we could" when both chambers went to conference. "It was among the last things that were finalized. We could not have pushed it harder," she said.
Lucille Roybal-Allard, chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, said lawmakers' hands were tied from the start.
"It doesn't matter what the Congress does. The president does whatever he pleases," Roybal-Allard told reporters. "Hopefully, the courts will rule in our favor."
This year, Democrats agreed to allow wall funding and other border security budget numbers to remain at 2019 levels of $1.375 billion, which satisfied Republicans but was far less than the $8 billion Trump had requested. The bill also allowed him to transfer money from other parts of the federal budget.
Last February, Trump took more than $6 billion from other parts of the federal budget and used the money to construct the border wall in an effort to fulfill his campaign promise to erect more barrier along the 2,000-mile southern border between Texas and California.
Many House Democrats voted against the measure in the House due to their objection to the border wall and border security funding, but it cleared Congress thanks to bipartisan support.
Part of last year's redirected money has been stalled in court, but an appeals court judge in El Paso, Texas, earlier this month allowed the government to continue construction while the case continues. Once the White House requests the transfer of military funds, the Trump administration will have used more than $18 billion for border fence construction.
To date, 100 miles of fence have gone up, though nearly all of it is replacing older fence or is a backup fence system that stands behind the original barrier. The Department of Homeland Security has vowed 500 miles of completed fence by December, though last week, acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf promised between 400 to 450 miles.
The White House and Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment.
[Opinion: Weekly Trump Report Card: ‘Dizzying,’ with wins on border wall and deregulation]


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--LSU coach thanks Trump for attending national championship

Louisiana State University football coach Ed Orgeron thanked President Trump for coming out for the team 's national championship clash Monday in New Orleans .
“ I ’ m so proud of the state of Louisiana , '' Orgeron said live on ESPN following the game .
`` We ’ ve had support from the governor , from the president , from everybody that follows LSU.
” Trump flew from Washington , D.C. , to New Orleans for the game and walked out onto the field before the game .
He was met with thunderous applause , and cheers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Superdome .
During the game , Trump sat in a private booth next to Rep. Steve Scalise , a Republican who represents the New Orleans suburbs in Congress .
The president was visited during the game by actor and comedian Vince Vaughn .
Trump called Orgeron in December and congratulated him on qualifying for the national championship .
`` He was very pleasant to talk to , '' the coach said of Trump .
`` Very complimentary of our football team , our coaching staff .
Complimentary of the way the state of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complimentary of the way we played all year and wished us good luck in the game . ''

Louisiana State University football coach Ed Orgeron thanked President Trump for coming out for the team's national championship clash Monday in New Orleans.
“I’m so proud of the state of Louisiana," Orgeron said live on ESPN following the game. "We’ve had support from the governor, from the president, from everybody that follows LSU.”
Congratulations to both teams. Hard fought win #GeauxTigers pic.twitter.com/1FA2DOXBRl — Bianca Marais WJHL (@BiancaWJHL) January 14, 2020
Trump flew from Washington, D.C., to New Orleans for the game and walked out onto the field before the game. He was met with thunderous applause, and cheers of "U-S-A" broke out in the Superdome.
During the game, Trump sat in a private booth next to Rep. Steve Scalise, a Republican who represents the New Orleans suburbs in Congress. The president was visited during the game by actor and comedian Vince Vaughn.
Trump called Orgeron in December and congratulated him on qualifying for the national championship.
"He was very pleasant to talk to," the coach said of Trump. "Very complimentary of our football team, our coaching staff. Complimentary of the way the state of Louisiana has rallied around us. Was complimentary of the way we played all year and wished us good luck in the game."
LSU won Monday's game against Clemson 42-25.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-15--Obama lawyer David Kris disrupts FISA renewal debate

The debate over Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization is heating up .
With three FISA provisions expected to sunset in March , Republicans intend to make a stand against David Kris , the former Obama administration lawyer picked to oversee reforms in the FISA process .
`` A few of us are not only appealing this to the judge who has now taken over the FISA process , but we are also looking at this when it comes to renewing the FISA process within Congress , ” North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows told conservative commentator Sara Carter on Monday .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Bob Goodlatte , who , as Judiciary Committee chairman , demanded a special counsel to look into allegations of FISA abuses , Meadows said Republicans are `` working very actively '' with the Trump administration to ensure the protection of civil liberties .
The FISA court , which was established in 1978 to oversee the approval of warrants sought by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies , has been criticized by privacy advocates for allowing the government to make secret and unchallenged arguments before its judges .
Kris , a defender of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a critic of the House Intelligence Committee 's 2018 memo on alleged FISA abuses , was picked by James Boasberg , the new presiding judge over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court , to serve as the court ’ s amicus curiae , a position that is supposed to provide impartial advice to the court .
He will oversee the implementation of reforms after a scathing Justice Department watchdog report on serious errors found in the FBI 's efforts to wiretap Carter Page , an American foreign policy adviser who helped President Trump 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistant attorney general with the Justice Department ’ s national security division during the Obama administration .
While Democrats argued Inspector General Michael Horowitz 's report debunked `` conspiracy theories '' about the Trump-Russia investigation , Republicans are concerned that the selection of Kris shows there is not a serious effort to install important changes after what they believe was a politically motivated scheme to undermine Trump .
Rep. Devin Nunes , the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee , acknowledged this week that Republicans `` ca n't get rid of '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down .
The California Republican said he views FISA as a `` very important '' national security tool but added that Republicans in Congress should consider getting rid of it if `` [ the ] Democratic Party gets to use these tools to attempt to remove presidents and target political operatives when they want to . ''
“ I ’ d rather get rid of and abolish this court than be left with that , ” Nunes said .
There is a similar sentiment on the Senate side .
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judiciary Committee , said he has `` serious concerns about whether the FISA court can continue unless there 's fundamental reform . ''
Meadows said Republicans will be `` appealing '' to Boasberg with a letter about Kris and other concerns related to surveillance of a future presidential campaign .

The debate over Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization is heating up.
With three FISA provisions expected to sunset in March, Republicans intend to make a stand against David Kris, the former Obama administration lawyer picked to oversee reforms in the FISA process.
"A few of us are not only appealing this to the judge who has now taken over the FISA process, but we are also looking at this when it comes to renewing the FISA process within Congress,” North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows told conservative commentator Sara Carter on Monday.
In addition to consulting with former Virginia Rep. Bob Goodlatte, who, as Judiciary Committee chairman, demanded a special counsel to look into allegations of FISA abuses, Meadows said Republicans are "working very actively" with the Trump administration to ensure the protection of civil liberties.
The FISA court, which was established in 1978 to oversee the approval of warrants sought by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, has been criticized by privacy advocates for allowing the government to make secret and unchallenged arguments before its judges.
Kris, a defender of the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation and a critic of the House Intelligence Committee's 2018 memo on alleged FISA abuses, was picked by James Boasberg, the new presiding judge over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to serve as the court’s amicus curiae, a position that is supposed to provide impartial advice to the court. He will oversee the implementation of reforms after a scathing Justice Department watchdog report on serious errors found in the FBI's efforts to wiretap Carter Page, an American foreign policy adviser who helped President Trump's 2016 campaign. Kris was a former assistant attorney general with the Justice Department’s national security division during the Obama administration.
While Democrats argued Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report debunked "conspiracy theories" about the Trump-Russia investigation, Republicans are concerned that the selection of Kris shows there is not a serious effort to install important changes after what they believe was a politically motivated scheme to undermine Trump.
Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledged this week that Republicans "can't get rid of" Kris without tearing the whole FISA system down. The California Republican said he views FISA as a "very important" national security tool but added that Republicans in Congress should consider getting rid of it if "[the] Democratic Party gets to use these tools to attempt to remove presidents and target political operatives when they want to."
“I’d rather get rid of and abolish this court than be left with that,” Nunes said.
There is a similar sentiment on the Senate side. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he has "serious concerns about whether the FISA court can continue unless there's fundamental reform."
Meadows said Republicans will be "appealing" to Boasberg with a letter about Kris and other concerns related to surveillance of a future presidential campaign.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Pelosi demands Trump officials brief Congress on reported Russian hack of Burisma

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanded the Trump administration brief Congress on a U.S. cybersecurity firm 's assessment that Russia hacked the Ukrainian natural gas company at the center of impeachment .
Echoing her fellow Democrats in the `` Gang of Eight , '' Pelosi claimed she had no prior knowledge of the Burisma breach and wants to know what U.S. officials may have known about it .
`` The president and every Republican senator must explain to the American people why they are refusing to defend our national security and the integrity of our elections , '' the California Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We only learned of this hacking through the press .
Congress must be briefed on what the administration knows about this attack and why the president doesn ’ t have a plan to protect our elections . ''
According to an assessment by Area 1 , first reported by the New York Times late Monday , Russian military hackers from the GRU began targeting in November subsidiaries of Burisma , which once employed former Vice President Joe Biden 's son Hunter , and Kvartal 95 , a Ukrainian television production company founded by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ served on the board of Burisma Holdings , a natural gas firm owned by a Ukrainian oligarch , from 2014 to 2019 .
The impeachment effort began last year after a whistleblower complaint revealed that President Trump pressured Zelensky in a July phone call to open investigations into political rivals , including the Bidens , while withholding congressionally approved military aid .
His father , Joe Biden , is now a Democratic candidate for president .
In back-to-back MSNBC appearances Monday evening , House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and Senate Minority Leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the reported hack through the media .
Like Pelosi , they are members of the `` Gang of Eight , '' a bipartisan group of leaders from both parties in the House and Senate with access to classified intelligence .
Democrats have complained over what they say is the Trump administration 's reluctance to share intelligence , particularly after U.S. officials failed to consult Congress before carrying out a drone strike killing Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani .
Pelosi , who picked Wednesday to appoint Democratic lawmakers to serve as impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took shots at Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for resisting legislation to improve election security , which has been a priority ever since the U.S. intelligence community determined Russia meddled in the 2016 election .
“ The alarming reports that the Russian Government is continuing to interfere in our elections to benefit the president and to undermine our democracy highlight the urgent need for action , '' she said .
In a Sunday interview , Pelosi said Trump is `` in complete denial '' about Russia 's attempts to interfere in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Kentucky Republican , of being an `` accomplice '' to Russian interference , claiming that she wonders about his allegiance to the United States .

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanded the Trump administration brief Congress on a U.S. cybersecurity firm's assessment that Russia hacked the Ukrainian natural gas company at the center of impeachment.
Echoing her fellow Democrats in the "Gang of Eight," Pelosi claimed she had no prior knowledge of the Burisma breach and wants to know what U.S. officials may have known about it.
"The president and every Republican senator must explain to the American people why they are refusing to defend our national security and the integrity of our elections," the California Democrat said in a statement Tuesday. "We only learned of this hacking through the press. Congress must be briefed on what the administration knows about this attack and why the president doesn’t have a plan to protect our elections."
According to an assessment by Area 1, first reported by the New York Times late Monday, Russian military hackers from the GRU began targeting in November subsidiaries of Burisma, which once employed former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter, and Kvartal 95, a Ukrainian television production company founded by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Hunter Biden served on the board of Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm owned by a Ukrainian oligarch, from 2014 to 2019. The impeachment effort began last year after a whistleblower complaint revealed that President Trump pressured Zelensky in a July phone call to open investigations into political rivals, including the Bidens, while withholding congressionally approved military aid. His father, Joe Biden, is now a Democratic candidate for president.
In back-to-back MSNBC appearances Monday evening, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said they too only learned of the reported hack through the media. Like Pelosi, they are members of the "Gang of Eight," a bipartisan group of leaders from both parties in the House and Senate with access to classified intelligence. Democrats have complained over what they say is the Trump administration's reluctance to share intelligence, particularly after U.S. officials failed to consult Congress before carrying out a drone strike killing Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani.
Pelosi, who picked Wednesday to appoint Democratic lawmakers to serve as impeachment managers in a Senate trial, also took shots at Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for resisting legislation to improve election security, which has been a priority ever since the U.S. intelligence community determined Russia meddled in the 2016 election.
“The alarming reports that the Russian Government is continuing to interfere in our elections to benefit the president and to undermine our democracy highlight the urgent need for action," she said.
In a Sunday interview, Pelosi said Trump is "in complete denial" about Russia's attempts to interfere in the 2020 election and accused McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, of being an "accomplice" to Russian interference, claiming that she wonders about his allegiance to the United States.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--McConnell: No quick dismissal of impeachment charges

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Republican senators do not support a vote to dismiss impeachment charges against President Trump immediately .
They first want to hear the arguments from impeachment managers and the White House defense team , McConnell said .
McConnell ’ s comments could clash with White House officials who said they are coordinating with Senate GOP leaders to ensure there is a vote to dismiss the charges , although it ’ s not clear when in the trial they are seeking the motion .
“ There is literally no sentiment in the Republican conference for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after meeting privately with GOP senators on Tuesday .
“ Our members feel we have an obligation to listen to the arguments.
” McConnell first told reporters in December he did not favor a quick dismissal but rather preferred to hear the case first and then vote to acquit the president of the two impeachment articles , which charge the president with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
It requires 67 votes to convict the president , which means Democrats would need at least 20 Republicans to side with them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s congressional liaison , Legislative Affairs Director Eric Ueland , dined privately with Republicans Tuesday afternoon .
He told reporters the White House is working closely with McConnell on the trial procedures and did not rule out a dismissal vote at some point .
“ The president ’ s rights will be protected , including the right to a motion to dismiss , ” Ueland said .
Reporters challenged Ueland , arguing McConnell has suggested he won ’ t allow a motion to dismiss the case quickly .
“ We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be protected , including the potential for a motion to dismiss , ” Ueland said , not specifying when in the trial they would seek such a motion .
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham , a South Carolina Republican , told the Washington Examiner a quick dismissal is “ not practical ” because senators want to hear from the House , which passed the impeachment articles on Dec. 19 , following weeks of witness testimony and depositions .
“ It would be very difficult to dismiss the case upfront , ” Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is going to be a hard sell in the Senate .
”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Republican senators do not support a vote to dismiss impeachment charges against President Trump immediately.
They first want to hear the arguments from impeachment managers and the White House defense team, McConnell said.
McConnell’s comments could clash with White House officials who said they are coordinating with Senate GOP leaders to ensure there is a vote to dismiss the charges, although it’s not clear when in the trial they are seeking the motion.
“There is literally no sentiment in the Republican conference for the motion to dismiss,” McConnell said after meeting privately with GOP senators on Tuesday. “Our members feel we have an obligation to listen to the arguments.”
McConnell first told reporters in December he did not favor a quick dismissal but rather preferred to hear the case first and then vote to acquit the president of the two impeachment articles, which charge the president with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
It requires 67 votes to convict the president, which means Democrats would need at least 20 Republicans to side with them to convict Trump, which is unlikely.
Trump’s congressional liaison, Legislative Affairs Director Eric Ueland, dined privately with Republicans Tuesday afternoon. He told reporters the White House is working closely with McConnell on the trial procedures and did not rule out a dismissal vote at some point.
“The president’s rights will be protected, including the right to a motion to dismiss,” Ueland said.
Reporters challenged Ueland, arguing McConnell has suggested he won’t allow a motion to dismiss the case quickly.
“We are confident the president’s rights will be protected, including the potential for a motion to dismiss,” Ueland said, not specifying when in the trial they would seek such a motion.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, told the Washington Examiner a quick dismissal is “not practical” because senators want to hear from the House, which passed the impeachment articles on Dec. 19, following weeks of witness testimony and depositions.
“It would be very difficult to dismiss the case upfront,” Graham said. “I just think that is going to be a hard sell in the Senate.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Congress, take back your war powers

Congress, take back your war powers

The Framers of the Constitution knew the importance of the separation of powers .
This is why they allocated specific responsibilities to each of the three branches of the federal government : the executive branch , the legislative branch , and the judicial branch .
Among the responsibilities given to the legislative branch is the power to authorize or declare war .
Sadly , our legislators in Congress have abdicated many of their core responsibilities to the executive branch .
With the dramatic growth of the regulatory state , this has had far-reaching consequences on the economy , harming job @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Democrats are responsible .
Congress ’ s surrender of its war powers to the executive branch is just as alarming — and , again , both parties are to blame .
Having been through a bloody revolution to gain their independence from the British crown , the Founders knew all too well the consequences of one individual having so much power .
The father of the Constitution , James Madison , wrote in a : “ In no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peace to the legislature , and not to the executive department.
” The president was given the power to conduct war as commander-in-chief , but only when Congress authorizes hostilities .
No doubt , President Trump ’ s decision to carry out a successful airstrike on terrorist leader Qassem Soleimani was justified .
The Constitution provides leeway for the commander in chief to exercise the use of the armed forces in defense .
But the Constitution also mandates that Congress set the scope of our foreign military involvement .
Congress represents the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our foreign wars .
That is why the Founders wanted Congress to set the goal and parameters of where we will be involved and who we are fighting .
Crucially , the legislative branch also holds sole discretion over the funding of operations .
Unfortunately , both parties threw the Constitution to the wind when they passed the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force , or AUMF , against al Qaeda and the Taliban , as well as the 2002 AUMF against Iraq .
Both of these AUMFs are still in effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been used as justification for endless military adventurism in the Middle East .
Many in Congress today point to the 2002 AUMF as a justification to go to war with Iran .
But this is absurd : As Sen. Rand Paul recently , “ Nobody in their right mind ... can argue that when Congress voted to go after Saddam Hussein in 2002 , that that authorized military force against an Iranian general 18 years later.
” The Kentucky Republican is absolutely right .
President Trump campaigned on the promise to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars .
He has an opportunity to make good on this promise in what could be the defining moment of his presidency .
He has an excellent record of putting American interests first and drawing down our costly and ill-defined overseas commitments .
There is no way to accurately predict how much a full-blown war with Iran could end up costing the U.S. More importantly , there is no possible way of knowing how many American lives would be spent to achieve an ill-defined objective .
What we can say with near certainty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high , in terms of both resources and lives .
According to more than 6,900 American service members and more than 7,800 contractors have died fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Furthermore , at a time when the national debt exceeds $ 23 trillion , the U.S. can ill-afford to become bogged down in yet another Middle East conflict .
To date , the U.S. has spent more than throughout the war in Afghanistan and in excess of an additional .
Already hamstrung by burdensome mandatory spending , dedicating scarce resources to fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would result in long-lasting financial and economic implications for our country .
It is up to Congress to determine the scope of foreign intervention .
Constitutional conservatives such as Sens .
Paul and Mike Lee and Reps. Matt Gaetz and Thomas Massie are leading voices standing up for our founding principles .
Yet the same people who advocate endless war without clear objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan have the audacity to criticize and ridicule these leading advocates of a sober foreign policy in the Republican Party , who merely want to set clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As history shows , when Americans are unified behind a goal , we are unbeatable .
Embroiling ourselves in yet another endless conflict will weaken the U.S. on the world stage and stretch our resources thin .
Iran is a serious regional threat , but China is the long-term , existential threat we should focus on .
It is easy to get into wars in the Middle East — getting out is much harder .
It ’ s time to put partisan politics aside and set clear policy objectives with Iran to @ @ @ @ @

The Framers of the Constitution knew the importance of the separation of powers. This is why they allocated specific responsibilities to each of the three branches of the federal government: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. Among the responsibilities given to the legislative branch is the power to authorize or declare war.
Sadly, our legislators in Congress have abdicated many of their core responsibilities to the executive branch. With the dramatic growth of the regulatory state, this has had far-reaching consequences on the economy, harming job creation and middle-class households. Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible. Congress’s surrender of its war powers to the executive branch is just as alarming — and, again, both parties are to blame.
Having been through a bloody revolution to gain their independence from the British crown, the Founders knew all too well the consequences of one individual having so much power.
The father of the Constitution, James Madison, wrote in a 1793 letter : “In no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department.” The president was given the power to conduct war as commander-in-chief, but only when Congress authorizes hostilities.
No doubt, President Trump’s decision to carry out a successful airstrike on terrorist leader Qassem Soleimani was justified. The Constitution provides leeway for the commander in chief to exercise the use of the armed forces in defense.
But the Constitution also mandates that Congress set the scope of our foreign military involvement. Congress represents the people who will ultimately fight and pay for our foreign wars. That is why the Founders wanted Congress to set the goal and parameters of where we will be involved and who we are fighting. Crucially, the legislative branch also holds sole discretion over the funding of operations.
Unfortunately, both parties threw the Constitution to the wind when they passed the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, against al Qaeda and the Taliban, as well as the 2002 AUMF against Iraq. Both of these AUMFs are still in effect, nearly two decades later, and have been used as justification for endless military adventurism in the Middle East.
Many in Congress today point to the 2002 AUMF as a justification to go to war with Iran. But this is absurd: As Sen. Rand Paul said recently, “Nobody in their right mind ... can argue that when Congress voted to go after Saddam Hussein in 2002, that that authorized military force against an Iranian general 18 years later.” The Kentucky Republican is absolutely right.
President Trump campaigned on the promise to keep the United States out of endless foreign wars. He has an opportunity to make good on this promise in what could be the defining moment of his presidency. He has an excellent record of putting American interests first and drawing down our costly and ill-defined overseas commitments.
There is no way to accurately predict how much a full-blown war with Iran could end up costing the U.S. More importantly, there is no possible way of knowing how many American lives would be spent to achieve an ill-defined objective. What we can say with near certainty is that the costs would be incredibly high, in terms of both resources and lives.
According to Brown University, more than 6,900 American service members and more than 7,800 contractors have died fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Furthermore, at a time when the national debt exceeds $23 trillion, the U.S. can ill-afford to become bogged down in yet another Middle East conflict. To date, the U.S. has spent more than $2 trillion throughout the war in Afghanistan and in excess of an additional $2 trillion in Iraq . Already hamstrung by burdensome mandatory spending, dedicating scarce resources to fight another ill-defined war in the Middle East would result in long-lasting financial and economic implications for our country.
It is up to Congress to determine the scope of foreign intervention.
Constitutional conservatives such as Sens. Paul and Mike Lee and Reps. Matt Gaetz and Thomas Massie are leading voices standing up for our founding principles. Yet the same people who advocate endless war without clear objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan have the audacity to criticize and ridicule these leading advocates of a sober foreign policy in the Republican Party, who merely want to set clear American objectives for our foreign military conflicts.
As history shows, when Americans are unified behind a goal, we are unbeatable. Embroiling ourselves in yet another endless conflict will weaken the U.S. on the world stage and stretch our resources thin.
Iran is a serious regional threat, but China is the long-term, existential threat we should focus on. It is easy to get into wars in the Middle East — getting out is much harder. It’s time to put partisan politics aside and set clear policy objectives with Iran to avoid another costly mistake.
Adam Brandon is president of FreedomWorks.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Senate poised to consider Bolton testimony at impeachment trial

A group of Republican senators said they want a chance to consider witness testimony in President Trump ’ s impeachment trial , raising the chances they ’ ll summon former national security adviser John Bolton .
Bolton , who left the White House in September — Trump said he was fired , while Bolton said he quit — said last month he is willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial if called by lawmakers , although Trump indicated he might use executive privilege to block him from speaking .
Susan Collins of Maine , Lisa Murkowski of Alaska , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signaled they may want to hear Bolton ’ s testimony .
Sen. Lamar Alexander , a Tennessee Republican who is retiring after his term ends , said he might support a vote to call witnesses but did not indicate who should be on the list .
Democrats need four Republican votes to win the majority needed to call a witness .
Alexander , Collins , Murkowski , and Romney said they want to hear arguments from the House impeachment managers , as well as the White House defense team , before deciding whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have a vote on calling witnesses or asking for documents after we have heard the case , ” Alexander told the Washington Examiner on Tuesday .
“ That could mean witnesses , or it could not.
” Bolton tops a list of four witnesses Democrats are seeking , but the party also wants to call acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and two other administration officials .
Democratic lawmakers believe Bolton can bolster their charges that Trump abused the power of his office by withholding critical security aid from Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , during his time as national security adviser , objected to efforts by Gordon Sondland , the U.S. ambassador to the European Union ; Mick Mulvaney , the acting White House chief of staff ; and Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to try to coerce Ukraine government officials to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democrats .
While Bolton sought a ruling from a federal court when the House called him to testify in their impeachment investigation last year , he said recently he ’ s willing to serve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump last week indicated he ’ d invoke executive privilege to block Bolton ’ s testimony .
Sen. Lindsey Graham , a South Carolina Republican and Trump ally , said the White House would seek to summon their own witnesses .
That list could include Hunter Biden , the son of Joe Biden , who held a lucrative position on a Ukraine gas company while his father was vice president .
“ I don ’ t imagine any scenario where the White House gets shut out when it comes to witnesses , @ @ @ @

A group of Republican senators said they want a chance to consider witness testimony in President Trump’s impeachment trial, raising the chances they’ll summon former national security adviser John Bolton.
Bolton, who left the White House in September — Trump said he was fired, while Bolton said he quit — said last month he is willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial if called by lawmakers, although Trump indicated he might use executive privilege to block him from speaking.
Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Mitt Romney of Utah have all signaled they may want to hear Bolton’s testimony.
Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican who is retiring after his term ends, said he might support a vote to call witnesses but did not indicate who should be on the list.
Democrats need four Republican votes to win the majority needed to call a witness.
Alexander, Collins, Murkowski, and Romney said they want to hear arguments from the House impeachment managers, as well as the White House defense team, before deciding whether they should call witnesses.
“We should have a vote on calling witnesses or asking for documents after we have heard the case,” Alexander told the Washington Examiner on Tuesday. “That could mean witnesses, or it could not.”
Bolton tops a list of four witnesses Democrats are seeking, but the party also wants to call acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and two other administration officials.
Democratic lawmakers believe Bolton can bolster their charges that Trump abused the power of his office by withholding critical security aid from Ukraine for his own personal benefit.
Bolton, during his time as national security adviser, objected to efforts by Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union; Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff; and Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to try to coerce Ukraine government officials to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democrats.
While Bolton sought a ruling from a federal court when the House called him to testify in their impeachment investigation last year, he said recently he’s willing to serve as a witness in the Senate trial.
Trump last week indicated he’d invoke executive privilege to block Bolton’s testimony.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and Trump ally, said the White House would seek to summon their own witnesses. That list could include Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden, who held a lucrative position on a Ukraine gas company while his father was vice president.
“I don’t imagine any scenario where the White House gets shut out when it comes to witnesses,” Graham said.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Jim Jordan: Impeachment began when FBI 'spied on four American citizens'

A key Republican ally of President Trump argued impeachment began long before the Ukraine controversy .
Instead , Rep. Jim Jordan , a Republican from Ohio , said the Democratic-led effort , which has resulted in two articles of impeachment , began in the summer of 2016 with the FBI 's counterintelligence investigation into members of Trump 's 2016 campaign .
`` It did n't even start with Ukraine .
Impeachment started before this guy was president , '' Jordan said Tuesday on Fox & Friends .
`` Impeachment started on July 31 , 2016 , when the FBI opened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American citizens associated with the Trump campaign .
And everything they did for that two and a half years until we finally got to Ukraine . ''
At the start of its inquiry , the FBI looked into ties between Russia and four Trump campaign associates : Paul Manafort , Michael Flynn , George Papadopoulos , and Carter Page .
No evidence of criminal conspiracy was turned up by special counsel Robert Mueller 's team .
Republican allies of the president have long accused the FBI of scheming with Democrats to undermine Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's use of British ex-spy Christopher Steele 's unverified dossier to obtain warrants to wiretap Page .
A Justice Department inspector general report released last month faulted the FBI for its handling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process but did not find evidence that political bias influenced the decision to open the counterintelligence inquiry .
Trump now faces two articles of impeachment , abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , spurred by his effort to pressure Ukraine to announce investigations into his political rivals , including 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approved military aid to the country .
Jordan argued that the Ukraine controversy simply replaced the Russia debacle in the Democrats ' never-ending struggle to undermine Trump .
He believes Americans see through the plot .
`` It 's backfired on them because the American people understand facts .
They understand truth , and they understand that the president did nothing wrong .
And furthermore , they appreciate what the president 's doing in spite of the relentless attack from the Left , '' he said .
Jordan also said he would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal team in a Senate impeachment trial if asked .

A key Republican ally of President Trump argued impeachment began long before the Ukraine controversy.
Instead, Rep. Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, said the Democratic-led effort, which has resulted in two articles of impeachment, began in the summer of 2016 with the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into members of Trump's 2016 campaign.
"It didn't even start with Ukraine. Impeachment started before this guy was president," Jordan said Tuesday on Fox & Friends. "Impeachment started on July 31, 2016, when the FBI opened up an investigation and spied on four American citizens associated with the Trump campaign. And everything they did for that two and a half years until we finally got to Ukraine."
At the start of its inquiry, the FBI looked into ties between Russia and four Trump campaign associates: Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page. No evidence of criminal conspiracy was turned up by special counsel Robert Mueller's team.
Republican allies of the president have long accused the FBI of scheming with Democrats to undermine Trump, particularly in regards to the bureau's use of British ex-spy Christopher Steele's unverified dossier to obtain warrants to wiretap Page. A Justice Department inspector general report released last month faulted the FBI for its handling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process but did not find evidence that political bias influenced the decision to open the counterintelligence inquiry.
Trump now faces two articles of impeachment, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, spurred by his effort to pressure Ukraine to announce investigations into his political rivals, including 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden, while withholding the release of congressionally approved military aid to the country.
Jordan argued that the Ukraine controversy simply replaced the Russia debacle in the Democrats' never-ending struggle to undermine Trump. He believes Americans see through the plot.
"It's backfired on them because the American people understand facts. They understand truth, and they understand that the president did nothing wrong. And furthermore, they appreciate what the president's doing in spite of the relentless attack from the Left," he said.
Jordan also said he would be "happy" to join Trump's legal team in a Senate impeachment trial if asked.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Vulnerable New Jersey Democrat endorses Joe Biden

Rep. Tom Malinowski endorsed Joe Biden , raising the number of vulnerable congressional Democrats backing the former vice president 's White House bid to more than half a dozen .
Malinowski and the other Democrats have latched onto Biden in a bid to avoid being swept from their battleground districts by President Trump this year .
Trump lost Malinowski 's suburban , Northern New Jersey district by just 1.1 percentage points in 2016 .
The endangered Democrats are concerned that a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren candidacy would sink their reelection in competitive seats won or lost narrowly by Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign we need to win in November , '' Malinowski told the New Jersey Globe in an article published Tuesday .
Malinowski , 54 , endorsed Biden after his first choice , Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey , dropped his presidential bid amid flagging support .
His move to Biden makes him the fifth Democrat elected in a Republican-leaning district in 2018 to back the 77-year-old former vice president .
Like the four others , Malinowski is a member of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee 's `` frontline '' program for vulnerable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coalescing behind Biden include Reps. Abby Finkenauer of Iowa ; Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania ; Elaine Luria of Virginia ; and Colin Allred of Texas .
Also endorsing the ex-vice president are embattled Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama , perhaps the most pro-Trump state , and Rep. Sean Maloney , a member of Congress since 2013 , who holds a district that fell to Trump in the last presidential election .

Rep. Tom Malinowski endorsed Joe Biden, raising the number of vulnerable congressional Democrats backing the former vice president's White House bid to more than half a dozen.
Malinowski and the other Democrats have latched onto Biden in a bid to avoid being swept from their battleground districts by President Trump this year. Trump lost Malinowski's suburban, Northern New Jersey district by just 1.1 percentage points in 2016. The endangered Democrats are concerned that a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren candidacy would sink their reelection in competitive seats won or lost narrowly by Trump.
"Joe Biden will run the campaign we need to win in November," Malinowski told the New Jersey Globe in an article published Tuesday.
Malinowski, 54, endorsed Biden after his first choice, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, dropped his presidential bid amid flagging support. His move to Biden makes him the fifth Democrat elected in a Republican-leaning district in 2018 to back the 77-year-old former vice president. Like the four others, Malinowski is a member of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "frontline" program for vulnerable Democrats.
Other "frontline" Democrats coalescing behind Biden include Reps. Abby Finkenauer of Iowa; Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania; Elaine Luria of Virginia; and Colin Allred of Texas. Also endorsing the ex-vice president are embattled Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama, perhaps the most pro-Trump state, and Rep. Sean Maloney, a member of Congress since 2013, who holds a district that fell to Trump in the last presidential election.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Illegal immigrant crossings fall 78% and once overcrowded cells are empty

There are a lot of statistics Mark A. Morgan , acting U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner , uses to show how Trump policies have helped to cut illegal immigration into the United States .
But there are two that he feels really make clear the victory his agency has had in the past year , and he highlighted them in a small meeting Tuesday .
First is daily apprehensions , a number that hit 4,600 at the height of the latest crisis in May .
That has now dropped to 1,300 .
What ’ s more , he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a 78 % cut .
“ That ’ s a dramatic reduction , ” he said , in updating the numbers released last week .
Then there are the numbers of illegal immigrants “ in custody.
” That was a horrific 20,000 in May for an agency that has just 4,000 beds .
Now a quarter of those beds are unused .
“ We were having those conversations back then about how the system was overwhelmed , there was overcrowding .
We ’ re just not experiencing that now , ” Morgan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what we ’ re seeing is our in-custody numbers right now are actually below 3,000 , and it has been steady for the past few weeks , ” he said .
He added that some 731 Border Protection officers pulled off the border to handle the housing crisis last year have also been put back on the border .
“ They are all back , ” he said .
While he stressed that the crisis is far from over , especially as Mexican cartels turn to drugs to replace moving people across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said that President Trump ’ s policies get the credit for the change .
Noting that Congress has done little to change outdated immigration laws , he said that Trump took action and built relationships with Mexico and other Central American nations that now hold immigrants seeking to come into the U.S. until the government gives them the green light .
“ This is not a political statement , it ’ s because I believe it and because it is true : The success that I just outlined is absolutely a direct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Morgan , a career government officer .
He added , “ We are succeeding in addressing this crisis .
”

There are a lot of statistics Mark A. Morgan, acting U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner, uses to show how Trump policies have helped to cut illegal immigration into the United States.
But there are two that he feels really make clear the victory his agency has had in the past year, and he highlighted them in a small meeting Tuesday.
First is daily apprehensions, a number that hit 4,600 at the height of the latest crisis in May. That has now dropped to 1,300.
What’s more, he said, the 21-daily average is below 1,000, a 78% cut. “That’s a dramatic reduction,” he said, in updating the numbers released last week.
Then there are the numbers of illegal immigrants “in custody.” That was a horrific 20,000 in May for an agency that has just 4,000 beds.
Now a quarter of those beds are unused.
“We were having those conversations back then about how the system was overwhelmed, there was overcrowding. We’re just not experiencing that now,” Morgan said.
“Currently, right now, what we’re seeing is our in-custody numbers right now are actually below 3,000, and it has been steady for the past few weeks,” he said.
He added that some 731 Border Protection officers pulled off the border to handle the housing crisis last year have also been put back on the border. “They are all back,” he said.
While he stressed that the crisis is far from over, especially as Mexican cartels turn to drugs to replace moving people across the border as their money source, he said that President Trump’s policies get the credit for the change.
Noting that Congress has done little to change outdated immigration laws, he said that Trump took action and built relationships with Mexico and other Central American nations that now hold immigrants seeking to come into the U.S. until the government gives them the green light.
“This is not a political statement, it’s because I believe it and because it is true: The success that I just outlined is absolutely a direct result of this president’s strategies,” said Morgan, a career government officer. He added, “We are succeeding in addressing this crisis.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Guns the No. 2 'extremely important' issue in 2020

Amid a growing national drive in some 20 states to provide “ gun sanctuaries ” in areas where calls are increasing for new controls , gun policy has become the second most “ extremely important ” issue in the 2020 elections .
In the latest Gallup survey , gun policy is tied at 34 % with terrorism and national security as the second issue voters call “ extremely important.
” Healthcare barely edges gun control out as No .
1 , with 35 % calling it “ extremely important . ''
Driven by Democrats and their apparent opposition to further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranks fifth as the one voters consider “ extremely important , very important.
” Gallup found a 20-point gap between Democrats and Republicans who consider guns a top issue .
Gun policy was similarly important in the 2018 elections , but has ranked extremely low in Gallup surveys when Americans are asked to name the “ most important problem.
” While guns and gun policy can fall away as key talking points in presidential elections , this year may prove different because pro- and anti-gun forces are fighting in several states and because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different gun bans and controls .
That is similar to 2016 when Hillary Clinton endorsed a gun ban , and President Trump was endorsed by the National Rifle Association .
Virginia , home to the NRA , has become the focus in the fight now that the state government is in Democratic hands .
Several new members to the state legislature were voted on a position of imposing gun control , and the state Senate took steps Monday to curb Second Amendment freedoms .

Amid a growing national drive in some 20 states to provide “gun sanctuaries” in areas where calls are increasing for new controls, gun policy has become the second most “extremely important” issue in the 2020 elections.
In the latest Gallup survey, gun policy is tied at 34% with terrorism and national security as the second issue voters call “extremely important.” Healthcare barely edges gun control out as No. 1, with 35% calling it “extremely important."
Driven by Democrats and their apparent opposition to further gun control rules, the issue also ranks fifth as the one voters consider “extremely important, very important.” Gallup found a 20-point gap between Democrats and Republicans who consider guns a top issue.
Gun policy was similarly important in the 2018 elections, but has ranked extremely low in Gallup surveys when Americans are asked to name the “most important problem.”
While guns and gun policy can fall away as key talking points in presidential elections, this year may prove different because pro- and anti-gun forces are fighting in several states and because all the Democratic presidential candidates are favoring different gun bans and controls. That is similar to 2016 when Hillary Clinton endorsed a gun ban, and President Trump was endorsed by the National Rifle Association.
Virginia, home to the NRA, has become the focus in the fight now that the state government is in Democratic hands. Several new members to the state legislature were voted on a position of imposing gun control, and the state Senate took steps Monday to curb Second Amendment freedoms.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Sanders press secretary rips into 'millionaires on The View' for calling him a 'misogynist'

Briahna Gray , the press secretary for Sen. Bernie Sanders 's presidential campaign , took aim at the hosts of ABC 's The View after they slammed Sanders 's treatment of women .
`` More women have given to Bernie ’ s campaign than any other campaign .
We have the most diverse , least white collation , '' Gray tweeted on Tuesday .
`` But the millionaires on the View openly smear the teachers , Walmart workers , and post office employees who form our base .
Shameful . ''
The hosts on The View called the Vermont independent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had a `` problem with women . ''
The segment was a response to Sen. Elizabeth Warren claiming that Sanders told her in 2018 that a woman could not win the presidency .
`` The women of @ TheView should consider having on one of the many women who make up Bernie ’ s 70 % female leadership team .
Even better , they should have on one of the working class women whose interests they undermine by parroting baseless , long debunked talking points , '' Gray added .
`` I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and respect its reach and influence a great deal .
That ’ s why I want it to be accountable to the women whose interests it ’ s attacking .
Whatever this segment is , it isn ’ t feminism . ''
Sanders , 78 , has denied he told Warren that a woman could not be elected president .
The two will face off in the next Democratic debate on Tuesday night .

A senior Bernie Sanders aide blasted hosts of ABC's The View for accusing him of being anti-women.
"More women have given to Bernie’s campaign than any other campaign," Briahna Gray, press secretary to Sanders, said via Twitter on Tuesday. "We have the most diverse, least white coalition. But the millionaires on the View openly smear the teachers, Walmart workers, and post office employees who form our base. Shameful."
More women have given to Bernie’s campaign than any other campaign. We have the most diverse, least white collation. But the millionaires on the View openly smear the teachers, Walmart workers, and post office employees who form our base. Shameful. pic.twitter.com/WMLqso6PfU — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) January 14, 2020
The hosts on The View called the Vermont independent a "misogynist" and said he had a "problem with women." The segment was a response to Sen. Elizabeth Warren claiming that Sanders told her in 2018 that a woman could not win the presidency.
"The women of @TheView should consider having on one of the many women who make up Bernie’s 70% female leadership team. Even better, they should have on one of the working class women whose interests they undermine by parroting baseless, long debunked talking points," Gray added. "I’m a longtime watcher of @TheView, and respect its reach and influence a great deal. That’s why I want it to be accountable to the women whose interests it’s attacking. Whatever this segment is, it isn’t feminism."
I’m a longtime watcher of @TheView, and respect its reach and influence a great deal. That’s why I want it to be accountable to the women whose interests it’s attacking.
Whatever this segment is, it isn’t feminism. — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) January 14, 2020
Sanders, 78, has denied he told Warren that a woman could not be elected president. The two will face off in the next Democratic debate on Tuesday night.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Bernie Sanders aides lock Twitter accounts after Project Veritas exposé

Two Iowa field directors for Bernie Sanders 's 2020 presidential campaign locked their Twitter accounts after a Project Veritas video showed a `` top-tier organizer '' saying `` Milwaukee will burn '' if the senator does n't win the Democratic nomination .
Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek told undercover journalists that `` there is a reason why Stalin had gulags , '' that Sanders wanted `` free education '' so that Trump supporters could be taught how to `` not be a f -- -ing Nazi , '' and that he wants to `` walk into that MSNBC studios , drag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hair , and light them on fire in the streets . ''
Iowa state director Misty Rebik and Iowa co-field director Brooke Adams both locked their Twitter accounts after Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe claimed they hired or worked with Jurek , who deleted his Twitter account this afternoon .
O'Keefe published a Sept. 21 tweet of Adams celebrating with Jurek along with accompanying text that read : `` This room is about to hit 20,000 phone calls !
!
Led by our top-tier organizers @ hiranodanielle and Kyle Jurek ! ''
O'Keefe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of ABC host Amy Robach claiming ABC quashed her report exposing Jeffrey Epstein in 2015 .
Sanders , 78 , has sparred with Sen. Elizabeth Warren over an internal memo his campaign circulated that painted Warren as only appealing to `` affluent '' voters .
They will both appear Tuesday at the seventh Democratic debate in Des Moines , Iowa , only weeks before the state 's first-in-the-nation caucus .

Two Iowa field directors for Bernie Sanders's 2020 presidential campaign locked their Twitter accounts after a Project Veritas video showed a "top-tier organizer" saying "Milwaukee will burn" if the senator doesn't win the Democratic nomination.
Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek told undercover journalists that "there is a reason why Stalin had gulags," that Sanders wanted "free education" so that Trump supporters could be taught how to "not be a f---ing Nazi," and that he wants to "walk into that MSNBC studios, drag those motherf---ers out by their hair, and light them on fire in the streets."
Iowa state director Misty Rebik and Iowa co-field director Brooke Adams both locked their Twitter accounts after Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe claimed they hired or worked with Jurek, who deleted his Twitter account this afternoon.
O'Keefe published a Sept. 21 tweet of Adams celebrating with Jurek along with accompanying text that read: "This room is about to hit 20,000 phone calls!! Led by our top-tier organizers @hiranodanielle and Kyle Jurek!"
O'Keefe is a conservative activist who released tapes of ABC host Amy Robach claiming ABC quashed her report exposing Jeffrey Epstein in 2015.
Sanders, 78, has sparred with Sen. Elizabeth Warren over an internal memo his campaign circulated that painted Warren as only appealing to "affluent" voters. They will both appear Tuesday at the seventh Democratic debate in Des Moines, Iowa, only weeks before the state's first-in-the-nation caucus.
BREAKING: @BernieSanders “free education” policies to “teach you how to not be a f**king nazi.”; 'There is a reason Stalin had Gulags'; 'Expect violent reaction' for speech. If Bernie doesn't get nomination "Milwaukee will burn"
Stay tuned: https://t.co/BFGnoCeJE7#Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/Koh6UTibbe — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 14, 2020


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-14--Sexism allegation latest in Elizabeth Warren campaign desperation

Rival operatives suspect that Elizabeth Warren ’ s story about a sexist comment from Bernie Sanders is the latest in a series of desperate moves from her campaign team to regain the momentum she once had in the Democratic presidential primary .
“ As the campaign heats up , many operatives whose interests are less in winning but rather in keeping the money flowing , have no problem throwing hand grenades at allies , ” said Nomiki Konst , a Sanders supporter and former Democratic National Committee member .
On Monday , a story citing Warren talked to right after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ familiar with it said that during a private 2018 dinner between Sanders and Warren , the Vermont senator said that he did not think a woman could win in 2020 .
Sanders immediately denied the report .
Faced with outrage and those demanding to know whether the aides ’ descriptions were true , Warren on Monday evening .
`` Among the topics that came up was what would happen if Democrats nominated a female candidate .
I thought a woman could win ; he disagreed , '' the Massachusetts senator said .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Examiner that they suspected the original story was by the Warren campaign .
“ The timing of this clearly shows that this is a desperate move , ” a top Sanders aide said .
“ Unfortunately , Elizabeth Warren 's campaign has been going down in the polls , and this is the latest attack on one of her leading competitors.
” Sanders ’ s national press secretary , without pointing out Warren specifically , appeared to express a similar sentiment while commenting on a California poll that showed Sanders in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ This is why they ’ re desperate , ” she said in a Monday night .
A few months ago , Warren was the breakout left-wing “ I have a plan for that ” star in the Democratic presidential field .
At one point , she passed former Vice President Joe Biden in RealClearPolitics ’ of national primary polls .
At 70 , she is younger and appears healthier than Sanders , 78 , who survived a heart attack in October .
But Warren at the end of the year as her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single-payer “ Medicare for all ” plan was criticized , and Sanders rose in the polls .
Analysts believe that of the left-wing firebrands can survive past the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary .
That makes three weeks before the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses prime time for Warren to break the nonaggression pact she and Sanders had for the last year .
Signs of Warren ’ s desperation started Sunday with Warren ’ s reaction to a Sanders volunteer script , escalated with a Warren fundraising email , and continued Monday with Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexist comment .
Volunteers for Sanders were leaning toward Warren that she brings `` no new bases into the Democratic Party '' and only appeals to `` highly-educated , more affluent people , '' according to a script obtained by Politico .
The day after news broke , the Massachusetts senator delivered an unusually detailed and pointed reaction to the news .
`` I was disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me .
Bernie knows me and has known me for a long time , '' Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A hundred miles away in Iowa City , Sanders from the volunteer campaign script , attempting to deescalate the situation .
`` We have over 500 people on our campaign .
People do certain things .
I 'm sure that in Elizabeth ’ s campaign , people do certain things as well , '' Sanders said .
`` But you have heard me for months .
I have never said a negative word about Elizabeth Warren , who is a friend of mine . ''
Warren 's campaign did not stand down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Sunday night .
`` Bernie Sanders ’ campaign is instructing volunteers to dismiss our broad-based , inclusive campaign , '' read a fundraising email from Warren campaign manager Roger Lau .
`` This type of attack isn ’ t about disagreeing on issues — it ’ s about dismissing the potency of our grassroots movement . ''
Then came the story about the meeting between Warren and Sanders , news of which went public days after a former 2020 Democrat , former Housing Secretary Julian Castro , backed Warren .
“ This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the low road .
No surprise this is coming out now after the biggest attack dog in the race — Castro — endorsed her , '' an aide to a third campaign told the Washington Examiner .
`` She ’ s taken low blows at Biden , Pete , and now Sanders .
It was only a matter of time . ''
In the wake of backlash over the sexist comment allegation , Warren on Tuesday tried to get back on track .
She released yet another policy plan : up to $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of borrowers through executive action rather than relying on Congress .
That , too , was labeled by many observers as a desperate move to get away from the Sanders story .
“ The problem is that while it may help with fundraising or knock an opponent down a few points , it ultimately hands the election to Trump , ” Konst said .
“ My advice to progressives is that now is the time to come together in supporting the only progressive who can beat Trump : Bernie Sanders .
”

Rival operatives suspect that Elizabeth Warren’s story about a sexist comment from Bernie Sanders is the latest in a series of desperate moves from her campaign team to regain the momentum she once had in the Democratic presidential primary.
“As the campaign heats up, many operatives whose interests are less in winning but rather in keeping the money flowing, have no problem throwing hand grenades at allies,” said Nomiki Konst, a Sanders supporter and former Democratic National Committee member.
On Monday, a story citing two people Warren talked to right after the meeting and two others who were familiar with it said that during a private 2018 dinner between Sanders and Warren, the Vermont senator said that he did not think a woman could win in 2020. Sanders immediately denied the report.
Faced with outrage and those demanding to know whether the aides’ descriptions were true, Warren on Monday evening confirmed the story herself . "Among the topics that came up was what would happen if Democrats nominated a female candidate. I thought a woman could win; he disagreed," the Massachusetts senator said.
Those close to the Sanders campaign told the Washington Examiner that they suspected the original story was deliberately planted by the Warren campaign.
“The timing of this clearly shows that this is a desperate move,” a top Sanders aide reportedly said. “Unfortunately, Elizabeth Warren's campaign has been going down in the polls, and this is the latest attack on one of her leading competitors.”
Sanders’s national press secretary, without pointing out Warren specifically, appeared to express a similar sentiment while commenting on a California poll that showed Sanders in the lead and Warren in third place. “This is why they’re desperate,” she said in a tweet Monday night.
A few months ago, Warren was the breakout left-wing “I have a plan for that” star in the Democratic presidential field. At one point, she passed former Vice President Joe Biden in RealClearPolitics’ average of national primary polls. At 70, she is younger and appears healthier than Sanders, 78, who survived a heart attack in October.
But Warren sunk in the polls at the end of the year as her plan on how to pay for a single-payer “Medicare for all” plan was criticized, and Sanders rose in the polls.
Analysts believe that only one of the left-wing firebrands can survive past the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary. That makes three weeks before the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses prime time for Warren to break the nonaggression pact she and Sanders had for the last year.
Signs of Warren’s desperation started Sunday with Warren’s reaction to a Sanders volunteer script, escalated with a Warren fundraising email, and continued Monday with Warren’s allegation of Sanders’s sexist comment.
Volunteers for Sanders were encouraged to tell voters leaning toward Warren that she brings "no new bases into the Democratic Party" and only appeals to "highly-educated, more affluent people," according to a script obtained by Politico.
The day after news broke, the Massachusetts senator delivered an unusually detailed and pointed reaction to the news. "I was disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me. Bernie knows me and has known me for a long time," Warren told reporters in Marshalltown, Iowa, on Sunday.
A hundred miles away in Iowa City, Sanders distanced himself from the volunteer campaign script, attempting to deescalate the situation.
"We have over 500 people on our campaign. People do certain things. I'm sure that in Elizabeth’s campaign, people do certain things as well," Sanders said. "But you have heard me for months. I have never said a negative word about Elizabeth Warren, who is a friend of mine."
Warren's campaign did not stand down, fundraising off the Sanders volunteer script on Sunday night.
"Bernie Sanders’ campaign is instructing volunteers to dismiss our broad-based, inclusive campaign," read a fundraising email from Warren campaign manager Roger Lau. "This type of attack isn’t about disagreeing on issues — it’s about dismissing the potency of our grassroots movement."
Then came the story about the meeting between Warren and Sanders, news of which went public days after a former 2020 Democrat, former Housing Secretary Julian Castro, backed Warren.
“This is the Warren playbook. She takes the low road. No surprise this is coming out now after the biggest attack dog in the race — Castro — endorsed her," an aide to a third campaign told the Washington Examiner. "She’s taken low blows at Biden, Pete, and now Sanders. It was only a matter of time."
In the wake of backlash over the sexist comment allegation, Warren on Tuesday tried to get back on track. She released yet another policy plan: eliminating up to $50,000 student loan debt for 95% of borrowers through executive action rather than relying on Congress. That, too, was labeled by many observers as a desperate move to get away from the Sanders story.
“The problem is that while it may help with fundraising or knock an opponent down a few points, it ultimately hands the election to Trump,” Konst said. “My advice to progressives is that now is the time to come together in supporting the only progressive who can beat Trump: Bernie Sanders.”
Joseph Simonson contributed to this story.