thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--Laura Ingraham shows emails tying alleged Ukraine whistleblower to Obama White House meeting on Buri

Laura Ingraham shows emails tying alleged Ukraine whistleblower to Obama White House meeting on Burisma

Fox News host Laura Ingraham reported Wednesday evening that she obtained a chain of State Department emails stemming from a standard request for comment from New York Times journalist Ken Vogel , whose reporting helped generate scrutiny of Hunter Biden 's ties to Ukrainian gas company Burisma .
Hunter Biden , 49 , is the son of Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden , and Republicans have called for him to testify during the Ukraine-related Senate impeachment trial against President Trump .
On May 1 , 2019 , Vogel contacted State Department official Kate Schilling about a story he was working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ January 2016 with Ukrainian prosecutors and mentioned the name of the CIA analyst believed to be the whistleblower whose complaint sparked impeachment proceedings that led to two articles of impeachment : abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
Ingraham did not state the name of the alleged whistleblower — Fox News hosts are banned from doing so until the identity is confirmed — and blacked out the name when showing excerpts of documents .
However , she likely was referring to Eric Ciaramella , who some Republicans and conservative media figures believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Vogel wrote , `` We are going to report that [ State Department official ] Elizabeth Zentos attended a meeting at the White House on 1/19/2016 with Ukrainian prosecutors and embassy officials as well as ... [ redacted ] from the NSC ... the subjects discussed included efforts within the United State government to support prosecutions , in Ukraine and the United Kingdom , of Burisma Holdings , ... and concerns that Hunter Biden 's position with the company could complicate such efforts . ''
Ingraham said this email was forwarded to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who appears to have been a source for Vogel .
The conversation ended on May 3 , with the State Department declining to comment .
Kent , who was stationed in Kyiv at the time , told House investigators during an impeachment hearing last year that he raised concerns in 2015 about Hunter Biden holding a position with Burisma but was rebuffed by a Joe Biden aide .
Using archived Obama White House visitor logs , Ingraham said her team was able to corroborate details of the January 2016 meeting , showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials checked into the White House by Ciaramella , who was Ukraine director on the National Security Council .
[ Read more : 'Saw everything ' : Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella had extensive access in Trump White House ] Ingraham said the story was never published and reached out to Vogel and the New York Times to ask why the report never came to fruition .
While Vogel did not reply , Ingraham said the New York Times director of communications simply stated that Vogel 's request for comment was consistent with their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that `` the timing of their request and the subsequent squashing of the story are very interesting , '' noting how Joe Biden announced his candidacy for president on April 25 , one week before Vogel 's request .
She speculated a number of possibilities , including that Joe Biden 's campaign somehow got the New York Times to drop the story .
On the same day as Vogel 's request to the State Department , he had a report published examining how in 2016 , then-Vice President Joe Biden threatened to withhold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if Ukraine did not fire its top prosecutor , Viktor Shokin .
Trump , his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani , and other allies claim Joe Biden improperly used his role as vice president to pressure Ukraine to fire Shokin , who was widely seen as corrupt , in 2016 to protect his son from an investigation into Burisma Holdings , a Ukrainian energy company at which Hunter Biden held a $ 50,000-per-month position on the board .
But the European Union , the International Monetary Fund , and other allies had the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. policy that had been set out by Washington ’ s ambassador to Kyiv in the preceding months and was briefed by White House staff just ahead of the trip .
Joe Biden has dubbed the allegations as “ false , debunked conspiracy theories ” about him , and Trump 's efforts to pressure Ukraine to announce an investigation into Joe Biden and other political rivals are at the heart of the impeachment proceedings .
Impeachment was spurred by the emergence of a whistleblower complaint , which the intelligence community inspector general determined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which the American leader pressed his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate Joe Biden and other Democrats .
Republicans have called for the whistleblower to come forward , but Democrats have argued that witness testimony and documents have moved the impeachment case beyond the whistleblower .
Lawyers for the whistleblower have warned that identifying their client would put that person 's life in danger .
Vogel has continued to report on the Bidens and Ukraine and the unfolding impeachment saga .
He said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukraine story posed a `` significant liability '' for Joe Biden and that there was `` more to be told . ''
Vogel got a report published the next day that declared no evidence had surfaced that showed Joe Biden intentionally tried to protect his son by getting Shokin fired .

Newly revealed documents raise questions about the alleged Ukraine whistleblower.
Fox News host Laura Ingraham reported Wednesday evening that she obtained a chain of State Department emails stemming from a standard request for comment from New York Times journalist Ken Vogel, whose reporting helped generate scrutiny of Hunter Biden's ties to Ukrainian gas company Burisma. Biden, 49, is the son of Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden, and Republicans have called for him to testify during the Ukraine-related Senate impeachment trial against President Trump.
On May 1, 2019, Vogel contacted State Department official Kate Schilling about a story he was working on regarding an Obama administration meeting in January 2016 with Ukrainian prosecutors and mentioned the name of the CIA analyst believed to be the whistleblower whose complaint sparked impeachment proceedings that led to two articles of impeachment: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Ingraham did not state the name of the alleged whistleblower — Fox News hosts are banned from doing so until the identity is confirmed — and blacked out the name when showing excerpts of documents. However, she likely was referring to Eric Ciaramella, who some Republicans and conservative media figures believe is the whistleblower.
In the email, Vogel wrote, "We are going to report that [State Department official] Elizabeth Zentos attended a meeting at the White House on 1/19/2016 with Ukrainian prosecutors and embassy officials as well as ... [redacted] from the NSC ... The subjects discussed included efforts within the United State government to support prosecutions, in Ukraine and the United Kingdom, of Burisma Holdings ... and concerns that Hunter Biden's position with the company could complicate such efforts."
Ingraham said this email was forwarded to Schilling's colleagues, Zentos and George Kent, who appear to have been a source for Vogel. The conversation ended on May 3, with the State Department declining to comment. Kent, who was stationed in Kyiv at the time, told House investigators during an impeachment hearing last year that he raised concerns in 2015 about Hunter Biden holding a position with Burisma but was rebuffed by a Joe Biden aide.
Using archived Obama White House visitor logs, Ingraham said her team was able to corroborate details of the January 2016 meeting, showing on the screen the names of Ukrainian officials checked into the White House by Ciaramella, who was Ukraine director on the National Security Council.
[Read more: 'Saw everything': Alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella had extensive access in Trump White House]
Ingraham said the story was never published and reached out to Vogel and the New York Times to ask why the report never came to fruition. While Vogel did not reply, Ingraham said the New York Times director of communications simply stated that Vogel's request for comment was consistent with the paper's news-gathering process.
Still, Ingraham said that "the timing of their request and the subsequent squashing of the story are very interesting," noting how Joe Biden announced his candidacy for president on April 25, one week before Vogel's request. She speculated a number of possibilities, including that Joe Biden's campaign somehow got the New York Times to drop the story.
On the same day as Vogel's request to the State Department, he had a report published examining how in 2016, then-Vice President Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees if Ukraine did not fire its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin.
Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and other allies claim Joe Biden improperly used his role as vice president to pressure Ukraine to fire Shokin, who was widely seen as corrupt, in 2016 to protect his son from an investigation into Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company at which Hunter Biden held a $50,000-per-month position on the board. But the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, and other allies had the same objective, and Joe Biden was repeating U.S. policy that had been set out by Washington’s ambassador to Kyiv in the preceding months and was briefed by White House staff just ahead of the trip.
Joe Biden has dubbed the allegations as “false, debunked conspiracy theories” about him, and Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to announce an investigation into Joe Biden and other political rivals are at the heart of the impeachment proceedings. Impeachment was spurred by the emergence of a whistleblower complaint, which the intelligence community inspector general determined to be urgent and credible, about a July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which the American leader pressed his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate Joe Biden and other Democrats.
Republicans have called for the whistleblower to come forward, but Democrats have argued that witness testimony and documents have moved the impeachment case beyond the whistleblower. Lawyers for the whistleblower have warned that identifying their client would put that person's life in danger.
Vogel has continued to report on the Bidens and Ukraine and the unfolding impeachment saga. He said in a Sept. 21 interview that the Ukraine story posed a "significant liability" for Joe Biden and that there was "more to be told." Vogel got a report published the next day that declared no evidence had surfaced that showed Joe Biden intentionally tried to protect his son by getting Shokin fired.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--White House reportedly credentialed outlet that called impeachment a 'Jew coup'

The White House reportedly credentialed a far-right news outlet , which has propagated anti-Semitism , so that members of the organization could travel to the World Economic Forum .
Rick Wiles , Doc Burkhart , and Edward Szall of TruNews held their Monday night broadcast from Davos , Switzerland , where the forum is being held .
Wiles , during the broadcast , thanked President Trump and the White House for `` extending the invitation to be '' at the event .
CNN anchor Jake Tapper noted that the White House Correspondents ' Association confirmed to him that the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WHCA told the Washington Examiner it has reached out to the White House about it .
`` Your TruNews team will be in the World Economic Forum , starting Tuesday , ” Wiles announced at the end of last week , according to Right Wing Watch .
“ We were officially invited by the White House to cover President Trump ’ s speech to the assembled globalists .
Now , we did not seek to go to this global event ; it was the White House that invited us at the last minute.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's founder , has an extensive history of pushing anti-Semitic claims .
Last November , Wiles claimed that the impeachment investigation into Trump was part of a `` Jew coup '' intent on `` overthrow [ ing ] the constitutionally elected president of the United States '' in order to install a `` Jewish cabal . ''
Earlier this month , TruNews announced that multiple payment companies , including PayPal , Bloomberang , and Spreedly , had stopped processing its donations , according to their website .
Wiles alleged that PayPal 's decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result of a report they published on Jan. 2 claiming that billionaire convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli spy and that Ghislaine Maxwell , his personal confidante , was his handler .
TruNews was also credentialed for the G-20 Summit in Osaka , Japan , in June .
The White House and TruNews did not respond to requests for comments .

The White House reportedly credentialed a far-right news outlet, which has propagated anti-Semitism, so that members of the organization could travel to the World Economic Forum.
Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart, and Edward Szall of TruNews held their Monday night broadcast from Davos, Switzerland, where the forum is being held. Wiles, during the broadcast, thanked President Trump and the White House for "extending the invitation to be" at the event. CNN anchor Jake Tapper noted that the White House Correspondents' Association confirmed to him that the White House credentialed the news outlet. The WHCA told the Washington Examiner it has reached out to the White House about it.
"Your TruNews team will be in the World Economic Forum, starting Tuesday,” Wiles announced at the end of last week, according to Right Wing Watch. “We were officially invited by the White House to cover President Trump’s speech to the assembled globalists. Now, we did not seek to go to this global event; it was the White House that invited us at the last minute.”
Virulent anti-Semite Rick Wiles, who recently declared that impeachment was a "Jew coup," broadcast his program last night from the World Economic Forum after once again receiving press credentials from the White House. https://t.co/lFrTHtFoTe pic.twitter.com/CsYXGdGDQ6 — Right Wing Watch (@RightWingWatch) January 22, 2020
TruNews and Wiles, the outlet's founder, has an extensive history of pushing anti-Semitic claims. Last November, Wiles claimed that the impeachment investigation into Trump was part of a "Jew coup" intent on "overthrow[ing] the constitutionally elected president of the United States" in order to install a "Jewish cabal."
Earlier this month, TruNews announced that multiple payment companies, including PayPal, Bloomberang, and Spreedly, had stopped processing its donations, according to their website. Wiles alleged that PayPal's decision to terminate its account was a direct result of a report they published on Jan. 2 claiming that billionaire convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli spy and that Ghislaine Maxwell, his personal confidante, was his handler.
TruNews was also credentialed for the G-20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, in June.
The White House and TruNews did not respond to requests for comments.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--White House shares photo of Donald and Melania Trump to commemorate 15th wedding anniversary

The White House commemorated the 15th wedding anniversary of President Trump and first lady Melania Trump on Wednesday by sharing @ @ @ @ @ couple on Instagram .
The first lady can be seen smiling and wearing a floor-length @ @ @ @ @ president as a band plays in the background .
News outlets across the country joined @ @ @ @ @ account in wishing the presidential pair a happy anniversary .
The two were married at @ @ @ @ @ , Florida , in 2005 , followed by a lavish reception at the future president @ @ @ @ @ event featured a performance by rocker Billy Joel and was attended by celebrities including Barbara @ @ @ @ @ as well as Bill and Hillary Clinton .
The ceremony landed Melania Trump on the @ @ @ @

The White House commemorated the 15th wedding anniversary of President Trump and first lady Melania Trump on Wednesday by sharing a never-before-seen photo of the couple on Instagram.
“Happy 15th anniversary, President @realdonaldtrump and @flotus,” the caption read.
The first lady can be seen smiling and wearing a floor-length gown while dancing with the president as a band plays in the background.
News outlets across the country joined the official White House Instagram account in wishing the presidential pair a happy anniversary.
HAPPY ANNIVERSARY! President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump are celebrating 15 years of marriage today.https://t.co/h3AtQz1hun — News 5 WCYB (@news5wcyb) January 22, 2020
❤ HAPPY ANNIVERSARY ❤ President @realDonaldTrump and First Lady Melania Trump are celebrating 15 years of marriage! 🍾 pic.twitter.com/kiiGcmZ7To — FOX Illinois (@foxillinois) January 22, 2020
The two were married at a church in Palm Beach, Florida, in 2005, followed by a lavish reception at the future president's Mar-a-Lago resort. The event featured a performance by rocker Billy Joel and was attended by celebrities including Barbara Walters and Regis Philbin, as well as Bill and Hillary Clinton. The ceremony landed Melania Trump on the cover of Vogue.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'She’s elevated awareness': Ivanka Trump declines to criticize Greta Thunberg

Ivanka Trump praised Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg for bringing more awareness to the issue as her father has sparred with the teenager .
“ I ’ m not going to criticize anyone who ’ s bringing their energy and voice .
That ’ s not my style .
I think she ’ s elevated awareness and that ’ s a positive thing , ” Trump , 38 , told the New York Times .
Before her father was inaugurated , Trump invited former Vice President Al Gore to discuss climate change with him .
She also met with actor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ copy of his documentary , Before the Flood .
She and her husband , Jared Kushner , also tried to convince the president to remain in the Paris climate accord .
On Tuesday , President Trump called climate change activists `` the heirs of yesterday 's foolish fortune tellers.
” While speaking to reporters Wednesday , he said Thunberg ’ s proposals are “ unrealistic.
” “ I believe in American innovation and global innovation , ” Ivanka Trump said .
“ Only a purely pessimistic outlook is not going to help us @ @ @ @ @

Ivanka Trump praised Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg for bringing more awareness to the issue as her father has sparred with the teenager.
“I’m not going to criticize anyone who’s bringing their energy and voice. That’s not my style. I think she’s elevated awareness and that’s a positive thing,” Trump, 38, told the New York Times.
Before her father was inaugurated, Trump invited former Vice President Al Gore to discuss climate change with him. She also met with actor Leonardo DiCaprio, who gave her a copy of his documentary, Before the Flood.
She and her husband, Jared Kushner, also tried to convince the president to remain in the Paris climate accord.
On Tuesday, President Trump called climate change activists "the heirs of yesterday's foolish fortune tellers.” While speaking to reporters Wednesday, he said Thunberg’s proposals are “unrealistic.”
“I believe in American innovation and global innovation,” Ivanka Trump said. “Only a purely pessimistic outlook is not going to help us solve the problem.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'He’s a disgruntled employee with an ax to grind': Rand Paul opposes calling Bolton to testify

Republican Sen. Rand Paul said he is opposed to calling former national security adviser John Bolton as a witness in President Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
“ He ’ s a disgruntled employee with an ax to grind , ” the Kentucky senator , who has long been critical of Bolton ’ s stances , told the Washington Post .
Trump told reporters in Davos , Switzerland , on Wednesday that testimony from certain administration officials , including Bolton , could threaten national security .
Democrats have pushed for Bolton , who left the White House in September after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to testify about Trump ’ s conduct in the Ukraine affair .
Trump said he “ would rather ” have Bolton appear before the Senate , but “ the problem with John is that it ’ s a national security problem.
” “ He knows some of my thoughts .
He knows what I think about leaders .
What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader , and it ’ s not very positive , and then I have to deal on behalf of the country ?
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s going to make the job very hard .
He knows other things .
And I don ’ t know if we left on the best of terms .
I would say probably not , ” Trump said .
Bolton ’ s former aide , Fiona Hill , testified to the House that Bolton opposed the Ukraine pressure campaign , saying he wanted no part of what he described as a `` drug deal '' that other administration officials were `` cooking up . ''
He is reportedly writing about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw '' in regards to Trump pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter in his forthcoming book .
“ Some people who have talked to him think he has an ax to grind , that he ’ s angry he was publicly fired by the president .
But he also has a history of believing in unlimited powers for the president .
Which is the guiding light for John Bolton at this point ?
Ax to grind and books to sell ?
Or be a player and say , 'Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s doing what I want on Iran and other things ?
’ ” Paul said .

Republican Sen. Rand Paul said he is opposed to calling former national security adviser John Bolton as a witness in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
“He’s a disgruntled employee with an ax to grind,” the Kentucky senator, who has long been critical of Bolton’s stances, told the Washington Post.
Trump told reporters in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday that testimony from certain administration officials, including Bolton, could threaten national security.
Democrats have pushed for Bolton, who left the White House in September after clashing with Trump on foreign policy issues, to testify about Trump’s conduct in the Ukraine affair. Trump said he “would rather” have Bolton appear before the Senate, but “the problem with John is that it’s a national security problem.”
“He knows some of my thoughts. He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader, and it’s not very positive, and then I have to deal on behalf of the country? It’s going to be very hard. It’s going to make the job very hard. He knows other things. And I don’t know if we left on the best of terms. I would say probably not,” Trump said.
Bolton’s former aide, Fiona Hill, testified to the House that Bolton opposed the Ukraine pressure campaign, saying he wanted no part of what he described as a "drug deal" that other administration officials were "cooking up."
He is reportedly writing about "at least some of what he saw" in regards to Trump pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter in his forthcoming book.
“Some people who have talked to him think he has an ax to grind, that he’s angry he was publicly fired by the president. But he also has a history of believing in unlimited powers for the president. Which is the guiding light for John Bolton at this point? Ax to grind and books to sell? Or be a player and say, 'Even if I’m gone, he’s doing what I want on Iran and other things?’” Paul said.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'We will take a look': Trump to consider entitlement cuts toward end of 2020

President Trump said he will begin considering cuts to entitlement spending `` toward the end of the year , '' putting a politically perilous issue in play for 2020 that he had kept off the table in 2016 , when he pledged to leave the programs alone .
Trump told CNBC in an interview from the sidelines of the Davos Summit on Wednesday that an increasingly strong U.S. economy will create the perfect moment to consider cuts .
`` It will be toward the end of the year .
The growth is going to be incredible .
And at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at that . ''
`` That 's actually the easiest of all things , if you look , because it is such a big percentage , '' Trump said , alluding to the amount of spending that can be revoked from the programs .
`` We also have assets that we 'd never had .
We never had growth like this .
We never had a consumer that was taking in , through different means , over $ 10,000 a family . ''
Spending cuts have technically been on the agenda since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House budget proposal for fiscal year 2020 proposed trillions in cuts to reach the goal of a balanced budget by 2034 .
The administration 's forecast , which relies on strong economic projections , calls for a $ 2.7 trillion spending cut over the coming decade .
Much of this would come through cuts to entitlement spending , estimated at $ 1.9 trillion .
But none of the entitlement cuts were expected to be enacted in the near term .
Running for office in 2015 , Trump campaigned against entitlement reform , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP field .
“ I ’ m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican , ” Trump said in a 2015 interview , “ and I ’ m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.
” Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is fending off reports that he would cut entitlements after the Sanders campaign shared a clip of him proposing `` changes '' to Social Security and Medicare that Biden called `` doctored . ''
The outcry shows the resistance among Democrats to plans that would cut government spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump 's calculation is that a strong economy will insulate him from voters who would otherwise resist .

President Trump said he will begin considering cuts to entitlement spending "toward the end of the year," putting a politically perilous issue in play for 2020 that he had kept off the table in 2016, when he pledged to leave the programs alone.
Trump told CNBC in an interview from the sidelines of the Davos Summit on Wednesday that an increasingly strong U.S. economy will create the perfect moment to consider cuts. "It will be toward the end of the year. The growth is going to be incredible. And at the right time, we will take a look at that."
"That's actually the easiest of all things, if you look, because it is such a big percentage," Trump said, alluding to the amount of spending that can be revoked from the programs.
"We also have assets that we'd never had. We never had growth like this. We never had a consumer that was taking in, through different means, over $10,000 a family."
Spending cuts have technically been on the agenda since at least last year, when the White House budget proposal for fiscal year 2020 proposed trillions in cuts to reach the goal of a balanced budget by 2034. The administration's forecast, which relies on strong economic projections, calls for a $2.7 trillion spending cut over the coming decade. Much of this would come through cuts to entitlement spending, estimated at $1.9 trillion. But none of the entitlement cuts were expected to be enacted in the near term.
Running for office in 2015, Trump campaigned against entitlement reform, leveraging his stance against the rest of the GOP field.
“I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican,” Trump said in a 2015 interview, “and I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.”
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is fending off reports that he would cut entitlements after the Sanders campaign shared a clip of him proposing "changes" to Social Security and Medicare that Biden called "doctored." The outcry shows the resistance among Democrats to plans that would cut government spending — and such plans' toxicity. Trump's calculation is that a strong economy will insulate him from voters who would otherwise resist.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'That monster behind him': Trump weighs in on potential Mark Zuckerberg presidential run

President Trump said a potential presidential challenge by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg `` wouldn ’ t be too frightening . ''
Trump weighed in on Zuckerberg ’ s potential political future during an interview with CNBC ’ s Squawk Box that aired Wednesday morning .
Trump spoke with the network from the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland , while the Senate trial over his impeachment continues .
`` I met [ Zuckerberg ] , and he told me that I ’ m No .
1 in the world in Facebook , '' Trump began .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi , who is the second-most popular figure on the platform .
Trump was asked about Facebook ’ s policy against fact-checking political ads on the platform and whether he supported the move or not .
`` I ’ d rather have him just do whatever he is going to do .
He ’ s done a hell of a job when you think of it , '' Trump said .
`` I heard he was going to run for president .
That wouldn ’ t be too frightening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but he does have that monster behind him . ''
Zuckerberg , 35 , positioned his social media giant as a defender of free speech and expression in an October speech at Georgetown University .
Zuckerberg expanded on Facebook ’ s loose restrictions on political content going into the 2020 campaign season .
`` I believe we have two responsibilities , '' Zuckerberg said , `` to remove content when it could cause real danger as effectively as we can and to fight to uphold as wide a definition of freedom of expression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definition of what is considered dangerous to expand beyond what is necessary . ''

President Trump said a potential presidential challenge by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg "wouldn’t be too frightening."
Trump weighed in on Zuckerberg’s potential political future during an interview with CNBC’s Squawk Box that aired Wednesday morning. Trump spoke with the network from the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, while the Senate trial over his impeachment continues.
"I met [Zuckerberg], and he told me that I’m No. 1 in the world in Facebook," Trump began. He added that he had beaten on Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is the second-most popular figure on the platform.
Trump was asked about Facebook’s policy against fact-checking political ads on the platform and whether he supported the move or not.
"I’d rather have him just do whatever he is going to do. He’s done a hell of a job when you think of it," Trump said. "I heard he was going to run for president. That wouldn’t be too frightening, I don’t think, but he does have that monster behind him."
Zuckerberg, 35, positioned his social media giant as a defender of free speech and expression in an October speech at Georgetown University. Zuckerberg expanded on Facebook’s loose restrictions on political content going into the 2020 campaign season.
"I believe we have two responsibilities," Zuckerberg said, "to remove content when it could cause real danger as effectively as we can and to fight to uphold as wide a definition of freedom of expression as possible — and not allow the definition of what is considered dangerous to expand beyond what is necessary."


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--WATCH LIVE: Opening arguments in Trump's Senate impeachment trial

The Senate will continue President Trump 's impeachment trial with opening arguments from House impeachment managers and the president 's @ @ @ @ @ EST on Wednesday .
Lawmakers previously voted to lay the groundwork for the rules of @ @ @ @ @ trial , but they have not yet decided whether new witnesses or evidence will be @ @

The Senate will continue President Trump's impeachment trial with opening arguments from House impeachment managers and the president's defense team at 1 p.m. EST on Wednesday.
Lawmakers previously voted to lay the groundwork for the rules of how they'll govern the trial, but they have not yet decided whether new witnesses or evidence will be allowed.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'We're clean and beautiful': Trump tells Greta Thunberg to save climate advice for other countries

President Trump touted the environmental health of the United States while blasting teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg during the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland .
`` We want to have the cleanest water on earth .
We want to have the cleanest air on earth , '' the president said during a Wednesday news conference after he was asked about Thunberg .
`` Our numbers , as you saw , we had record numbers come out very recently .
Our numbers are very , very good .
Our environmental numbers , our water numbers , our numbers on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're clean and beautiful , '' Trump added , but said things need to be done to clean up other countries .
`` You have another continent where the fumes are rising at levels that you ca n't believe .
I mean , I think Greta ought to focus on those places . ''
Trump also said during the press conference that he `` would have loved to have seen '' Thunberg speak at the conference .
He additionally mentioned that `` she beat me out on Time magazine '' in reference to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Person of the Year . ''
On Tuesday , the president said at the conference that he did not know `` anything about '' the climate activist but called her a `` very angry person . ''
He has previously ripped her on social media , saying last month that she `` must work on her anger management problem . ''

President Trump touted the environmental health of the United States while blasting teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
"We want to have the cleanest water on earth. We want to have the cleanest air on earth," the president said during a Wednesday news conference after he was asked about Thunberg. "Our numbers, as you saw, we had record numbers come out very recently. Our numbers are very, very good. Our environmental numbers, our water numbers, our numbers on air are tremendous."
"We're clean and beautiful," Trump added, but said things need to be done to clean up other countries. "You have another continent where the fumes are rising at levels that you can't believe. I mean, I think Greta ought to focus on those places."
Trump also said during the press conference that he "would have loved to have seen" Thunberg speak at the conference. He additionally mentioned that "she beat me out on Time magazine" in reference to her being recognized as the 2019 "Person of the Year."
On Tuesday, the president said at the conference that he did not know "anything about" the climate activist but called her a "very angry person." He has previously ripped her on social media, saying last month that she "must work on her anger management problem."


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Trump says he would have ‘loved’ to see Greta Thunberg at Davos: ‘She beat me out on Time magazine'

President Trump said he would have liked to hear Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg speak while the two of them were in Davos , Switzerland .
Trump , who has sparred with the 17-year-old , dismissed warnings of climate change from environmental activists during his speech at the World Economic Forum on Tuesday , calling them the “ prophets of doom.
” During a Wednesday news conference , the president was asked about Thunberg .
“ She beat me out on Time magazine , ” Trump said , referring to the publication 's naming Thunberg the 2019 `` Person of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have loved to have seen her speak.
” He added , “ Some people are — they put it at a level that is , you know , unrealistic to a point you can ’ t live your lives.
” '' I don ’ t really know anything about her , '' he said , adding that she ’ s `` very angry . ''
The same day , Thunberg scolded world leaders at the annual gathering for not doing more to combat the warming planet .
“ I wonder what will you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fail and leave them facing a climate chaos that you knowingly brought upon them .
That it seemed so bad for the economy that we decided to resign the idea of securing future living conditions without even trying ?
Our house is still on fire , ” she said .
“ We are telling you to act as if you loved your children above all else , ” she continued .

President Trump said he would have liked to hear Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg speak while the two of them were in Davos, Switzerland.
Trump, who has sparred with the 17-year-old, dismissed warnings of climate change from environmental activists during his speech at the World Economic Forum on Tuesday, calling them the “prophets of doom.”
During a Wednesday news conference, the president was asked about Thunberg.
“She beat me out on Time magazine,” Trump said, referring to the publication's naming Thunberg the 2019 "Person of the Year." “I would have loved to have seen her speak.”
He added, “Some people are — they put it at a level that is, you know, unrealistic to a point you can’t live your lives.”
A day prior, Trump denied knowing “anything about” the teenager.
"I don’t really know anything about her," he said, adding that she’s "very angry."
The same day, Thunberg scolded world leaders at the annual gathering for not doing more to combat the warming planet.
“I wonder what will you tell your children was the reason to fail and leave them facing a climate chaos that you knowingly brought upon them. That it seemed so bad for the economy that we decided to resign the idea of securing future living conditions without even trying? Our house is still on fire,” she said.
“We are telling you to act as if you loved your children above all else,” she continued.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--'Good job’: Lindsey Graham congratulates Adam Schiff on impeachment trial performance

In the midst of one of the most acrimonious partisan divides in congressional history , Sen. Lindsey Graham extended kind words to Rep. Adam Schiff after the first day of opening arguments in President Trump 's Senate impeachment trial .
“ Good job , you ’ re very well-spoken , ” the South Carolina Republican told the California Democrat as the two men shook hands on Wednesday night .
Graham has been one of Trump 's most ardent supporters and has repeatedly called for a quick dismissal of the Senate trial against the president .
Schiff , chairman of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigation into the president 's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which he requested an investigation into Joe Biden .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi named Schiff to lead the team of seven House impeachment managers prosecuting Trump 's trial .
He kicked off opening arguments by relaying `` the story of the president ’ s corrupt scheme '' to pressure a foreign government for his own political benefit .
The impeachment managers are set to return to the Senate floor on Thursday afternoon to continue building their case against @ @ @

In the midst of one of the most acrimonious partisan divides in congressional history, Sen. Lindsey Graham extended kind words to Rep. Adam Schiff after the first day of opening arguments in President Trump's Senate impeachment trial.
“Good job, you’re very well-spoken,” the South Carolina Republican told the California Democrat as the two men shook hands on Wednesday night.
Sen Graham walking out of the Capitol encounters Schiff, shakes his hand and says, “Good job, you’re very well spoken.” pic.twitter.com/Ne1f8TB7Qz — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) January 23, 2020
“Good job,” @LindseyGrahamSC tells @RepAdamSchiff as the impeachment trial wraps for the day. “Very well spoken.” pic.twitter.com/NC9jC3367o — Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) January 23, 2020
Graham has been one of Trump's most ardent supporters and has repeatedly called for a quick dismissal of the Senate trial against the president. Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, led the House investigation into the president's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which he requested an investigation into Joe Biden.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi named Schiff to lead the team of seven House impeachment managers prosecuting Trump's trial. He kicked off opening arguments by relaying "the story of the president’s corrupt scheme" to pressure a foreign government for his own political benefit. The impeachment managers are set to return to the Senate floor on Thursday afternoon to continue building their case against the president.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--AOC just unwittingly made the case for right-to-work laws

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez kicked off 2020 by kneecapping her colleagues .
The bartender-turned-congresswoman announced in early January that she will not be paying her share of party dues ( dues which amount to roughly $ 250,000 ) to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee .
The Democrats ’ main campaign arm , the DCCC recruits and fundraises for candidates as well as incumbents .
Each House Democrat is customarily expected to contribute to the committee at a level commensurate with his or her tenure and leadership role .
Ocasio-Cortez , whose online operation has effortlessly put her in the top tier of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Speaker Nancy Pelosi and impeachment manager Adam Schiff in the last half of 2019 — does n't agree with Democratic leadership and does n't want to fund their political ambitions .
The Democratic Party ’ s priorities , she argues , don ’ t necessarily align with her liberal agenda .
She should be able to decide how to spend her money strategically .
Yes , it does .
But the fact that she would deny such independence of action to workers in all other professions only serves to highlight her hypocrisy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress for labor union bosses , Ocasio-Cortez has unwittingly showcased a compelling and common argument in favor of right-to-work laws .
For years , public employees throughout the United States have seen a growing percentage of their paychecks gobbled up in the form of compulsory union dues .
Hardworking people in the Bronx , throughout Middle America , and all the way to the West Coast had little choice but to watch in dumb anguish as their hard-earned dollars were confiscated by a government union , whose values they often did not share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be passed on to fund political candidates and causes they often did not support .
Thankfully , the U.S Supreme Court ’ s 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME drew a line in the sand .
It recognized that all public employees have the same constitutional right Ocasio-Cortez insists upon for herself — the right to decide independently how to use her resources to influence the world around her .
Thanks to outreach efforts from the Freedom Foundation , more than 65,000 public employees on the West Coast have exercised this right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 months following the landmark Janus decision .
In deep blue Oregon , breeding ground of antifa rioters and Ocasio-Cortez ’ s fellow Democratic Socialists of America comrades , more than 33 % of state employees represented by the Service Employees International Union — SEIU is one of the state ’ s largest unions and the freshman congresswoman ’ s No .
1 donor — have freed themselves from union bondage , taking back their voices and their paychecks as they go .
Every public employee in the U.S. , whether they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sweeper , is entitled to exercise the same choice that Ocasio-Cortez is making and for the same reasons .
However , her benefactors in organized labor vehemently disagree , and in her eagerness to continue cashing their generous checks , who is Ocasio-Cortez to argue ?
Ocasio-Cortez has some conception that it ’ s wrong to force her to fund political activities she disagrees with .
If only she could be persuaded to support extending those freedoms to all the other public sector employees .
Aaron Withe is the national director of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Oregon state director .

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez kicked off 2020 by kneecapping her colleagues. The bartender-turned-congresswoman announced in early January that she will not be paying her share of party dues (dues which amount to roughly $250,000) to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The Democrats’ main campaign arm, the DCCC recruits and fundraises for candidates as well as incumbents. Each House Democrat is customarily expected to contribute to the committee at a level commensurate with his or her tenure and leadership role.
Ocasio-Cortez, whose online operation has effortlessly put her in the top tier of Democratic fundraisers — she outraised both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and impeachment manager Adam Schiff in the last half of 2019 — doesn't agree with Democratic leadership and doesn't want to fund their political ambitions. The Democratic Party’s priorities, she argues, don’t necessarily align with her liberal agenda. She should be able to decide how to spend her money strategically.
“Seems fair, no?”
Yes, it does. But the fact that she would deny such independence of action to workers in all other professions only serves to highlight her hypocrisy. As one of the loudest advocates in Congress for labor union bosses, Ocasio-Cortez has unwittingly showcased a compelling and common argument in favor of right-to-work laws.
For years, public employees throughout the United States have seen a growing percentage of their paychecks gobbled up in the form of compulsory union dues. Hardworking people in the Bronx, throughout Middle America, and all the way to the West Coast had little choice but to watch in dumb anguish as their hard-earned dollars were confiscated by a government union, whose values they often did not share. The money, in turn, would be passed on to fund political candidates and causes they often did not support.
Thankfully, the U.S Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME drew a line in the sand. It recognized that all public employees have the same constitutional right Ocasio-Cortez insists upon for herself — the right to decide independently how to use her resources to influence the world around her.
Thanks to outreach efforts from the Freedom Foundation, more than 65,000 public employees on the West Coast have exercised this right, quitting their government unions in the 18 months following the landmark Janus decision.
In deep blue Oregon, breeding ground of antifa rioters and Ocasio-Cortez’s fellow Democratic Socialists of America comrades, more than 33% of state employees represented by the Service Employees International Union — SEIU is one of the state’s largest unions and the freshman congresswoman’s No. 1 donor — have freed themselves from union bondage, taking back their voices and their paychecks as they go.
Every public employee in the U.S., whether they are a congresswoman, teacher, or street sweeper, is entitled to exercise the same choice that Ocasio-Cortez is making and for the same reasons. However, her benefactors in organized labor vehemently disagree, and in her eagerness to continue cashing their generous checks, who is Ocasio-Cortez to argue?
Ocasio-Cortez has some conception that it’s wrong to force her to fund political activities she disagrees with. If only she could be persuaded to support extending those freedoms to all the other public sector employees.
Aaron Withe is the national director of the Freedom Foundation, and Jason Dudash is its Oregon state director.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Pompeo: 'I'd be happy' to testify if 'legally required'

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump if a judge orders him to .
Pompeo told reporters he would appear in the Senate in a Wednesday press conference with Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness on an official trip to the island nation , according to the Hill .
`` If I am legally required to testify , as I ’ ve said before , I ’ d be happy to do it , '' Pompeo said , adding that he has not followed the impeachment proceedings going on in Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial in a party line vote early Wednesday morning after hours of debate on the floor .
Wednesday kicked off the opening arguments between the House managers picked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Trump ’ s defense team , led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone .
The Senate trial began after weeks of stonewalling by Pelosi .
The House speaker refused to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate for weeks in an attempt to influence Senate trial rules .
Pelosi gave in to pressure from Republicans and some members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitch McConnell threatened to hold a vote to dismiss the articles before a trial .

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump if a judge orders him to.
Pompeo told reporters he would appear in the Senate in a Wednesday press conference with Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness on an official trip to the island nation, according to the Hill.
"If I am legally required to testify, as I’ve said before, I’d be happy to do it," Pompeo said, adding that he has not followed the impeachment proceedings going on in Washington.
The Senate passed rules for the trial in a party line vote early Wednesday morning after hours of debate on the floor. Wednesday kicked off the opening arguments between the House managers picked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Trump’s defense team, led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
The Senate trial began after weeks of stonewalling by Pelosi. The House speaker refused to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate for weeks in an attempt to influence Senate trial rules. Pelosi gave in to pressure from Republicans and some members of her caucus after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell threatened to hold a vote to dismiss the articles before a trial.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Nonprofit group founded by Bernie Sanders hit with FEC complaint for accepting excessive donations

A democracy watchdog group filed with the Federal Elections Commission against a nonprofit Bernie Sanders founded .
, a nonpartisan government accountability group , filed the against , a group Bernie Sanders founded during his 2016 campaign to promote the socialist values the Vermont senator touts from the campaign trail .
The watchdog group alleged that Our Revolution accepted donations in excess of federal campaign law limits which were used to bolster Sanders ’ campaign illegally .
The complaint followed from the Associated Press that claimed that Our Revolution was acting as an unregistered super PAC on Sanders ’ behalf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donations .
The report claimed Our Revolution was acting as a “ dark money ” fund for Sanders because donors could pour money into the nonprofit organization without a trace .
Federal campaign finance laws bar nonprofit groups founded by candidates from using money from large donors in campaign activities , but Our Revolution has been pushing a get-out-the-vote campaign on behalf of Sanders .
Paul Ryan , a campaign finance expert for Common Cause , said , “ Any entity established by a federal officeholder can only raise and spend money under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connection with a federal election .
Our Revolution was undoubtedly established by Sen. Sanders , is subject to these laws — and is seemingly in violation of them.
” Ryan later added , “ Because Sanders set up Our Revolution and they have raised and spent money in candidate elections , Our Revolution is required to comply with contribution limits , register with the FEC and discloses its donors — but it hasn ’ t .
It ’ s his establishment of the group that triggers these laws .
That means a $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no contributions from prohibited sources.
” Paco Fabian , a spokesman for Our Revolution , denied wrongdoing , saying , “ We invest our money ... in things like organizing and phone banks and canvassing voters on issues that matter .
We aren ’ t running ads or doing glossy mailers.
” While the organization denies wrongdoing , it has accepted $ 1 million from donors that were not fully disclosed who had cut checks over the legal limits .
Dan Petalas , a former FEC attorney , said that Our Revolution could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affiliated with Sanders , saying , “ I believe that the analysis is more complicated than has been suggested , and that Our Revolution will be able to show Sanders is no longer affiliated .
And even if that ’ s incorrect , Our Revolution should be able to demonstrate that they used the money in ways that comply with the law.
” Sanders , 78 , has for accepting money from large donors and PACs .
He maintained that he is not tied to Our Revolution in any way , telling New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got on the phone and I told them what to do , that would be a violation of campaign finance law .
”

A democracy watchdog group filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission against a nonprofit Bernie Sanders founded.
Common Cause , a nonpartisan government accountability group, filed the FEC complaint against Our Revolution , a group Bernie Sanders founded during his 2016 campaign to promote the socialist values the Vermont senator touts from the campaign trail. The watchdog group alleged that Our Revolution accepted donations in excess of federal campaign law limits which were used to bolster Sanders’ campaign illegally.
The complaint followed a report from the Associated Press that claimed that Our Revolution was acting as an unregistered super PAC on Sanders’ behalf because the organization could rake in unlimited donations. The report claimed Our Revolution was acting as a “dark money” fund for Sanders because donors could pour money into the nonprofit organization without a trace.
Federal campaign finance laws bar nonprofit groups founded by candidates from using money from large donors in campaign activities, but Our Revolution has been pushing a get-out-the-vote campaign on behalf of Sanders.
Paul Ryan, a campaign finance expert for Common Cause, said, “Any entity established by a federal officeholder can only raise and spend money under federal contribution limits for any activities in connection with a federal election. Our Revolution was undoubtedly established by Sen. Sanders, is subject to these laws — and is seemingly in violation of them.”
Ryan later added, “Because Sanders set up Our Revolution and they have raised and spent money in candidate elections, Our Revolution is required to comply with contribution limits, register with the FEC and discloses its donors — but it hasn’t. It’s his establishment of the group that triggers these laws. That means a $5,000 limit, full donor disclosure and no contributions from prohibited sources.”
Paco Fabian, a spokesman for Our Revolution, denied wrongdoing, saying, “We invest our money ... in things like organizing and phone banks and canvassing voters on issues that matter. We aren’t running ads or doing glossy mailers.”
While the organization denies wrongdoing, it has accepted $1 million from donors that were not fully disclosed who had cut checks over the legal limits.
Dan Petalas, a former FEC attorney, said that Our Revolution could make the case that they are not affiliated with Sanders, saying, “I believe that the analysis is more complicated than has been suggested, and that Our Revolution will be able to show Sanders is no longer affiliated. And even if that’s incorrect, Our Revolution should be able to demonstrate that they used the money in ways that comply with the law.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Mitch McConnell’s ‘deposition’ rule is just a cheap trick

Item by item , the impeachment trial rules enacted by Senate Republicans are blatantly unfair to the public interest , but one rule in particular deserves more criticism than it yet has received .
Even after stacking the deck against calling any witnesses in the first place , Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wasn ’ t satisfied .
His rules provide that even if , after what amounts to nearly a week of this trial , senators do vote to allow witnesses , those witnesses must first be “ deposed ” outside the Senate chamber and then senators must vote again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Except under unusual circumstances in which both sides agree to this deposition requirement , the rule is procedurally inane .
It completely upends the ordinary purpose and use of depositions , especially in a criminal rather than civil proceeding .
While a presidential impeachment trial is not , strictly speaking , a criminal trial , it is highly analogous to one , with the difference that the interests in transparency are greater , not lesser , than in a criminal trial .
The purpose is to decide if the people of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of power , so the public interest lies in making as much information available as possible .
McConnell ’ s requirement for a deposition will further delay , and perhaps deny , the revelation of relevant information .
For that matter , a deposition is not ordinarily part of any actual trial , civil or criminal , at all .
When used at all , it is part of pretrial activity , not something occurring once a trial has commenced .
It is most commonly part of civil , not criminal proceedings .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ emphases added ] , “ A deposition is a witness 's sworn out-of-court testimony .
It is used to gather information as part of the discovery process and , in limited circumstances , [ its substance ] may be [ entered into evidence and ] used at trial .
... Depositions usually do not directly involve the court .
The process is initiated and supervised by the individual parties .
... Depositions are usually hearsay and are thus inadmissible at trial.
” In the context of a criminal trial , depositions are rarer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As summarized in a Lawyers.com explainer , “ In criminal cases , depositions are normally taken to preserve testimony from a witness .
A deposition is n't meant as a discovery device in a criminal case.
” Furthermore , says the explainer , “ The vast majority of states allow criminal depositions only when a judge has concluded that there ’ s a good chance that an important witness will be unable to testify at trial.
” In other words , if a witness may not be available during a trial due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he may be deposed before trial .
That 's why it was technically not improper for the House Intelligence Committee to depose witnesses before holding live hearings with them : Those depositions came in what by analogy was the indictment , or pretrial , stage .
( Even so , I opposed them as running counter to the spirit and necessities of impeachment . )
Obviously , if someone such as John Bolton is “ available ” to be deposed once the Senate trial begins , he would be equally available to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no good reason to prescreen his testimony , or to hide it from the public , if he can just provide witness in open court .
And because the main goal of an impeachment trial is to ascertain the truth about whether a president abused his office ( while there is no risk to the president of imprisonment or other loss of ordinary civic privileges ) , a deposition actually would get in the way of the public interest .
It would interrupt the trial , conflict with its purpose , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , might be used to keep the public in the dark .
Even if the deposition transcripts are later made public , transcripts never have the power of live testimony .
Yes , the Senate has the power to do what it wants .
During the Clinton impeachment trial , the only three new witnesses were deposed rather than afforded live testimony .
In that case , though , all sides stipulated to the basic facts , and agreed to that system , for good reason : to keep explicit sexual talk from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no less .
In this year ’ s Senate trial , there is no agreement by the sides and no reasons of social propriety at issue .
McConnell ’ s rule is completely indefensible .

Item by item, the impeachment trial rules enacted by Senate Republicans are blatantly unfair to the public interest, but one rule in particular deserves more criticism than it yet has received.
Even after stacking the deck against calling any witnesses in the first place, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wasn’t satisfied. His rules provide that even if, after what amounts to nearly a week of this trial, senators do vote to allow witnesses, those witnesses must first be “deposed” outside the Senate chamber and then senators must vote again before hearing them as live witnesses.
Except under unusual circumstances in which both sides agree to this deposition requirement, the rule is procedurally inane. It completely upends the ordinary purpose and use of depositions, especially in a criminal rather than civil proceeding.
While a presidential impeachment trial is not, strictly speaking, a criminal trial, it is highly analogous to one, with the difference that the interests in transparency are greater, not lesser, than in a criminal trial. The purpose is to decide if the people of the United States need protection from an executive abuse of power, so the public interest lies in making as much information available as possible. McConnell’s requirement for a deposition will further delay, and perhaps deny, the revelation of relevant information.
For that matter, a deposition is not ordinarily part of any actual trial, civil or criminal, at all. When used at all, it is part of pretrial activity, not something occurring once a trial has commenced. It is most commonly part of civil, not criminal proceedings. To quote the Legal Information Institute [emphases added], “A deposition is a witness's sworn out-of-court testimony. It is used to gather information as part of the discovery process and, in limited circumstances, [its substance] may be [entered into evidence and] used at trial. ... Depositions usually do not directly involve the court. The process is initiated and supervised by the individual parties. ... Depositions are usually hearsay and are thus inadmissible at trial.”
In the context of a criminal trial, depositions are rarer, and they serve a different purpose. As summarized in a Lawyers.com explainer, “In criminal cases, depositions are normally taken to preserve testimony from a witness. A deposition isn't meant as a discovery device in a criminal case.” Furthermore, says the explainer, “The vast majority of states allow criminal depositions only when a judge has concluded that there’s a good chance that an important witness will be unable to testify at trial.” In other words, if a witness may not be available during a trial due to reasons such as health or safety, he may be deposed before trial.
That's why it was technically not improper for the House Intelligence Committee to depose witnesses before holding live hearings with them: Those depositions came in what by analogy was the indictment, or pretrial, stage. (Even so, I opposed them as running counter to the spirit and necessities of impeachment.)
Obviously, if someone such as John Bolton is “available” to be deposed once the Senate trial begins, he would be equally available to testify at the trial itself. There is no good reason to prescreen his testimony, or to hide it from the public, if he can just provide witness in open court. And because the main goal of an impeachment trial is to ascertain the truth about whether a president abused his office (while there is no risk to the president of imprisonment or other loss of ordinary civic privileges), a deposition actually would get in the way of the public interest. It would interrupt the trial, conflict with its purpose, and, if not followed by live testimony, might be used to keep the public in the dark. Even if the deposition transcripts are later made public, transcripts never have the power of live testimony.
Yes, the Senate has the power to do what it wants. During the Clinton impeachment trial, the only three new witnesses were deposed rather than afforded live testimony. In that case, though, all sides stipulated to the basic facts, and agreed to that system, for good reason: to keep explicit sexual talk from airing publicly, from the Senate floor no less.
In this year’s Senate trial, there is no agreement by the sides and no reasons of social propriety at issue. McConnell’s rule is completely indefensible.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--'You would be all over us': Graham slams press over impeachment coverage

Sen. Lindsey Graham slammed the Capitol Hill press corps for what he said is a double standard when media outlets cover impeachment of a Democratic president as opposed to a Republican .
“ Nobody would be saying this about a Democratic president , '' Graham said during a press briefing Wednesday .
`` If a Republican House had done this , you would n't even ask me that question .
All of you would be in our face , saying that there 's a Democratic president and you 're denying that person , he or she , a chance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — gosh , you hate them so much . ''
Graham criticized reporters for not asking tougher questions of Democrats who have been seeking to subpoena additional witnesses and testimony .
Senate Democrats say they want to hear from former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney , who they say have relevant information that could sway the opinion of a jury of 100 senators .
House Democrats never issued a subpoena against Bolton or Mulvaney , fearing such an action would get caught up in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'Hell to pay ' : Democrats step up pressure for witnesses but duck Biden question ] Trump is a danger to national security , Democrats in both chambers say , so the House voted to approve articles of impeachment late last year .
`` It shows you how complicit people have become when it comes to Trump , '' Graham said .
`` Not one question about the idea that a Democratic-controlled House in 48 days impeaching the president of the United States with a process where you could n't have a lawyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Some Senate Republicans have floated the idea of witness reciprocity in order to get Hunter Biden to testify , a suggestion Democrats rejected .
Graham and other Trump defenders in Congress have instead complained about a `` rushed '' impeachment process conducted by House Democrats , blasting it as a `` sham '' and a `` national disgrace . ''
Democrats are impeaching Trump on two charges : one of abuse of power and other on obstruction of Congress .
The abuse of power allegation comes in the wake of a well-documented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aides again the government of Ukraine .
Led by Trump 's personal lawyer , Rudy Giuliani , a team of close confidants of the president urged Ukrainian officials to investigate corruption allegations waged against former Vice President Joe Biden , Trump 's chief domestic political rival .
During a July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine , Trump asked his counterpart to `` do us a favor '' and investigate Biden .
At the same time , military aid to the country was briefly held up by the White House Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has refused to cooperate with any congressional requests for documents or witness testimony relating to the shadow diplomacy campaign , citing executive privilege and sparking the obstruction of Congress charge .
Republicans have dismissed the charges as flimsy and vindictive against a president they disagree with politically .
`` The only thing I can tell the American people , '' Graham said .
`` When it comes to replacing this president , nine months-plus from the election , you got an uphill battle with me . ''
As for the press corps , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needling a Democratic president over his conduct while in office , `` you would be all over us . ''

Sen. Lindsey Graham slammed the Capitol Hill press corps for what he said is a double standard when media outlets cover impeachment of a Democratic president as opposed to a Republican.
“Nobody would be saying this about a Democratic president," Graham said during a press briefing Wednesday. "If a Republican House had done this, you wouldn't even ask me that question. All of you would be in our face, saying that there's a Democratic president and you're denying that person, he or she, a chance to go to court and litigate these matters — gosh, you hate them so much."
Graham criticized reporters for not asking tougher questions of Democrats who have been seeking to subpoena additional witnesses and testimony.
Senate Democrats say they want to hear from former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, who they say have relevant information that could sway the opinion of a jury of 100 senators.
House Democrats never issued a subpoena against Bolton or Mulvaney, fearing such an action would get caught up in the courts.
[Read more: 'Hell to pay': Democrats step up pressure for witnesses but duck Biden question]
Senators get 16 hours to ask questions. Wouldn't they like to ask about documents?
If McConnell gets his way, they won't see any documents before their questions.
Even if documents are allowed later, they can't ask a single question about them.
Americans deserve a fair trial. pic.twitter.com/wF5SBs9xV8 — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) January 22, 2020
Trump is a danger to national security, Democrats in both chambers say, so the House voted to approve articles of impeachment late last year.
"It shows you how complicit people have become when it comes to Trump," Graham said. "Not one question about the idea that a Democratic-controlled House in 48 days impeaching the president of the United States with a process where you couldn't have a lawyer, couldn't call a witness."
Some Senate Republicans have floated the idea of witness reciprocity in order to get Hunter Biden to testify, a suggestion Democrats rejected.
Graham and other Trump defenders in Congress have instead complained about a "rushed" impeachment process conducted by House Democrats, blasting it as a "sham" and a "national disgrace."
Democrats are impeaching Trump on two charges: one of abuse of power and other on obstruction of Congress. The abuse of power allegation comes in the wake of a well-documented pressure campaign orchestrated by Trump's top aides again the government of Ukraine.
Led by Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, a team of close confidants of the president urged Ukrainian officials to investigate corruption allegations waged against former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump's chief domestic political rival.
During a July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine, Trump asked his counterpart to "do us a favor" and investigate Biden. At the same time, military aid to the country was briefly held up by the White House Office of Budget Management.
The White House has refused to cooperate with any congressional requests for documents or witness testimony relating to the shadow diplomacy campaign, citing executive privilege and sparking the obstruction of Congress charge.
Republicans have dismissed the charges as flimsy and vindictive against a president they disagree with politically.
"The only thing I can tell the American people," Graham said. "When it comes to replacing this president, nine months-plus from the election, you got an uphill battle with me."
Their case was so “overwhelming” in the House that they need & demand Witnesses in the Senate! https://t.co/XuOMzYSnwv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 22, 2020
As for the press corps, Graham said if it was the Republicans needling a Democratic president over his conduct while in office, "you would be all over us."
Opening arguments in Trump's Senate impeachment trial began Wednesday.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Tim Kaine says John Roberts admonishment of Nadler and Cipollone was 'good'

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine praised Chief Justice John Roberts 's late-night smackdown of a House lawmaker and a Trump administration lawyer over a lack of decorum .
Roberts , presiding over President Trump 's impeachment trial after midnight , scolded both House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler and White House counsel Pat Cipollone after a fiery debate over the ground rules for the proceedings .
“ I think that that 's good .
It 's good for him to do that to both sides , ” Kaine told the Washington Examiner .
“ At the end of the day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think both sides of that particular interchange were a little bit testier than they needed to be .
And I think that was good.
” Other members , however , defended their side ’ s positions .
“ When you have the House managers insulting and accusing Republican senators , in effect , the jurors , I know we 're not jurors were senators , of conspiring in a cover-up .
That 's completely inappropriate , completely out of bounds , ” Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson told reporters .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do , quite honestly .
Again , if the Democrats are smart , they 'd keep Chairman Nadler off the field.
” When asked by reporters if House impeachment managers were too partisan on the Senate floor , Michigan Democratic Sen. Gary Peters replied , “ Well , I don ’ t think the White House strongly has a set of legal arguments .
”

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine praised Chief Justice John Roberts's late-night smackdown of a House lawmaker and a Trump administration lawyer over a lack of decorum.
Roberts, presiding over President Trump's impeachment trial after midnight, scolded both House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler and White House counsel Pat Cipollone after a fiery debate over the ground rules for the proceedings.
“I think that that's good. It's good for him to do that to both sides,” Kaine told the Washington Examiner. “At the end of the day, you know, after 11 hours, I think both sides of that particular interchange were a little bit testier than they needed to be. And I think that was good.”
Other members, however, defended their side’s positions.
“When you have the House managers insulting and accusing Republican senators, in effect, the jurors, I know we're not jurors were senators, of conspiring in a cover-up. That's completely inappropriate, completely out of bounds,” Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson told reporters. “It was really a stupid thing for him to do, quite honestly. Again, if the Democrats are smart, they'd keep Chairman Nadler off the field.”
When asked by reporters if House impeachment managers were too partisan on the Senate floor, Michigan Democratic Sen. Gary Peters replied, “Well, I don’t think the White House strongly has a set of legal arguments.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--55% say media are ‘corrupt’ and 'exaggerate' news

It ’ s been a tough few days for the news media , having exaggerated the involvement of white supremacists and haters at the gun rally in Richmond , Virginia , hyping impeachment coverage , and watching in dismay as level-headed Arizona Sen. Martha McSally called a CNN reporter a “ liberal hack.
” And now , there ’ s a survey that shows just how much confidence in the news media consumers have lost , a trend started decades ago but supercharged since the 2016 election .
According to a survey done for SeniorList , a medical device firm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans believe that the media is “ corrupt.
” In addition , many , especially Republicans , believe that the media exaggerates stories while some Democrats believe reporters minimize issues , a sign that the political polarization in media has deepened .
“ Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to think the media overblow issues on a large scale , indicating a more conservative trend of questioning the mainstream media , ” said the survey analysis , citing issues such as Russian interference in elections , the treatment of illegal immigrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And , said the survey provided exclusively to Secrets , consumers are bored with the repetitive nature of some electronic and internet outlets .
“ The repetitive programming on networks and websites and the emphasis of the media to pump the news cycle with the same stories can create burnout , causing many to question the overall quality of the news , ” said the survey analysis .
The answer , it said , is to read more news sources and check facts out .
And it offered some tips to news media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bias in reporting , and stick to media that deliver quality news stories .
• Read up on which sources have a high level of bias and which are objective in their reporting .
• Enjoy opinion-based programming with a grain of salt , knowing they have a narrative to push .
• Fact-check whenever possible , even when you trust the source .
• Question what you see on the internet , and be aware of satire or fake news websites that promote false stories .

It’s been a tough few days for the news media, having exaggerated the involvement of white supremacists and haters at the gun rally in Richmond, Virginia, hyping impeachment coverage, and watching in dismay as level-headed Arizona Sen. Martha McSally called a CNN reporter a “liberal hack.”
And now, there’s a survey that shows just how much confidence in the news media consumers have lost, a trend started decades ago but supercharged since the 2016 election.
According to a survey done for SeniorList, a medical device firm focused on older Americans, 55% of Americans believe that the media is “corrupt.”
The most fascinating thing about the liberal media is that they think they’re neutral. Maybe they check their journalistic objectivity at the door. pic.twitter.com/v6jyQkSsYh — Martha McSally (@SenMcSallyAZ) January 18, 2020
In addition, many, especially Republicans, believe that the media exaggerates stories while some Democrats believe reporters minimize issues, a sign that the political polarization in media has deepened.
“Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to think the media overblow issues on a large scale, indicating a more conservative trend of questioning the mainstream media,” said the survey analysis, citing issues such as Russian interference in elections, the treatment of illegal immigrants at the border, and racism.
And, said the survey provided exclusively to Secrets, consumers are bored with the repetitive nature of some electronic and internet outlets.
“The repetitive programming on networks and websites and the emphasis of the media to pump the news cycle with the same stories can create burnout, causing many to question the overall quality of the news,” said the survey analysis.
The answer, it said, is to read more news sources and check facts out.
And it offered some tips to news media consumers:
Be aware of inherent bias in reporting, and stick to media that deliver quality news stories.
Read up on which sources have a high level of bias and which are objective in their reporting.
Enjoy opinion-based programming with a grain of salt, knowing they have a narrative to push.
Fact-check whenever possible, even when you trust the source.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-22--Impeachment drives 1,000 GOP candidates to run for House

Pennsylvanian James Bognet had been around local and presidential politics for a long time before landing a dream job as a senior vice president at the Export-Import Bank of the United States .
“ I was really honored to get a chance to work in the Trump administration , ” said Bognet , 44 , a veteran of several campaigns , including those for former California Gov .
Arnold Schwarzenegger and former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney .
“ It ’ s really cool for a small-town kid from Hazleton , Pennsylvania , ” added Bognet , who worked with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s manufacturing agenda .
But like many Republicans inside and out of the administration , the Democratic drive to impeach Trump angered him , and he started watching his hometown Democratic congressman , Matt Cartwright , to see if he would vote against Trump .
“ There ’ s no way Matt Cartwright is going to vote for impeachment .
That is suicidal .
He represents a Trump plus-10 district , he can ’ t do that , ” reasoned Bognet , quietly “ boiling mad ” but prevented from publicly venting because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speech .
But Cartwright did vote to impeach , prompting political predictor Charlie Cook to move his seat , Pennsylvania ’ s 8th Congressional District , into the “ toss-up ” category .
Twenty-one days later , Bognet resigned from his job and made plans to run in the GOP House primary in April to unseat Cartwright , citing impeachment as his motivation .
“ I can now lend my voice , my passion , and my efforts to defending our President from a never-ending witch hunt , and return to my hometown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ District of Pennsylvania , to take direct personal action fighting to make sure that the House of Representatives will not continue to wage political war on President Trump during his second term in office , ” he said in his resignation letter shown below .
He ’ s not the only one .
According to Minnesota Rep. Tom Emmer , chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee , impeachment has helped to push about 1,000 Republicans to file to run for House seats this year .
“ I think that they are one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his success in building an army of candidates and the influence of impeachment on their decisions .
In an interview , he said that impeachment “ intensity ” has raised the overall political intensity to an Election Day level , and Republicans are responding , giving him an incumbent or challenger candidate in 384 of 435 House districts , nearly 40 above expectations at this stage of the year .
“ I believe it is the intensity that is causing people to stand up and say , ‘ It ’ s time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is very diverse , beating his goals of turning the GOP House caucus into one that looks like the party ’ s base that includes women , veterans , and minorities .
“ The majority is well within reach , ” said Emmer .
As he ’ s started to campaign in Pennsylvania ’ s 8th District , which includes Joe Biden ’ s hometown of Scranton , Bognet senses more support for Trump and the GOP .
In a stop at Hazleton ’ s Swing Club , the local Italian club , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president a sign of support .
“ I had a number of guys come up and say , ‘ I know that you ’ ve always been a Republican , and we ’ ve argued because I ’ m a Democrat , but I can ’ t stand it anymore .
I ’ m a Trump supporter .
I ’ m voting for Trump this time .
I didn ’ t vote for him last time . '
”

Pennsylvanian James Bognet had been around local and presidential politics for a long time before landing a dream job as a senior vice president at the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
“I was really honored to get a chance to work in the Trump administration,” said Bognet, 44, a veteran of several campaigns, including those for former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
“It’s really cool for a small-town kid from Hazleton, Pennsylvania,” added Bognet, who worked with the White House on President Trump’s manufacturing agenda.
But like many Republicans inside and out of the administration, the Democratic drive to impeach Trump angered him, and he started watching his hometown Democratic congressman, Matt Cartwright, to see if he would vote against Trump.
“There’s no way Matt Cartwright is going to vote for impeachment. That is suicidal. He represents a Trump plus-10 district, he can’t do that,” reasoned Bognet, quietly “boiling mad” but prevented from publicly venting because of Hatch Act rules governing government employee speech.
But Cartwright did vote to impeach, prompting political predictor Charlie Cook to move his seat, Pennsylvania’s 8th Congressional District, into the “toss-up” category.
Twenty-one days later, Bognet resigned from his job and made plans to run in the GOP House primary in April to unseat Cartwright, citing impeachment as his motivation.
“I can now lend my voice, my passion, and my efforts to defending our President from a never-ending witch hunt, and return to my hometown of Hazleton, in the 8th Congressional District of Pennsylvania, to take direct personal action fighting to make sure that the House of Representatives will not continue to wage political war on President Trump during his second term in office,” he said in his resignation letter shown below.
He’s not the only one.
According to Minnesota Rep. Tom Emmer, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, impeachment has helped to push about 1,000 Republicans to file to run for House seats this year.
“I think that they are one in the same,” he said of his success in building an army of candidates and the influence of impeachment on their decisions.
In an interview, he said that impeachment “intensity” has raised the overall political intensity to an Election Day level, and Republicans are responding, giving him an incumbent or challenger candidate in 384 of 435 House districts, nearly 40 above expectations at this stage of the year.
“I believe it is the intensity that is causing people to stand up and say, ‘It’s time to serve.’”
And that intensity is very diverse, beating his goals of turning the GOP House caucus into one that looks like the party’s base that includes women, veterans, and minorities.
The NRCC’s candidate recruitment numbers show it:
Total women filed — 190.
Total veterans filed — 196.
Total minorities filed — 155.
“The majority is well within reach,” said Emmer.
As he’s started to campaign in Pennsylvania’s 8th District, which includes Joe Biden’s hometown of Scranton, Bognet senses more support for Trump and the GOP.
In a stop at Hazleton’s Swing Club, the local Italian club, some high school friends gave him and the president a sign of support. “I had a number of guys come up and say, ‘I know that you’ve always been a Republican, and we’ve argued because I’m a Democrat, but I can’t stand it anymore. I’m a Trump supporter. I’m voting for Trump this time. I didn’t vote for him last time.'”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--‘Blatant effort to intimidate’: Tulsi Gabbard defends suing Hillary Clinton over ‘Russian asset’ cla

‘Blatant effort to intimidate’: Tulsi Gabbard defends suing Hillary Clinton over ‘Russian asset’ claim

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard explained why she filed a $ 50 million defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for suggesting she was a `` Russian asset '' back in October .
Gabbard , who is seeking the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination , filed the suit on Wednesday and released a lengthy statement deriding the party 's former nominee Thursday morning .
`` During my lifetime of service to our country , Hillary Clinton has essentially tried to portray me as a traitor to our country .
If Hillary Clinton and her allies can successfully destroy my reputation — even though I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member of Congress — then they can do it to anyone , '' she wrote .
`` In fact , that ’ s exactly the message Hillary and her powerful elite friends want to send to you .
Hillary Clinton and her allies want you to know that if you dare to cross them , they will destroy your reputation as well , '' she continued .
Gabbard went on to call Clinton ’ s remarks a “ blatant effort to intimidate me ” and said she will not allow it to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she addressed the lawsuit during a town hall Wednesday night , telling voters , `` I will not stand quietly by as Hillary Clinton or anyone else tries to smear my character and my loyalty and dedication to serving our country . ''
The lawsuit , filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York , notes that it is intended to hold Clinton and other `` political elites '' accountable “ for distorting the truth in the middle of a critical presidential election.
” It stems from comments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she claimed Gabbard was a `` Russian asset '' and that the Kremlin was pushing her presidential bid to ensure President Trump 's reelection .
“ They are also going to do third party again , and I ’ m not making any predictions , but I think they got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate , ” she said , before calling 2016 Green Party candidate Jill Stein a `` Russian asset , '' as well .
Facing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP was `` grooming Tulsi , not Russia . ''
Unsatisfied with the explanation , Gabbard 's attorneys demanded that Clinton retract her statements in a November letter .
Meanwhile , Nick Merrill , an aide to Clinton , quipped , `` If the nesting doll fits , '' during the height of the backlash .
`` This is not some outlandish claim , '' Merrill added .
`` This is reality .
If the Russian propaganda machine , both their state media and their bot and troll operations , is backing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is just a reality , it is not speculation . ''
Gabbard , a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard , serves on the House Armed Services and Financial Services Committees .
She was previously a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Homeland Security Committee .

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard explained why she filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for suggesting she was a "Russian asset" back in October.
Gabbard, who is seeking the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, filed the suit on Wednesday and released a lengthy statement deriding the party's former nominee Thursday morning.
"During my lifetime of service to our country, Hillary Clinton has essentially tried to portray me as a traitor to our country. If Hillary Clinton and her allies can successfully destroy my reputation — even though I’m a war veteran and a sitting member of Congress — then they can do it to anyone," she wrote.
"In fact, that’s exactly the message Hillary and her powerful elite friends want to send to you. Hillary Clinton and her allies want you to know that if you dare to cross them, they will destroy your reputation as well," she continued.
Gabbard went on to call Clinton’s remarks a “blatant effort to intimidate me” and said she will not allow it to “go unchallenged.” Her statement came after she addressed the lawsuit during a town hall Wednesday night, telling voters, "I will not stand quietly by as Hillary Clinton or anyone else tries to smear my character and my loyalty and dedication to serving our country."
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, notes that it is intended to hold Clinton and other "political elites" accountable “for distorting the truth in the middle of a critical presidential election.” It stems from comments Clinton made during an October podcast when she claimed Gabbard was a "Russian asset" and that the Kremlin was pushing her presidential bid to ensure President Trump's reelection.
“They are also going to do third party again, and I’m not making any predictions, but I think they got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” she said, before calling 2016 Green Party candidate Jill Stein a "Russian asset," as well.
Facing backlash afterward, Clinton claimed she meant the GOP was "grooming Tulsi, not Russia." Unsatisfied with the explanation, Gabbard's attorneys demanded that Clinton retract her statements in a November letter. Meanwhile, Nick Merrill, an aide to Clinton, quipped, "If the nesting doll fits," during the height of the backlash.
"This is not some outlandish claim," Merrill added. "This is reality. If the Russian propaganda machine, both their state media and their bot and troll operations, is backing a candidate aligned with their interests, that is just a reality, it is not speculation."
Gabbard, a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard, serves on the House Armed Services and Financial Services Committees. She was previously a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Homeland Security Committee.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-23--2020 Democrats marooned in DC for impeachment deny longing for Iowa

The Democratic primary contenders stuck in Washington for the impeachment trial of President Trump denied frustration with being forced to stay off the campaign trail as the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses approach .
Sens .
Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota , Bernie Sanders of Vermont , and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts are expected to spend every day except Sundays on Capitol Hill as jurors during the trial .
It ’ s an unwelcome development for candidates who have pinned their presidential aspirations on a strong finish in the crucial first nominating contest on the Democratic primary calendar .
In interviews Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for opening arguments , Klobuchar and Warren did not dispute that being forced off the campaign trail less than two weeks before Iowa could handicap their 2020 prospects .
But each described it as their moral duty to adjudicate impeachment articles charging Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
“ This is my responsibility , ” Warren said .
“ I took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution , and that ’ s why I ’ m here .
Some things are more important than politics.
” Trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floor for several hours at a time , Monday through Saturday , and prohibit the use of smartphones and other electronics , regulations that limit opportunities to engage with voters on television or via social media .
Klobuchar , who has made headway in Iowa , is relying on prominent supporters in the state to stand in for her .
The senator conceded she had no other choice .
“ I am here doing my constitutional duty ; the people of Iowa understand that , ” Klobuchar said , noting that she had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Having people on the ground that are people that see folks in the supermarket or at work — that matters.
” Sanders declined to comment .
Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado also is seeking the Democratic nomination but is focused on the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary and is considered a long shot .
As House Democratic impeachment managers delivered arguments Wednesday , the scene in the Senate resembled a college lecture hall full of students occasionally engaged and interested but often bored and distracted .
Some senators appeared to be taking notes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stared motionless at the lectern , listening intently as arguments were made ; some did the same while standing .
Some stared elsewhere or looked as though they were nodding off .
Some made quick conversation with their neighbor to the right or left ; some disappeared into the cloakroom for minutes at a time .
Klobuchar and Warren mostly appeared to be reviewing documents or focusing on the House Democrat arguing from the well of the chamber at any given moment .
Sanders was more often staring straight ahead , listening to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa with 21 % , according to the RealClearPolitics average , followed by Sanders with 17.3 % , Warren with 16.7 % , Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , with 16.3 % , and Klobuchar with 8.3 % .
Sen. Chris Coons , a Delaware Democrat backing Biden , downplayed the fallout his colleagues might experience in the caucuses as a result of the impeachment trial before suggesting the former vice president might profit .
“ I don ’ t think , in the end , that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
… You ’ ve got lots of surrogates and advocates for the other candidates who will be out there , ” Coons said .
“ But one of Joe ’ s greatest strengths is his ability to really connect with people , and time that he has to do town halls and retail campaigning obviously will be to his benefit .
”

The Democratic primary contenders stuck in Washington for the impeachment trial of President Trump denied frustration with being forced to stay off the campaign trail as the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses approach.
Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts are expected to spend every day except Sundays on Capitol Hill as jurors during the trial. It’s an unwelcome development for candidates who have pinned their presidential aspirations on a strong finish in the crucial first nominating contest on the Democratic primary calendar.
In interviews Wednesday as they headed to the Senate floor for opening arguments, Klobuchar and Warren did not dispute that being forced off the campaign trail less than two weeks before Iowa could handicap their 2020 prospects. But each described it as their moral duty to adjudicate impeachment articles charging Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
“This is my responsibility,” Warren said. “I took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution, and that’s why I’m here. Some things are more important than politics.”
Trial rules require senators to be on the floor for several hours at a time, Monday through Saturday, and prohibit the use of smartphones and other electronics, regulations that limit opportunities to engage with voters on television or via social media. Klobuchar, who has made headway in Iowa, is relying on prominent supporters in the state to stand in for her. The senator conceded she had no other choice.
“I am here doing my constitutional duty; the people of Iowa understand that,” Klobuchar said, noting that she had staffers standing in for her. “Having people on the ground that are people that see folks in the supermarket or at work — that matters.”
Sanders declined to comment. Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado also is seeking the Democratic nomination but is focused on the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary and is considered a long shot.
As House Democratic impeachment managers delivered arguments Wednesday, the scene in the Senate resembled a college lecture hall full of students occasionally engaged and interested but often bored and distracted.
Some senators appeared to be taking notes, while others read documents. Some stared motionless at the lectern, listening intently as arguments were made; some did the same while standing. Some stared elsewhere or looked as though they were nodding off. Some made quick conversation with their neighbor to the right or left; some disappeared into the cloakroom for minutes at a time.
Klobuchar and Warren mostly appeared to be reviewing documents or focusing on the House Democrat arguing from the well of the chamber at any given moment. Sanders was more often staring straight ahead, listening to the prosecutor.
Biden leads narrowly in Iowa with 21%, according to the RealClearPolitics average, followed by Sanders with 17.3%, Warren with 16.7%, Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, with 16.3%, and Klobuchar with 8.3%.
Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat backing Biden, downplayed the fallout his colleagues might experience in the caucuses as a result of the impeachment trial before suggesting the former vice president might profit.
“I don’t think, in the end, that’ll have a huge impact one way. … You’ve got lots of surrogates and advocates for the other candidates who will be out there,” Coons said. “But one of Joe’s greatest strengths is his ability to really connect with people, and time that he has to do town halls and retail campaigning obviously will be to his benefit.”