theguardian--2020-02-19--Trump calls for Roger Stone's conviction to be thrown out

Donald Trump has called for his longtime ally Roger Stone ’ s recent conviction for witness tampering and lying to Congress to be thrown out .
Trump ’ s barrage of Tuesday morning tweets comes days after his own attorney general , William Barr , sparked a furore over his apparent intervention in the case .
“ Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and , in my opinion , should be thrown out , ” one of Trump ’ s tweets said .
Trump tweeted the Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano ’ s comment that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Trump .
He called out Judge Amy Berman Jackson by name , saying almost any judge in the country would throw out the conviction .
The president also on Tuesday made the eye-popping , and false , claim that he is “ the chief law enforcement officer of the United States ” .
Many were quick to point out that Barr is in fact the chief law enforcement officer of the US government .
Trump made the remarks at a military base in Maryland , in response to reporters ’ questions on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent rebuke that Trump ’ s tweets “ make it impossible to do my job ” .
“ The attorney general is a man with incredible integrity , ” Trump said , but he refused to rule out the possibility of weighing in on Stone ’ s case .
“ Just so you understand , I chose not to be involved .
I ’ m allowed to be totally involved .
I ’ m actually , I guess , the chief law enforcement officer of the country .
But I ’ ve chosen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was not considered pardoning Stone but complained that his former associate was being treated “ very unfairly ” .
Stone was convicted in November of a seven-count indictment that accused him of lying to Congress , tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election .
Prosecutors had recommended a tough sentence of between seven to nine years in federal prison , but Barr reversed that decision and recommended a less harsh punishment , prompting the entire prosecution team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Holder , US attorney general under Barack Obama , said in a statement at the time that the conduct over Stone had “ put at risk the perceived – and real – neutral enforcement of our laws and , ultimately , endanger the fabric of our democracy ” .
Barr later denied that Trump ’ s Twitter denunciation of the sentencing recommendation had influenced his decision ; in an interview with ABC News , Barr said he had not been asked by Trump to look into the case .
But the highly unusual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 2,000 former justice department employees have signed an open letter calling for Barr ’ s resignation and expressing support of the four prosecutors .
Jackson said Stone ’ s sentencing would take place on Thursday , as planned .
There had been questions raised about a potential delay in sentencing , as Stone ’ s lawyers push for a new trial due to the allegations of anti-Trump bias of one of the jurors .
However , Jackson said the sentencing should occur as scheduled , while noting that its implementation may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s team .
Stone , 67 , is the sixth former Trump aide to be convicted in cases prompted by Robert Mueller ’ s Russia investigation .
In their court filing last Monday , the prosecutors had argued that Stone – who was found guilty in November of seven crimes including obstruction of justice , witness tampering and lying to Congress – has shown “ contempt for this court and the rule of law ” .
But the following day Trump claimed in a tweet : “ The real crimes were on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to them .
Can not allow this miscarriage of justice !
” Hours later , on Tuesday afternoon , a new court filing was released , proposing that the sentence guidelines for Stone be cut .
Defense attorneys for Stone last week filed a second motion for a new trial .
The first was rejected by Jackson last year .
Associated Press contributed to this report


theguardian--2020-02-19--The white swan harbingers of global economic crisis are already here | Nouriel Roubini

In my 2010 book , Crisis Economics , I defined financial crises not as the “ black swan ” events that Nassim Nicholas Taleb described in his eponymous bestseller but as “ white swans ” .
According to Taleb , black swans are events that emerge unpredictably , like a tornado , from a fat-tailed statistical distribution .
But I argued that financial crises , at least , are more like hurricanes : they are the predictable result of builtup economic and financial vulnerabilities and policy mistakes .
There are times when we should expect the system to reach a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” – when a boom and a bubble turn into a crash and a bust .
Such events are not about the “ unknown unknowns ” but rather the “ known unknowns ” .
Beyond the usual economic and policy risks that most financial analysts worry about , a number of potentially seismic white swans are visible on the horizon this year .
Any of them could trigger severe economic , financial , political and geopolitical disturbances unlike anything since the 2008 crisis .
For starters , the US is locked in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ implicitly aligned revisionist powers : China , Russia , Iran and North Korea .
These countries all have an interest in challenging the US-led global order and 2020 could be a critical year for them , owing to the US presidential election and the potential change in US global policies that could follow .
Under Donald Trump , the US is trying to contain or even trigger regime change in these four countries through economic sanctions and other means .
Similarly , the four revisionists want to undercut American hard and soft power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through asymmetric warfare .
If the US election descends into partisan rancour , chaos , disputed vote tallies and accusations of “ rigged ” elections , so much the better for rivals of the US .
A breakdown of the US political system would weaken American power abroad .
Moreover , some countries have a particular interest in removing Trump .
The acute threat that he poses to the Iranian regime gives it every reason to escalate the conflict with the US in the coming months – even if it means risking a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ensuing spike in oil prices would crash the US stock market , trigger a recession , and sink Trump ’ s re-election prospects .
Yes , the consensus view is that the targeted killing of Qassem Suleimani has deterred Iran but that argument misunderstands the regime ’ s perverse incentives .
War between US and Iran is likely this year ; the current calm is the one before the proverbial storm .
As for US-China relations , the recent phase one deal is a temporary Band-Aid .
The bilateral cold war over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and finance is already escalating sharply .
The Covid-19 outbreak has reinforced the position of those in the US arguing for containment and lent further momentum to the broader trend of Sino-American “ decoupling ” .
More immediately , the epidemic is likely to be more severe than currently expected and the disruption to the Chinese economy will have spillover effects on global supply chains – including pharma inputs , of which China is a critical supplier – and business confidence , all of which will likely be more severe than financial markets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sino-American cold war is by definition a low-intensity conflict , a sharp escalation is likely this year .
To some Chinese leaders , it can not be a coincidence that their country is simultaneously experiencing a massive swine flu outbreak , severe bird flu , a coronavirus outbreak , political unrest in Hong Kong , the re-election of Taiwan ’ s pro-independence president , and stepped-up US naval operations in the East and South China Seas .
Regardless of whether China has only itself to blame for some of these crises , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conspiratorial .
But open aggression is not really an option at this point , given the asymmetry of conventional power .
China ’ s immediate response to US containment efforts will likely take the form of cyberwarfare .
There are several obvious targets .
Chinese hackers ( and their Russian , North Korean , and Iranian counterparts ) could interfere in the US election by flooding Americans with misinformation and deep fakes .
With the US electorate already so polarised , it is not difficult to imagine armed partisans taking to the streets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious violence and chaos .
Revisionist powers could also attack the US and western financial systems – including the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication ( Swift ) platform .
Already , the European Central Bank president , Christine Lagarde , has warned that a cyber-attack on European financial markets could cost $ 645bn ( £496.2bn ) .
And security officials have expressed similar concerns about the US , where an even wider range of telecommunication infrastructure is potentially vulnerable .
By next year , the US-China conflict could have escalated from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A Chinese regime and economy severely damaged by the Covid-19 crisis and facing restless masses will need an external scapegoat , and will likely set its sights on Taiwan , Hong Kong , Vietnam and US naval positions in the East and South China Seas ; confrontation could creep into escalating military accidents .
It could also pursue the financial “ nuclear option ” of dumping its holdings of US Treasury bonds if escalation does take place .
Because US assets comprise such a large share of China ’ s ( and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ) foreign reserves , the Chinese are increasingly worried that such assets could be frozen through US sanctions ( like those already used against Iran and North Korea ) .
Of course , dumping US Treasuries would impede China ’ s economic growth if dollar assets were sold and converted back into renminbi ( which would appreciate ) .
But China could diversify its reserves by converting them into another liquid asset that is less vulnerable to US primary or secondary sanctions , namely gold .
Indeed , China and Russia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and covertly ) , which explains the 30 % spike in gold prices since early 2019 .
In a sell-off scenario , the capital gains on gold would compensate for any loss incurred from dumping US Treasuries , whose yields would spike as their market price and value fell .
So far , China and Russia ’ s shift into gold has occurred slowly , leaving Treasury yields unaffected .
But if this diversification strategy accelerates , as is likely , it could trigger a shock in the US Treasuries market , possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US .
The US , of course , will not sit idly by while coming under asymmetric attack .
It has already been increasing the pressure on these countries with sanctions and other forms of trade and financial warfare , not to mention its own world-beating cyberwarfare capabilities .
US cyber-attacks against the four rivals will continue to intensify this year , raising the risk of the first-ever cyber world war and massive economic , financial and political disorder .
Looking beyond the risk of severe geopolitical escalations in 2020 , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change , which could trigger costly environmental disasters .
Climate change is not just a lumbering giant that will cause economic and financial havoc decades from now .
It is a threat in the here and now , as demonstrated by the growing frequency and severity of extreme weather events .
In addition to climate change , there is evidence that separate , deeper seismic events are under way , leading to rapid global movements in magnetic polarity and accelerating ocean currents .
Any one of these developments could augur an environmental white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tipping points ” such as the collapse of major ice sheets in Antarctica or Greenland in the next few years .
We already know that underwater volcanic activity is increasing ; what if that trend translates into rapid marine acidification and the depletion of global fish stocks upon which billions of people rely ?
As of early 2020 , this is where we stand : the US and Iran have already had a military confrontation that will likely soon escalate ; China is in the grip of a viral outbreak that could become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; major holders of US Treasuries are pursuing diversification strategies ; the Democratic presidential primary is exposing rifts in the opposition to Trump and already casting doubt on vote-counting processes ; rivalries between the US and four revisionist powers are escalating ; and the real-world costs of climate change and other environmental trends are mounting .
This list is hardly exhaustive but it points to what one can reasonably expect for 2020 .
Financial markets , meanwhile , remain blissfully in denial of the risks , convinced that a calm if not happy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• Nouriel Roubini is a professor at NYU ’ s Stern School of Business and was senior economist for international affairs in the Clinton White House ’ s Council of Economic Advisers .
He has worked for the IMF , the US Federal Reserve and the World Bank .

In my 2010 book, Crisis Economics, I defined financial crises not as the “black swan” events that Nassim Nicholas Taleb described in his eponymous bestseller but as “white swans”. According to Taleb, black swans are events that emerge unpredictably, like a tornado, from a fat-tailed statistical distribution. But I argued that financial crises, at least, are more like hurricanes: they are the predictable result of builtup economic and financial vulnerabilities and policy mistakes.
There are times when we should expect the system to reach a tipping point – the “Minsky Moment” – when a boom and a bubble turn into a crash and a bust. Such events are not about the “unknown unknowns” but rather the “known unknowns”.
Beyond the usual economic and policy risks that most financial analysts worry about, a number of potentially seismic white swans are visible on the horizon this year. Any of them could trigger severe economic, financial, political and geopolitical disturbances unlike anything since the 2008 crisis.
For starters, the US is locked in an escalating strategic rivalry with at least four implicitly aligned revisionist powers: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. These countries all have an interest in challenging the US-led global order and 2020 could be a critical year for them, owing to the US presidential election and the potential change in US global policies that could follow.
Under Donald Trump, the US is trying to contain or even trigger regime change in these four countries through economic sanctions and other means. Similarly, the four revisionists want to undercut American hard and soft power abroad by destabilising the US from within through asymmetric warfare. If the US election descends into partisan rancour, chaos, disputed vote tallies and accusations of “rigged” elections, so much the better for rivals of the US. A breakdown of the US political system would weaken American power abroad.
Moreover, some countries have a particular interest in removing Trump. The acute threat that he poses to the Iranian regime gives it every reason to escalate the conflict with the US in the coming months – even if it means risking a full-scale war – on the chance that the ensuing spike in oil prices would crash the US stock market, trigger a recession, and sink Trump’s re-election prospects. Yes, the consensus view is that the targeted killing of Qassem Suleimani has deterred Iran but that argument misunderstands the regime’s perverse incentives. War between US and Iran is likely this year; the current calm is the one before the proverbial storm.
As for US-China relations, the recent phase one deal is a temporary Band-Aid. The bilateral cold war over technology, data, investment, currency and finance is already escalating sharply. The Covid-19 outbreak has reinforced the position of those in the US arguing for containment and lent further momentum to the broader trend of Sino-American “decoupling”. More immediately, the epidemic is likely to be more severe than currently expected and the disruption to the Chinese economy will have spillover effects on global supply chains – including pharma inputs, of which China is a critical supplier – and business confidence, all of which will likely be more severe than financial markets’ current complacency suggests.
Although the Sino-American cold war is by definition a low-intensity conflict, a sharp escalation is likely this year. To some Chinese leaders, it cannot be a coincidence that their country is simultaneously experiencing a massive swine flu outbreak, severe bird flu, a coronavirus outbreak, political unrest in Hong Kong, the re-election of Taiwan’s pro-independence president, and stepped-up US naval operations in the East and South China Seas. Regardless of whether China has only itself to blame for some of these crises, the view in Beijing is veering toward the conspiratorial.
But open aggression is not really an option at this point, given the asymmetry of conventional power. China’s immediate response to US containment efforts will likely take the form of cyberwarfare. There are several obvious targets. Chinese hackers (and their Russian, North Korean, and Iranian counterparts) could interfere in the US election by flooding Americans with misinformation and deep fakes. With the US electorate already so polarised, it is not difficult to imagine armed partisans taking to the streets to challenge the results, leading to serious violence and chaos.
Revisionist powers could also attack the US and western financial systems – including the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift) platform. Already, the European Central Bank president, Christine Lagarde, has warned that a cyber-attack on European financial markets could cost $645bn (£496.2bn). And security officials have expressed similar concerns about the US, where an even wider range of telecommunication infrastructure is potentially vulnerable.
By next year, the US-China conflict could have escalated from a cold war to a near hot one. A Chinese regime and economy severely damaged by the Covid-19 crisis and facing restless masses will need an external scapegoat, and will likely set its sights on Taiwan, Hong Kong, Vietnam and US naval positions in the East and South China Seas; confrontation could creep into escalating military accidents. It could also pursue the financial “nuclear option” of dumping its holdings of US Treasury bonds if escalation does take place. Because US assets comprise such a large share of China’s (and, to a lesser extent, Russia’s) foreign reserves, the Chinese are increasingly worried that such assets could be frozen through US sanctions (like those already used against Iran and North Korea).
Of course, dumping US Treasuries would impede China’s economic growth if dollar assets were sold and converted back into renminbi (which would appreciate). But China could diversify its reserves by converting them into another liquid asset that is less vulnerable to US primary or secondary sanctions, namely gold. Indeed, China and Russia have been stockpiling gold reserves (overtly and covertly), which explains the 30% spike in gold prices since early 2019.
In a sell-off scenario, the capital gains on gold would compensate for any loss incurred from dumping US Treasuries, whose yields would spike as their market price and value fell. So far, China and Russia’s shift into gold has occurred slowly, leaving Treasury yields unaffected. But if this diversification strategy accelerates, as is likely, it could trigger a shock in the US Treasuries market, possibly leading to a sharp economic slowdown in the US.
The US, of course, will not sit idly by while coming under asymmetric attack. It has already been increasing the pressure on these countries with sanctions and other forms of trade and financial warfare, not to mention its own world-beating cyberwarfare capabilities. US cyber-attacks against the four rivals will continue to intensify this year, raising the risk of the first-ever cyber world war and massive economic, financial and political disorder.
Looking beyond the risk of severe geopolitical escalations in 2020, there are additional medium-term risks associated with climate change, which could trigger costly environmental disasters. Climate change is not just a lumbering giant that will cause economic and financial havoc decades from now. It is a threat in the here and now, as demonstrated by the growing frequency and severity of extreme weather events.
Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk
In addition to climate change, there is evidence that separate, deeper seismic events are under way, leading to rapid global movements in magnetic polarity and accelerating ocean currents. Any one of these developments could augur an environmental white swan event, as could climatic “tipping points” such as the collapse of major ice sheets in Antarctica or Greenland in the next few years. We already know that underwater volcanic activity is increasing; what if that trend translates into rapid marine acidification and the depletion of global fish stocks upon which billions of people rely?
As of early 2020, this is where we stand: the US and Iran have already had a military confrontation that will likely soon escalate; China is in the grip of a viral outbreak that could become a global pandemic; cyberwarfare is ongoing; major holders of US Treasuries are pursuing diversification strategies; the Democratic presidential primary is exposing rifts in the opposition to Trump and already casting doubt on vote-counting processes; rivalries between the US and four revisionist powers are escalating; and the real-world costs of climate change and other environmental trends are mounting.
This list is hardly exhaustive but it points to what one can reasonably expect for 2020. Financial markets, meanwhile, remain blissfully in denial of the risks, convinced that a calm if not happy year awaits major economies and global markets.
Nouriel Roubini is a professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business and was senior economist for international affairs in the Clinton White House’s Council of Economic Advisers. He has worked for the IMF, the US Federal Reserve and the World Bank.
© Project Syndicate


theguardian--2020-02-20--Trump hints at pardon as Roger Stone sentencing looms - live updates

Bernie Sanders also came under attack from his opponents during last night ’ s debate , the first since Sanders became the definitive frontrunner in the race .
Pete Buttigieg , in particular , criticized Sanders for not doing enough to chastize his online supporters , some of whom engaged in “ vicious attacks ” against Nevada ’ s Culinary Union after the organizion came out against Medicare-for-all .
“ Leadership isn ’ t just about policy , ” Buttigieg told Sanders .
“ I think you have to accept some responsibility and ask yourself what it is about your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ motivating this behavior more than others.
” Sanders said he condemned the “ few people who make ugly remarks ” online , but he added , “ All of us remember 2016 , and what we remember is efforts by Russians and others to try to interfere in our election and divide us up .
I ’ m not saying that ’ s happening , but it would not shock me.
” But Twitter said in a statement that it would have disclosed any evidence of Russian disinformation campaign to sully the reputation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology and human review in concert , we proactively monitor Twitter to identify attempts at platform manipulation and mitigate them , ” a Twitter spokesperson told CNBC .
“ As is standard , if we have reasonable evidence of state-backed information operations , we ’ ll disclose them following our thorough investigation to our public archive — the largest of its kind in the industry .
”

Joan E Greve in Washington (now) Martin Belam  (earlier)

21 Feb 2020 03.04 GMT Late evening summary It was another evening of late-breaking news. Here’s a summary as our live politics coverage ends for the night: House members were reportedly warned by intelligence officials last week that Russia is interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get Trump re-elected, the New York Times and the Washington Post reported. The account Trump heard of the briefing reportedly enraged him, prompting him to lash out at his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire , who had expected to stay in the position.
re-elected, the New York Times and the Washington Post reported. The account Trump heard of the briefing reportedly enraged him, prompting him to lash out at his acting director of national intelligence, , who had expected to stay in the position. Instead, Trump replaced Maguire with Richard Grenell, a hardcore Trump loyalist, the current US ambassador to Germany, and a person with no intelligence experience.
a hardcore Trump loyalist, the current US ambassador to Germany, and a person with no intelligence experience. One sign of how Grenell will operate in this role: one of his new senior advisers, in his new role as the top intelligence official for the Trump White House, is Kash Patel, a former Hill staffer who made his reputation as the lead author of a Republican report “questioning the conduct of FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference,” Politico reported.
a former Hill staffer who made his reputation as the lead author of a Republican report “questioning the conduct of FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference,” Politico reported. Also: among the new information reportedly shared with lawmakers at the House intelligence briefing: “Russia intends to interfere with the ongoing Democratic primaries as well as the general election,” the Times reported.
as well as the general election,” the Times reported. Meanwhile: Democrats discussed what they will do if Bernie Sanders wins the most voters in the Democratic primary, but not an outright majority of votes, a contentious issue.
wins the most voters in the Democratic primary, but not an outright majority of votes, a contentious issue. Elizabeth Warren renewed her demand that Michael Bloomberg release former employees who sued him or his company from their non-disclosure agreements, so they can speak promptly and publicly about the behavior that prompted their lawsuits.
renewed her demand that release former employees who sued him or his company from their non-disclosure agreements, so they can speak promptly and publicly about the behavior that prompted their lawsuits. At a rally in Colorado, Trump complained that Parasite, a South Korean film, had won the best picture Oscar. “Can we get Gone with the Wind back. please?” he asked.
21 Feb 2020 02.32 GMT Elizabeth Warren is not done with her demans that Michael Bloomberg, billionaire former New York mayor and late entrant into the 2020 Democratic primary, release former employees who have brought lawsuits against Bloomberg and his company from their nondisclosure agreements. The goal, Warren has said: allowing women to talk candidly about the behavior that prompted the lawsuits, and ensuring transparency in the primary. Elizabeth Warren opens her CNN town hall by saying she brought something with her -- a contract she wrote up that she says would release former Bloomberg employees from NDAs.
"I used to teach contract law... All he has to do is sign it. I’ll text it." — Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) February 21, 2020
21 Feb 2020 01.27 GMT Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner, speaking alongside the president at a rally for Trump supporters in Colorado Springs, is now attacking “the normalization of socialism by Bernie Sanders.” Gardner, facing a rocky path to reelection this year, pledged to fight hard to keep Republican control of the Senate and the White House. “They want to take our guns. They want to take our healthcare. That’s their platform,” Gardner said of the Democratic Party.
21 Feb 2020 01.22 GMT Former Senate majority leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told the Washington Post that none of the Democratic presidential primary candidates should get the nomination with less than a majority of delegates. Reid was pushing back on “suggestions from Sanders and his supporters that he should become the nominee if he finishes with a plurality lead ahead of the still large pack of candidates,” the Post reported. “Reid even suggested that a group of moderate candidates, trailing Sanders overall, could assemble a coalition ahead of the Democratic convention in July in Milwaukee to hand the nomination to someone else.” Bloomberg’s campaign has already been pushing to position himself as a candidate who could benefit from the support of other “moderate” candidates like Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg in this situation, Politico reported earlier today. Harry Reid still doesn't mince words, on Bernie or anything:
“Let’s say that he has 35 percent. Well, 65 percent he doesn’t have. ... I do not believe anyone should get the nomination unless they have 50-plus-one.”
1st cut from HMR-PK talk. https://t.co/Gh7IycMtTy — Paul Kane (@pkcapitol) February 21, 2020
21 Feb 2020 01.04 GMT A group co-founded by Hollywood actor Eva Longoria and DNC Finance Chair Henry R. Muñoz III has endorsed Joe Biden for president. NEW: @latinovictoryus announces they are endorsing @JoeBiden for President, just 2 days ahead of the Nevada caucuses
"Our country will need an experienced leader who will hit the ground running on day one, and that candidate is Vice President Biden,” the groups chair says — Johnny Verhovek (@JTHVerhovek) February 21, 2020
21 Feb 2020 00.57 GMT A Democratic political strategist notes that Trump’s praise at this Colorado Springs rally for Sen. Cory Gardner, a Colorado Republican facing a tough reelection campaign, will likely be used in attack ads against him. “Cory was with us all the way. He didn’t move, he didn’t budge,” Trump added later in the speech, saluting Gardner for voting against impeaching him, a vote that was reportedly a tough one for Gardner. Coming soon to a million Democratic ads this fall! https://t.co/oKDjNq59bX — Emmy Bengtson (@EmmyA2) February 21, 2020
21 Feb 2020 00.45 GMT President Trump is now at a rally in Colorado complaining that the Oscar for Best Picture went to Parasite, a film from South Korea, and complaining that the country has trade problems with South Korea. “Can we get Gone with the Wind back please?” Trump asked. Trump goes off on the Oscars for giving Best Picture to Parasite because it's a South Korean movie pic.twitter.com/GUGKdExTbw — Claudia Koerner (@ClaudiaKoerner) February 21, 2020
Updated at 00.49 GMT
21 Feb 2020 00.37 GMT John Brennan, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency and a prominent public critic of Donald Trump, weighs in on the significance of the new report about Trump being furious about an intelligence briefing for members of Congress that included the conclusion that Russia is still attempting to interfere in the 2020 election with the goal of supporting him. We are now in a full-blown national security crisis. By trying to prevent the flow of intelligence to Congress, Trump is abetting a Russian covert operation to keep him in office for Moscow’s interests, not America’s. https://t.co/Vj6lUV5ZNu — John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) February 21, 2020
21 Feb 2020 00.30 GMT “Russia intends to interfere with the ongoing Democratic primaries as well as the general election.” That’s key new information that House lawmakers heard during an intelligence briefing last week, according to the New York Times. The briefing, which reportedly angered the president, once again conveyed to lawmakers the conclusion from intelligence officials that Russia was interfering in the election with goal of electing Trump. Last week’s briefing did contain what appeared to be new information, according to NYT, including that Russia intends to interfere with the ongoing Democratic primaries as well as the general election. https://t.co/NEdqx6ee8b — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) February 21, 2020
20 Feb 2020 23.30 GMT Mike Bloomberg is quietly lobbying Democratic Party officials and donors allied with moderate opponents like Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg to flip their allegiance to him —and defeat Bernie Sanders — if Democrats fail to choose a presidential nominee during the first round of voting, Politico reports. “It’s a presumptuous play for a candidate who hasn’t yet won a delegate or even appeared on a ballot,” Politico’s David Siders writes. “And it could also bring havoc to the convention, raising the prospect of party insiders delivering the nomination to a billionaire over a progressive populist.” if Bernie Sanders goes into the Democratic National Convention with a plurality and Mike Bloomberg signs up superdelegates to wrest it away from him, as this story suggests, I am genuinely uncertain what will happen to the Democratic Party https://t.co/SHasxfe5Hv — Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) February 20, 2020
20 Feb 2020 23.19 GMT A heavily edited video posted by the Bloomberg campaign to Instagram on Thursday paints a flattering, and false, portrait of the former New York mayor’s widely panned debate performance. My colleague Kari Paul reports on how tech companies are responding to this kind of misleading political content. Facebook and Instagram: nothing. Twitter: would be flagged as misleading... under a new policy that hasn’t started yet. Twitter told me this video should be flagged as misleading under its new policy regarding disinformation, but that policy doesn't go into effect until March 5 https://t.co/WXoqWPZJaS https://t.co/xtB2ttGLuu — Kari Paul (@kari_paul) February 20, 2020
20 Feb 2020 23.10 GMT The Washington Post obtained a recording of a private speech in London at which the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, said that the United States desperately needs more immigrants to fuel its economy, a position starkly different from the senior White House adviser Stephen Miller and others who have pushed to reduce any kind of immigration.
“We are desperate – desperate – for more people,” Mulvaney said, according to the Post. “We are running out of people to fuel the economic growth that we’ve had in our nation over the last four years. We need more immigrants.” The Trump administration wants those immigrants to come in a “legal fashion”, Mulvaney said, according to the Post. "We are desperate -- desperate -- for more people," Mulvaney said during private speech in London. "We are running out of people to fuel the economic growth that we’ve had in our nation over the last four years. We need more immigrants.” w/@nickmiroff: https://t.co/q1WtDMYYwd — Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) February 20, 2020
Updated at 23.15 GMT
20 Feb 2020 22.13 GMT House members reportedly told Russia interfering in 2020 election House members were reportedly warned by intelligence officials last week that Russia is interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get Trump re-elected, mirroring the country’s meddling in the 2016 race. The New York Times reports: The day after the Feb. 13 briefing to lawmakers, Mr. Trump berated Joseph Maguire, the outgoing acting director of national intelligence, for allowing it to take place, people familiar with the exchange said. Mr. Trump cited the presence in the briefing of Representative Adam B. Schiff, the California Democrat who led the impeachment proceedings against him, as a particular irritant.
During the briefing to the House Intelligence Committee, Mr. Trump’s allies challenged the conclusions, arguing that Mr. Trump has been tough on Russia and strengthened European security. Some intelligence officials viewed the briefing as a tactical error, saying that had the official who delivered the conclusion spoken less pointedly or left it out, they would have avoided angering the Republicans. That intelligence official, Shelby Pierson, is an aide to Mr. Maguire who has a reputation of delivering intelligence in somewhat blunt terms. The president announced on Wednesday that he was replacing Mr. Maguire with Richard Grenell, the ambassador to Germany and long an aggressively vocal Trump supporter. The Washington Post reported earlier today about the confrontation between Trump and Maguire, but the content of the intelligence briefing was not previously known. Trump has repeatedly pushed back against the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 race to help him defeat Hillary Clinton. During the impeachment inquiry and trial, some of the president’s allies tried to peddle the baseless conspiracy theory that it was actually Ukraine who meddled in the 2016 race. That claim was dismissed by Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia expert, as a “fictional narrative” pushed by Vladimir Putin’s government.
Updated at 23.15 GMT
20 Feb 2020 22.03 GMT Evening summary That’s it from me today. My west coast colleague, Lois Beckett, will take over the blog for the next few hours. Here’s where the day stands so far: Trump said he would not yet pardon Roger Stone, his former associate who was sentenced to 40 months in prison today, and would instead wait for “the process to play out”. But the president added he thinks Stone has a “very good chance of exoneration”.
said he would not yet pardon his former associate who was sentenced to 40 months in prison today, and would instead wait for “the process to play out”. But the president added he thinks Stone has a “very good chance of exoneration”. While delivering Stone’s sentence, Judge Amy Berman Jackson denounced Stone’s actions and warned that his disregard for the truth represented “a threat to the very foundation of this democracy”.
denounced Stone’s actions and warned that his disregard for the truth represented “a threat to the very foundation of this democracy”. Trump reportedly lashed out against the acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire last week, after one of his staffers privately testified to the House intelligence committee on election security. The president announced yesterday that Richard Grenell, the US ambassador to Germany and a Trump loyalist, would replace Maguire.
last week, after one of his staffers privately testified to the House intelligence committee on election security. The president announced yesterday that the US ambassador to Germany and a Trump loyalist, would replace Maguire. Nearly 20 million people, a new record for a Democratic primary debate, watched last night’s event. That could be bad news for Mike Bloomberg, whose first debate performance was widely panned. Lois will have more coming up, so stay tuned.
Updated at 23.16 GMT
20 Feb 2020 21.49 GMT Coming off her strong debate performance, Elizabeth Warren said her campaign has raised more than $5 million since she took the stage last night. Since I stepped on the #DemDebate stage, our grassroots campaign has raised more than $5 million. We’ve not only reached our critical goal of raising $7 million before the Nevada caucuses—we're now raising it to $12 million. I'm so grateful. Keep it up! https://t.co/9kjAWYs2zq — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) February 20, 2020 Warren had set a goal of raising $7 million before Saturday’s Nevada caucuses, and she is now raising that number to $12 million. But Warren is also attracting some criticism today for refusing to distance herself from a new super PAC supporting her candidacy. NEW: Here is video of Warren declining to disavow the new super PAC supporting her:
“If all the candidates want to get rid of super PACs, count me in. I'll lead the charge. But that's how it has to be. It can't be the case that a bunch of people keep them and only 1 or 2 don’t.” pic.twitter.com/byxQRjGMfs — Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) February 20, 2020 The Massachusetts senator said she would support all the candidates disavowing super PACs but would not be the sole opponent. (This comes after Warren previously said she would reject the groups’ support.)
20 Feb 2020 21.30 GMT Shortly after Roger Stone was sentenced today, senator Lindsey Graham tweeted that Trump “has all the legal authority in the world to review this case.” This presidential power is available to all presidents in all cases brought before our justice system.
This is the way our legal system is intended to work and provides a brilliant and intricate system of checks and balances we should all honor. — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) February 20, 2020 The tweet was read as a possible indication that Trump’s congressional allies will not push back much if the president chooses to pardon his former associate. In contrast, House intelligence committee chairman Adam Schiff said such a move would be a “breathtaking act of corruption.”


theguardian--2020-02-20--Trump to reportedly appoint loyalist Richard Grenell to oversee spy agencies

Donald Trump has appointed the US ambassador to Germany , a combative loyalist , to his administration ’ s most senior intelligence post , in his continuing effort to wield personal control over the spy agencies , according to multiple US reports .
By making Richard Grenell acting director of national intelligence ( DNI ) , rather than nominating him for the permanent position , Trump has sidestepped the need for Senate confirmation , a loophole the president has increasingly exploited as he has moved to replace career officials with those chosen for their personal loyalty .
The move marks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Since the position was established in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to coordinate the 17 intelligence agencies , the office of the director of national intelligence has been viewed as non-partisan , and generally occupied by career professionals .
The current acting DNI , Joseph Maguire , is a retired vice-admiral and former head of the National Counterterrorism Center .
Grenell does not have a background in intelligence or the armed services , but the White House statement confirming the appointment claimed Grenell had “ years of experience ” working with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special envoy to Serbia and Kosovo peace talks ( a job he was given in October ) and while he was spokesman at the US mission to the UN from 2001 to 2008 .
“ He is committed to a non-political , non-partisan approach as head of the intelligence community , on which our safety and security depend , ” the statement said .
Until now Grenell has been best known as a Twitter warrior , lashing out at critics of the Trump administration with a ferocity that captured the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outspoken advocate of LGBT rights , and has made the issue part of his brief as ambassador .
According to some reports , he would remain ambassador to Berlin and special envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations while overseeing the US intelligence agencies .
The president has been a bitter critic of the intelligence agencies , particularly when their assessments were at odds with his own – about Iran and North Korea , for example .
He once derided agency chiefs as “ passive and naive ” .
His denunciations became so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ giving public briefings to Congress over national security threats .
“ The president has selected an individual without any intelligence experience to serve as the leader of the nation ’ s intelligence community in an acting capacity , ” Mark Warner , the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee , said , noting that Grenell was the second acting director in the post since the resignation of the last Senate-confirmed DNI , Dan Coats , last summer .
Warner said that the acting appointments were an apparent “ effort to sidestep the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and consent on such critical national security positions , and flouting the clear intent of Congress when it established the office of the director of national intelligence in 2004 ” .
“ This should frighten you , ” the former National Security Agency lawyer Susan Hennessey said on Twitter .
“ Not just brazen politicization of intelligence , but also someone who is utterly incompetent in an important security role .
The guardrails are gone.
” After Coats ’ s resignation in July , Trump attempted to replace him with an outspoken Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Ratcliffe was forced to stand down in the face of bipartisan scepticism over his qualifications in the Senate and revelations that he had exaggerated his experience in his official biography .

Donald Trump has appointed the US ambassador to Germany, a combative loyalist, to his administration’s most senior intelligence post, in his continuing effort to wield personal control over the spy agencies, according to multiple US reports.
By making Richard Grenell acting director of national intelligence (DNI), rather than nominating him for the permanent position, Trump has sidestepped the need for Senate confirmation, a loophole the president has increasingly exploited as he has moved to replace career officials with those chosen for their personal loyalty.
The move marks a radical break from past practice. Since the position was established in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to coordinate the 17 intelligence agencies, the office of the director of national intelligence has been viewed as non-partisan, and generally occupied by career professionals. The current acting DNI, Joseph Maguire, is a retired vice-admiral and former head of the National Counterterrorism Center.
Grenell does not have a background in intelligence or the armed services, but the White House statement confirming the appointment claimed Grenell had “years of experience” working with the intelligence community in other jobs, as special envoy to Serbia and Kosovo peace talks (a job he was given in October) and while he was spokesman at the US mission to the UN from 2001 to 2008.
“He is committed to a non-political, non-partisan approach as head of the intelligence community, on which our safety and security depend,” the statement said.
Until now Grenell has been best known as a Twitter warrior, lashing out at critics of the Trump administration with a ferocity that captured the president’s attention.
Grenell has also been an outspoken advocate of LGBT rights, and has made the issue part of his brief as ambassador.
According to some reports, he will remain ambassador to Berlin and special envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations while overseeing the US intelligence agencies. Neither the state department nor the White House would comment on those reports on Thursday.
The president has been a bitter critic of the intelligence agencies, particularly when their assessments were at odds with his own – about Iran and North Korea, for example. He once derided agency chiefs as “passive and naive”. His denunciations became so acerbic that the agency chiefs have stopped giving public briefings to Congress over national security threats.
“The president has selected an individual without any intelligence experience to serve as the leader of the nation’s intelligence community in an acting capacity,” Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, said, noting that Grenell was the second acting director in the post since the resignation of the last Senate-confirmed DNI, Dan Coats, last summer.
Warner said that the acting appointments were an apparent “effort to sidestep the Senate’s constitutional authority to advise and consent on such critical national security positions, and flouting the clear intent of Congress when it established the office of the director of national intelligence in 2004”.
“This should frighten you,” the former National Security Agency lawyer Susan Hennessey said on Twitter. “Not just brazen politicization of intelligence, but also someone who is utterly incompetent in an important security role. The guardrails are gone.”
After Coats’s resignation in July, Trump attempted to replace him with an outspoken Republican partisan, the congressman John Ratcliffe, but Ratcliffe was forced to stand down in the face of bipartisan scepticism over his qualifications in the Senate and revelations that he had exaggerated his experience in his official biography.


theguardian--2020-02-20--John Bolton rebuked for withholding Trump testimony in new public event

Former national security adviser John Bolton faced a roasting from one of his predecessors on Wednesday night , in his second public appearance since the conclusion of Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
Bolton , speaking alongside Susan Rice at a lecture series at Vanderbilt University , was taken to task by his co-speaker , who served as national security adviser under Barack Obama .
Rice criticized Bolton for refusing to testify before the House of Representatives during the impeachment hearings .
It later emerged that Bolton has documented , in a forthcoming book , evidence regarding Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide on the record .
“ I can ’ t imagine withholding my testimony with or without a subpoena , ” Rice said at the Vanderbilt event , according to CNN reporter Jennifer Hansler .
“ I would feel like I was shamefully violating the oath that I took to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.
” Bolton refused to give testimony during the House impeachment hearings late last year .
In January he said he was prepared to testify , if subpoenaed , in the Senate trial , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing from new witnesses .
At the Vanderbilt event , Bolton said , according to the Vanderbilt Hustler student newspaper : “ I said I would testify if subpoenaed .
My position is exactly the same as Joe Biden.
” Rice reportedly responded : “ Except Joe Biden didn ’ t have firsthand knowledge about what transpired with Ukraine.
” Vanderbilt said ahead of the event it would not be livestreamed , and no audio of the event was provided online .
“ When I was the sitting national security adviser in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ front of the House select committee about Benghazi , ” Rice said , according to the Hustler .
“ The last thing I wanted to do was take time away from my duty as national security adviser .
But I did so voluntarily .
I wasn ’ t subpoenaed.
” Bolton ’ s appearance came after an event at Duke University on Monday , where he said he was facing “ censorship ” from the White House , which he claimed was trying to block publication of his book .
According to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I don ’ t understanding using [ White House ] pre-clearance as a reason to not be forthcoming.
” Bolton , who left the White House in September , gave a series of teasers on Monday about what his forthcoming book might contain , in one instance referring an audience member to a specific chapter of the book .
“ For all the focus on Ukraine and the impeachment trial and all that , to me , there are portions of the manuscript that deal with Ukraine , I view that like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in terms of what ’ s in the book , ” Bolton said , according to the New York Times .
Bolton is said to have written that Trump spoke to him about withholding aid to Ukraine until they agreed to investigate Joe Biden and his son , Hunter Biden .
After being criticized for remaining coy over national security matters until publishing them in a commercially published book , Bolton seemed keen to tamp down his sales pitch on Wednesday .
“ I didn ’ t come here to promote the book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an interview published before his onstage appearance .
“ I ’ m not going to talk about the book in part because it ’ s still in the pre-publication review process .
And to avoid criticism that I ’ m simply out talking [ about ] the book , which I am not.
” The New York Times has previously shared details from a draft of Bolton ’ s book .
In it , Bolton affirmed that Trump was intent on withholding military aid to Ukraine until it helped investigate Democrats and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Trump .
Bolton is also said to have written that Trump was granting favors to the leaders of Turkey and China , claims the justice department has denied .
In January the White House , having received a copy of Bolton ’ s book , said it “ appears to contain significant amounts of classified information ” , and said it could not be published until certain details are removed .
Bolton ’ s lawyers dispute that any information in the book could be considered classified .

Former national security adviser John Bolton faced a roasting from one of his predecessors on Wednesday night, in his second public appearance since the conclusion of Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.
Bolton, speaking alongside Susan Rice at a lecture series at Vanderbilt University, was taken to task by his co-speaker, who served as national security adviser under Barack Obama.
Rice criticized Bolton for refusing to testify before the House of Representatives during the impeachment hearings. It later emerged that Bolton has documented, in a forthcoming book, evidence regarding Trump and Ukraine that Democrats had sought him to provide on the record.
“I can’t imagine withholding my testimony with or without a subpoena,” Rice said at the Vanderbilt event, according to CNN reporter Jennifer Hansler.
“I would feel like I was shamefully violating the oath that I took to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”
Bolton refused to give testimony during the House impeachment hearings late last year. In January he said he was prepared to testify, if subpoenaed, in the Senate trial, where Republicans – as expected – voted against hearing from new witnesses.
At the Vanderbilt event, Bolton said, according to the Vanderbilt Hustler student newspaper: “I said I would testify if subpoenaed. My position is exactly the same as Joe Biden.”
Rice reportedly responded: “Except Joe Biden didn’t have firsthand knowledge about what transpired with Ukraine.”
Vanderbilt said ahead of the event it would not be livestreamed, and no audio of the event was provided online.
“When I was the sitting national security adviser in 2016, I was called to testify in front of the House select committee about Benghazi,” Rice said, according to the Hustler. “The last thing I wanted to do was take time away from my duty as national security adviser. But I did so voluntarily. I wasn’t subpoenaed.”
Bolton’s appearance came after an event at Duke University on Monday, where he said he was facing “censorship” from the White House, which he claimed was trying to block publication of his book.
According to the Hustler, Rice said of Bolton: “I don’t understanding using [White House] pre-clearance as a reason to not be forthcoming.”
Bolton, who left the White House in September, gave a series of teasers on Monday about what his forthcoming book might contain, in one instance referring an audience member to a specific chapter of the book.
“For all the focus on Ukraine and the impeachment trial and all that, to me, there are portions of the manuscript that deal with Ukraine, I view that like the sprinkles on the ice cream sundae in terms of what’s in the book,” Bolton said, according to the New York Times.
Bolton is said to have written that Trump spoke to him about withholding aid to Ukraine until they agreed to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
After being criticized for remaining coy over national security matters until publishing them in a commercially published book, Bolton seemed keen to tamp down his sales pitch on Wednesday.
“I didn’t come here to promote the book,” Bolton told the Hustler in an interview published before his onstage appearance.
“I’m not going to talk about the book in part because it’s still in the pre-publication review process. And to avoid criticism that I’m simply out talking [about] the book, which I am not.”
The New York Times has previously shared details from a draft of Bolton’s book. In it, Bolton affirmed that Trump was intent on withholding military aid to Ukraine until it helped investigate Democrats and the Bidens, supporting Democrats’ impeachment case against Trump.
Bolton is also said to have written that Trump was granting favors to the leaders of Turkey and China, claims the justice department has denied.
In January the White House, having received a copy of Bolton’s book, said it “appears to contain significant amounts of classified information”, and said it could not be published until certain details are removed. Bolton’s lawyers dispute that any information in the book could be considered classified.


theguardian--2020-02-20--Bloomberg roundly attacked by rivals in fiercest Democratic debate so far

The top six Democratic presidential candidates faced off in Las Vegas on Wednesday in the most combative debate of the election and days before the high-stakes caucuses in Nevada .
It was the first debate for Mike Bloomberg , and the former New York mayor ’ s rivals in the Democratic race for president immediately took aim – attacking him for his legacy on racist policing and reports of sexist comments and discrimination at his companies .
In the first minutes of the debate , the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders argued that Bloomberg ’ s legacy of stop-and-frisk made it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party ’ s coalition and defeat Donald Trump .
The Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren compared Bloomberg to Trump in her opening remarks : “ Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another.
” From there , the attacks didn ’ t let up .
Bloomberg gave ineffective responses to a series of stop-and-frisk questions , saying he was “ embarrassed ” by the tactic deployed in New York while he was mayor : “ I ’ ve apologized .
I ’ ve asked for forgiveness .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claimed he “ discovered ” the city was conducting too many stops and that he reduced use of the policy .
In reality , a court ordered the city to stop the practice , deeming it unconstitutional .
Warren also targeted Bloomberg over non-disclosure agreements several women at his company have signed while settling lawsuits .
She repeatedly urged him to disclose how many NDAs women had signed and to let the women speak freely about their experiences .
Bloomberg demurred and ultimately refused to answer her direct questions , leading to boos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company , lots and lots of women have big responsibilities , ” Bloomberg responded .
“ I hope you heard what his defense was : ‘ I ’ ve been nice to some women , ’ ” Warren shot back .
Wednesday ’ s debate at the Paris Theater in Vegas came one week after Sanders won the New Hampshire primary , setting the stage for a primary battle between the Vermont senator and the more moderate candidates .
On the heels of a strong performance in the chaotic Iowa caucuses , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a close second in New Hampshire , where the Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar ’ s unexpected surge won her third place , and Warren and Joe Biden both experienced disappointing results .
Bloomberg is not competing in Nevada , but he had been climbing in polls after spending more on ads than any candidate in US political history .
He also sat out the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries and had mostly been making his case to voters through TV ads and scripted public events up until Wednesday ’ s debate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates from the midwest , were looking on Wednesday to broaden their coalitions in states like Nevada that are significantly more diverse than Iowa and New Hampshire .
Buttigieg went after Sanders and Bloomberg , claiming that they were “ the two most polarizing figures on this stage ” and that he had broader appeal .
But he clashed most fiercely with Klobuchar .
Both midwestern candidates are competing in a crowded central lane , and tore each other down near the end of the debate .
“ You memorized a bunch of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling the former mayor he has not been “ in the arena ” .
Buttigieg responded : “ I ’ m used to senators telling mayors that senators are more important .
You don ’ t have to be in Washington to matter.
” Earlier in the evening , Buttigieg had criticized Klobuchar , for forgetting the name of the president of Mexico , she responded : “ Are you trying to say that I ’ m dumb ?
Are you mocking me here , Pete ?
” Klobuchar , a former prosecutor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminal justice record and her recent inability to name the president of Mexico .
Even though he is the frontrunner , Sanders avoided the brunt of attacks and benefited from the other candidates ’ jabs at one another .
Buttigieg was at one point asked to comment on an essay he wrote in 2000 praising the senator .
Following the debate , Warren ’ s surrogates brushed off questions as to why she had held her fire on Sanders .
“ It ’ s about showing who can bring together that coalition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Committee member from Nevada .
Warren can bring “ people who look like me and people who look like Nevada together ” , she said , adding : “ And I happen to be a millennial of color.
” Biden ’ s campaign had deployed additional staff to Nevada , hoping the caucus will deliver some sort of comeback after his poor performance in the first two states led to a significant drop in his national poll numbers .
In the debate , the former vice-president went after Bloomberg with some energetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record from Warren and other candidates and generally failed to break through .
Nevada is nearly 30 % Latino and 10 % black and has become increasingly Democratic in recent years .
The state also has a strong record of supporting women in office and was the first in the country to have a majority-female legislature .
With the long-shot candidate Andrew Yang out of the race , the debate once again featured an all-white lineup .
Before the start of Wednesday evening ’ s event , groups of Nevada voters had gathered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Theater .
“ This is the biggest election of our lifetime , ” said Linda Gannon , a 49-year-old Vegas resident who showed up to the debate hoping to get a seat to see Buttigieg , her top choice .
“ I ’ m a bit worried about him in Nevada , but I think he ’ s got a shot .
I feel confident any of the Democrats can beat Trump .
We have to feel that way , and I will support any of them.
” Lorraine Oliver , a 68-year-old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the debate , said she recently got a chance to meet Warren in person and was sold .
“ She has such in-depth knowledge .
But she ’ s not polling as well as I ’ d like .
I need her to shoot up in the polls , ” she said , adding : “ I ’ m excited for an opportunity to get rid of Trump .
He ’ s done enough to make people angry .
We ’ re gon na fight back.
” Also on line were several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continuing to advocate for their favorite candidate , even though he has already suspended his campaign .
“ It ’ s larger than him .
It ’ s about his movement , ” said Hannah Won , a 37-year-old arts advocate .

The top six Democratic presidential candidates faced off in Las Vegas on Wednesday in the most combative debate of the election and days before the high-stakes caucuses in Nevada.
It was the first debate for Mike Bloomberg, and the former New York mayor’s rivals in the Democratic race for president immediately took aim – attacking him for his legacy on racist policing and reports of sexist comments and discrimination at his companies.
In the first minutes of the debate, the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders argued that Bloomberg’s legacy of stop-and-frisk made it impossible for him to broaden the Democratic party’s coalition and defeat Donald Trump.
The Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren compared Bloomberg to Trump in her opening remarks: “Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another.”
From there, the attacks didn’t let up. Bloomberg gave ineffective responses to a series of stop-and-frisk questions, saying he was “embarrassed” by the tactic deployed in New York while he was mayor: “I’ve apologized. I’ve asked for forgiveness. We stopped too many people.”
He also claimed he “discovered” the city was conducting too many stops and that he reduced use of the policy. In reality, a court ordered the city to stop the practice, deeming it unconstitutional.
“You need a different apology,” Warren interjected.
Warren also targeted Bloomberg over non-disclosure agreements several women at his company have signed while settling lawsuits. She repeatedly urged him to disclose how many NDAs women had signed and to let the women speak freely about their experiences. Bloomberg demurred and ultimately refused to answer her direct questions, leading to boos from the crowd.
“In my company, lots and lots of women have big responsibilities,” Bloomberg responded.
“I hope you heard what his defense was: ‘I’ve been nice to some women,’” Warren shot back.
Wednesday’s debate at the Paris Theater in Vegas came one week after Sanders won the New Hampshire primary, setting the stage for a primary battle between the Vermont senator and the more moderate candidates. On the heels of a strong performance in the chaotic Iowa caucuses, the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg came in a close second in New Hampshire, where the Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar’s unexpected surge won her third place, and Warren and Joe Biden both experienced disappointing results.
Bloomberg with Warren and Sanders. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images
Bloomberg is not competing in Nevada, but he had been climbing in polls after spending more on ads than any candidate in US political history. He also sat out the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries and had mostly been making his case to voters through TV ads and scripted public events up until Wednesday’s debate.
Buttigieg and Klobuchar, the more centrist candidates from the midwest, were looking on Wednesday to broaden their coalitions in states like Nevada that are significantly more diverse than Iowa and New Hampshire.
Buttigieg went after Sanders and Bloomberg, claiming that they were “the two most polarizing figures on this stage” and that he had broader appeal.
But he clashed most fiercely with Klobuchar. Both midwestern candidates are competing in a crowded central lane, and tore each other down near the end of the debate. “You memorized a bunch of talking points,” Klobuchar said, telling the former mayor he has not been “in the arena”.
Buttigieg responded: “I’m used to senators telling mayors that senators are more important. You don’t have to be in Washington to matter.”
Earlier in the evening, Buttigieg had criticized Klobuchar, for forgetting the name of the president of Mexico, she responded: “Are you trying to say that I’m dumb? Are you mocking me here, Pete?”
Klobuchar, a former prosecutor, also faced difficult questions over her criminal justice record and her recent inability to name the president of Mexico.
Even though he is the frontrunner, Sanders avoided the brunt of attacks and benefited from the other candidates’ jabs at one another. Buttigieg was at one point asked to comment on an essay he wrote in 2000 praising the senator.
Following the debate, Warren’s surrogates brushed off questions as to why she had held her fire on Sanders. “It’s about showing who can bring together that coalition,” said Allison Stephens, a Democratic National Committee member from Nevada. Warren can bring “people who look like me and people who look like Nevada together”, she said, adding: “And I happen to be a millennial of color.”
Biden’s campaign had deployed additional staff to Nevada, hoping the caucus will deliver some sort of comeback after his poor performance in the first two states led to a significant drop in his national poll numbers. In the debate, the former vice-president went after Bloomberg with some energetic remarks but faced renewed questions about his record from Warren and other candidates and generally failed to break through.
Nevada is nearly 30% Latino and 10% black and has become increasingly Democratic in recent years. The state also has a strong record of supporting women in office and was the first in the country to have a majority-female legislature.
With the long-shot candidate Andrew Yang out of the race, the debate once again featured an all-white lineup.
“This is the biggest election of our life time,” said Linda Gannon, a 49-year-old Vegas resident and English professor who showed up to #DemDebate hoping to get a seat to see Buttigieg, her top choice. “I’m a bit worried about him in Nevada, but I think he’s got a shot.” pic.twitter.com/vYU8tKsrdo — Sam Levin (@SamTLevin) February 20, 2020
Before the start of Wednesday evening’s event, groups of Nevada voters had gathered inside the busy lobby of the Paris Theater. “This is the biggest election of our lifetime,” said Linda Gannon, a 49-year-old Vegas resident who showed up to the debate hoping to get a seat to see Buttigieg, her top choice. “I’m a bit worried about him in Nevada, but I think he’s got a shot. I feel confident any of the Democrats can beat Trump. We have to feel that way, and I will support any of them.”
Lorraine Oliver, a 68-year-old public health nurse in line to get into the debate, said she recently got a chance to meet Warren in person and was sold.
“She has such in-depth knowledge. But she’s not polling as well as I’d like. I need her to shoot up in the polls,” she said, adding: “I’m excited for an opportunity to get rid of Trump. He’s done enough to make people angry. We’re gonna fight back.”
Also on line were several Andrew Yang fans who said they were continuing to advocate for their favorite candidate, even though he has already suspended his campaign.
“It’s larger than him. It’s about his movement,” said Hannah Won, a 37-year-old arts advocate.


theguardian--2020-02-20--'Cause of death: Elizabeth Warren': Democratic debate's brutality delights viewers

It only took nine debates and eight months , but the Democratic candidates for president have finally taken their gloves off and gone for each other .
And – with the likely exception of Mike Bloomberg ’ s supporters – it seems that most viewers have been delighted .
From the very start of the Las Vegas debate , the tone for the night was set .
It all kicked off when Elizabeth Warren branded Michael Bloomberg a “ billionaire who calls women fat broads and horse-faced lesbians ” in her first answer .
Bloomberg was then attacked from all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and history of unsettling remarks about women .
Soon enough , a light backdrop of memes and jokes began to accompany the tearing apart of Bloomberg , who had just joined the debate stage for the first time since announcing his candidacy in November .
For many , the general message was a simple “ RIP ” : However , Bloomberg wasn ’ t the only candidate getting beaten up on stage .
The other big battle of the night was between Senator Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg , the former mayor of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go awry when she asked Buttigieg if he was calling her “ dumb ” , after he criticized her recent inability to name the president of Mexico .
The two continued to lay into each other at any given opportunity , their obvious mutual dislike serving as an inspiration to those watching the debate online : In the end the general consensus seems to be that Warren ’ s attacks on Bloomberg won her the debate .
And she definitely triumphed across two semi-significant metrics : she had the longest speaking time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the most-tweeted-about candidate of the night .
Meanwhile , the biggest loser of the night was unambiguously Bloomberg , who , after spending more than $ 400m to get into the race , may be starting to get buyer ’ s remorse .

It only took nine debates and eight months, but the Democratic candidates for president have finally taken their gloves off and gone for each other. And – with the likely exception of Mike Bloomberg’s supporters – it seems that most viewers have been delighted.
While Trump sits in the Oval Office, this is what the Democratic debate stage looks like tonight. pic.twitter.com/GdDRsHi6Ir — Julian Zelizer (@julianzelizer) February 20, 2020
From the very start of the Las Vegas debate, the tone for the night was set. It all kicked off when Elizabeth Warren branded Michael Bloomberg a “billionaire who calls women fat broads and horse-faced lesbians” in her first answer.
Bloomberg was then attacked from all sides over his problematic legacy as mayor and history of unsettling remarks about women.
Warren’s opening salvo on Bloomberg set the tone for the rest of the debate. He was unable to come back from this. pic.twitter.com/tHwoRL7Soc — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 20, 2020
Soon enough, a light backdrop of memes and jokes began to accompany the tearing apart of Bloomberg, who had just joined the debate stage for the first time since announcing his candidacy in November.
For many, the general message was a simple “RIP”:
Time to update Bloomberg's Wikipedia page...
Date of death: 2/19/2020
Place: Democratic Debate stage
Cause: Elizabeth Ann Warren#DemDebate — Adam Best (@adamcbest) February 20, 2020
Some dudes would pay a lot of money for the humiliation Warren is giving Bloomberg for free #DemDebate — Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) February 20, 2020
Bloomberg arriving at the debate pic.twitter.com/LtHLSspeyF — Andrew Todd (@mistertodd) February 20, 2020
Did Bloomberg forget to spend money on debate prep? — Erika Stallings (@quidditch424) February 20, 2020
However, Bloomberg wasn’t the only candidate getting beaten up on stage. The other big battle of the night was between Senator Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana. Things started to go awry when she asked Buttigieg if he was calling her “dumb”, after he criticized her recent inability to name the president of Mexico.
The two continued to lay into each other at any given opportunity, their obvious mutual dislike serving as an inspiration to those watching the debate online:
amy klobuchar will never be president but if she was her first act would razing south bend, indiana to the ground out of spite — Brandy Jensen (@BrandyLJensen) February 20, 2020
In the end the general consensus seems to be that Warren’s attacks on Bloomberg won her the debate. And she definitely triumphed across two semi-significant metrics: she had the longest speaking time out of any of the candidates and was the most-tweeted-about candidate of the night.
Meanwhile, the biggest loser of the night was unambiguously Bloomberg, who, after spending more than $400m to get into the race, may be starting to get buyer’s remorse.


theguardian--2020-02-20--Roger Stone's sentencing to move ahead despite request for new trial

Roger Stone , a longtime ally of Donald Trump and a self-described political dirty trickster , is set to be sentenced on Thursday for his attempts to sabotage a congressional investigation that posed a political threat to the president .
The sentencing will go ahead despite an 11th-hour request by Stone ’ s defense team for a new trial following Trump ’ s claim that the conviction “ should be thrown out ” .
The judge , Amy Berman Jackson of the US district court for the District of Columbia , on Tuesday has not yet ruled definitively on that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentencing would not be “ a prudent thing to do given all the circumstances ” .
Stone , 67 , a flamboyant Republican operative who began his political career as a junior staffer on Richard Nixon ’ s re-election campaign in 1972 , was convicted in November on seven felony charges , including lying to Congress , tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in the 2016 presidential election .
Stone had denied wrongdoing .
His sentencing hearing followed an extraordinary series of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sentencing recommendation by the prosecutors of between seven and nine years in federal prison , a punishment Trump assailed on Twitter as “ horrible and very unfair ” .
After the president assailed the prosecutors directly and decried a “ miscarriage of justice ” , the attorney general , William Barr , intervened and sought a more lenient punishment .
His intervention prompted the entire prosecution team to resign , including one member who left the justice department altogether .
Barr – a close ally of the president – also publicly reproached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online commentary about politically sensitive investigations makes it “ impossible ” for him to do his job .
Trump eventually said on Twitter that he had not asked the attorney general to “ do anything in a criminal case ” , but argued that , as president , he had “ the legal right to do so ” and had “ so far chosen not to !
” Despite Barr ’ s rebuke , Trump continued to weigh in on the case on Twitter .
On Tuesday , he quoted the Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jury harbored biases against the president and that “ almost any judge in the country ” would throw out the conviction .
“ Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and , in my opinion , should be thrown out , ” Trump wrote in another tweet .
Since Trump was acquitted by the Senate of charges that he abused power and obstructed Congress , he has embarked on a campaign of retribution against his perceived political enemies while intervening to protect allies who have been loyal .
His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the conclusion of the Senate impeachment trial .
Trump has not ruled out pardoning his longtime friend .
Stone ’ s convictions stem from the former special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election .
During the course of the week-long trial , the jury heard from Steve Bannon , the president ’ s former campaign chairman , that Stone was the campaign ’ s “ access point ” to WikiLeaks , which published a trove of stolen Democratic emails in the final weeks of the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witnesses was the comedian and radio personality Randy Credico , who Stone said was his “ back channel ” to WikiLeaks .
Prosecutors accused Stone of trying to prevent Credico from contradicting his testimony before a House committee and encouraging him to lie or avoid speaking to congressional investigators or the FBI .
Credico testified during the trial that Stone encouraged him to “ do a ‘ Frank Pentangeli ’ ” , a reference to a character in The Godfather : Part II who lies before Congress .
Prosecutors also presented evidence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dog , Bianca .

Roger Stone, a longtime ally of Donald Trump and a self-described political dirty trickster, was sentenced on Thursday to more than three years in prison for his attempts to sabotage a congressional investigation that posed a political threat to the president.
In handing down the sentence, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the US district court for the District of Columbia lambasted Stone, 67, calling his attempts to thwart a congressional inquiry of “great national significance” a “threat to our most fundamental institutions, to the very foundation of our democracy”.
But she sentenced Stone to 40 months in prison, far less than the punishment prosecutors originally sought. Stone was convicted in November on seven felony charges, including lying to Congress, tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in the 2016 presidential election. Stone had denied wrongdoing.
Jackson argued Stone’s disregard for the truth should worry all those who care about American democracy and accused him of covering up for Trump. “The dismay and disgust at the defendant’s belligerence should transcend party,” Jackson said.
“The truth still exists,” she said. “The truth still matters.”
After the sentencing, a spokeswoman for Stone appealed directly to Trump for a pardon.
“It falls on President Trump to use the power of a pardon as the final means of checks and balances to right this horrible wrong,” Kristin Davis said in a statement.
Trump, who issued 11 high-profile pardons earlier this week, said he was holding off for now.
“I’m not going to do anything in terms of the great powers bestowed upon a president of the United States,” Trump said during an appearance in Las Vegas. “I want the process to play out. I think that’s the best thing to do because I would love to see Roger exonerated.”
Adam Schiff, a high-profile California Democrat who chairs the House intelligence committee, said to pardon Stone when his crimes were committed to protect Trump would be a “breathtaking act of corruption”.
Roger Stone was found guilty of lying to Congress and threatening a witness.
He did it to cover up for Trump. His sentence is justified.
It should go without saying, but to pardon Stone when his crimes were committed to protect Trump would be a breathtaking act of corruption. — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 20, 2020
Stone wore a bemused look for much of the nearly three-hour hearing on Thursday, standing with his defense team to receive his sentence. A small group of male supporters with mostly trendy haircuts, designer bags and Make America Great Again embellishments watched the proceedings from an overflow room next to where Stone was being sentenced.
At one point, security removed one of the men after he began protesting against Jackson’s remarks. “Ridiculous. This is a sham,” he cried as he was escorted out of the room. Outside the courtroom, rightwing activists chanted “Pardon Roger Stone” while opponents shouted:“Lock him up.”
The sentencing went ahead despite an 11th-hour request by Stone’s defense team for a new trial.
Jackson has not yet ruled definitively on that motion, but she determined that postponing the sentencing would not be “a prudent thing to do given all the circumstances”. Stone will not have to report to prison until the court rules on that motion, which is based on a claim of juror bias.
Stone, a flamboyant Republican operative who began his political career as a junior staffer on Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign in 1972, had become a cause célèbre for supporters of the president, who said he was being punished for defending his longtime friend.
Roger Stone has 'very good chance of exoneration', says Trump in February – video
Jackson forcefully rejected such claims, stating that Stone was not being prosecuted “for standing up for the president” but for “covering up for the president”.
Stone’s sentencing hearing followed an extraordinary series of events in which justice department officials overruled a sentencing recommendation by the prosecutors of between seven and nine years in federal prison, a punishment Trump assailed on Twitter as “horrible and very unfair”.
After the president condemned the prosecutors directly and decried a “miscarriage of justice”, the attorney general, William Barr, intervened and sought a more lenient punishment. His intervention prompted the entire prosecution team to resign in protest, including one member who left the justice department altogether.
Barr – a close ally of the president – also publicly reproached Trump, saying the president’s online commentary about politically sensitive investigations made it “impossible” for him to do his job.
Trump eventually said on Twitter that he had not asked the attorney general to “do anything in a criminal case”, but argued that, as president, he had “the legal right to do so” and had “so far chosen not to!”
Despite Barr’s rebuke, Trump continued to weigh in on the case on Twitter. On Tuesday, he quoted the Fox News analyst Andrew Napolitano who claimed that the jury harbored biases against the president and that “almost any judge in the country” would throw out the conviction.
“Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and, in my opinion, should be thrown out,” Trump wrote in another tweet.
On Thursday, Jackson asked the new prosecution team to explain its position, noting that the justice department had not actually withdrawn its initial sentencing recommendation of seven to nine years in prison.
“I fear that you know less about the case than just about everybody else in the courtroom,” Jackson told John Crabb, the prosecutor newly assigned to the case.
Crabb apologized for the “confusion” surrounding the sentencing recommendation and defended the initial trial team, who he said had received approval to submit the initial sentencing memo.
“This prosecution was, and this prosecution is, righteous,” Crabb said.
Asked by Jackson whether he had written the court filing that reversed the original sentencing recommendation, Crabb declined to say.
Jackson told the court that she believed the original recommendation was well-researched but unnecessarily punitive, a conclusion she said she reached notwithstanding the “unprecedented actions of the Department of Justice in the past week”.
Stone’s attorney, Seth Ginsberg, asked Jackson to consider the man and not the “larger-than-life” public persona his client had cultivated over the course of decades. Stone, Ginsberg argued, is a faithful family man with no criminal record whose political activism includes support for football players who suffered concussions and animal rights groups.
“Mr Stone is, in fact, not simply that public persona, but a human being,” Ginsberg said.
Since Trump was acquitted by the Senate of charges that he abused power and obstructed Congress, he has embarked on a campaign of retribution against his perceived political enemies while intervening to protect allies who have been loyal. His defense of Stone came just days after the conclusion of the Senate impeachment trial. Trump has not ruled out pardoning his longtime friend.
On Thursday he appeared to raise that possibility again. The president tweeted out a clip of the Fox News host Tucker Carlson saying Stone should be pardoned and also pinned it to the top of his feed.
Stone’s convictions stem from the former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
During the course of the week-long trial, the jury heard from Steve Bannon, Trump’s former campaign chairman, that Stone was the campaign’s “access point” to WikiLeaks, which published a trove of stolen Democratic emails in the final weeks of the last presidential campaign.
The Associated Press contributed to this story


theguardian--2020-02-20--Hawks say Sanders will be weak on Russia. But Putin should fear a President Bernie | Ben Judah and D

Hawks say Sanders will be weak on Russia. But Putin should fear a President Bernie | Ben Judah and David Adler

He may not be running , but Vladimir Putin is already a formidable presence in the 2020 US presidential campaign .
From concerns about Russian aggression abroad to anxieties about electoral interference at home , Putin has become a question to which all presidential candidates are expected to have a strongly worded answer – particularly in the wake of Donald Trump ’ s failed impeachment , in which the Democratic party sought to make the case that “ all roads lead to Putin ” .
The conventional wisdom in US foreign policy is that military competition is necessary to contain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influence .
“ The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there , and we don ’ t have to fight Russia over here , ” said the Republican adviser Tim Morrison during the impeachment hearings – a quote then repeated by Adam Schiff , chairman of the House intelligence committee , in his opening argument .
It is in this context that the rise of Bernie Sanders is raising fears inside the Democratic party establishment .
Sanders has long been a leading advocate of military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a platform of “ responsible foreign policy ” that promises to end America ’ s “ endless war ” .
Despite speech after speech in which the senator decries Putin ’ s criminal authoritarianism , a narrative is now developing that his presidency would amount to a great gift to the Kremlin .
“ If I ’ m Russian , I go with Sanders this time around , ” tweeted the former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein .
But most advocates of military competition fundamentally misunderstand the nature of Kremlin power – a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fail , time and again , in its attempt to contain Putin .
The promise of Sanders ’ foreign policy platform is precisely that it turns the conventional wisdom on its head , showing how the US government can use domestic reform as a strategy to undermine Putin ’ s authoritarian aggression abroad .
To make sense of this strategy , it is necessary to see the three pillars on which Putin ’ s regime rests .
The first of these pillars is hydrocarbons : the vast reserves of oil and gas in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political loyalties both within Russia and across Europe .
Russian oil and gas output is currently at a record high 11.25m barrels per day , generating $ 44.4bn each year from countries such as Germany that have become heavily reliant on Russian gas exports .
The second pillar of Putin ’ s power is corruption .
Russia is today a kleptocracy , a political system that runs on kickbacks , bribes and pocketed public money for loyal oligarchs .
Their dark money , of course , does not stay in Russia .
Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system of murky finance – into Deutsche Bank and Danske Bank , into London real estate and US shell companies – buying allegiance to the regime along the way .
And the third pillar is propaganda : Putin and his allies actively seek to stir up conflict abroad in order to strengthen nationalist loyalties at home .
From the very beginning of his tenure , Putin has fomented violence and aggression against Russia ’ s “ enemies ” – be they Chechen , Ukrainian or American – as a strategy to boost his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pillars of Kremlin power , recent US foreign policy has served to strengthen them .
The Barack Obama administration , for example , aggressively pursued a fossil fuels arms race against Russia , further entrenching the global addiction to hydrocarbons .
Meanwhile , Obama presided over a flood of Russian oligarchs ’ cash into the US , even as his secretary of state , Hillary Cinton , drew comparisons between Putin and Hitler .
Sanders , by contrast , seeks to dismantle each of the three pillars at their base .
Rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he is promoting a Green New Deal with major provisions to support a green transition beyond US borders .
By driving decarbonisation among US allies in Europe and around the world , Sanders promises to reduce Putin ’ s geopolitical leverage .
Rather than ignoring the illicit financial system , Sanders is advocating a programme of “ corporate accountability ” to shut down tax havens , eliminate anonymous shell companies and strictly regulate the Wall Street banks that have facilitated the flow of kleptocrats ’ cash all around the world .
Finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rhetoric about “ the Russians ” that helps boost Putin ’ s legitimacy back at home .
Instead , his approach is infrastructural , attacking the nodes of the illicit finance network rather than the individual “ bad actors ” operating within it .
In short , Sanders is shifting away from the antiquated paradigm of “ foreign policy ” – with its clear demarcations of home and abroad and its appeals to a unified national interest – and towards “ foreign politics ” .
He is targeting the global architecture of kleptocracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holders are complicit , and building ties with social movements around the world that can serve as allies in the fight against state corruption .
Progressives can not afford to be naive in their approach to Putin .
His efforts to consolidate a sphere of influence are unlikely to abate , regardless of the 2020 election outcome .
But for all the Democratic party ’ s legitimate fears about Russian aggression , it can not retreat to an outdated paradigm that approaches Russia as a question of military security alone .
It should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that those who understand Putin ’ s kleptocratic system – such the leader of the Russian opposition , Alexei Navalny – are now rooting for Sanders .
It is only by undermining that system , not competing with it , that the US can truly weaken Putin ’ s authoritarian grip , and make way for a new democratic movement to flourish in Russia .
• Ben Judah is a fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC .
David Adler is a fellow at the school of transnational governance at the European @ @

He may not be running, but Vladimir Putin is already a formidable presence in the 2020 US presidential campaign. From concerns about Russian aggression abroad to anxieties about electoral interference at home, Putin has become a question to which all presidential candidates are expected to have a strongly worded answer – particularly in the wake of Donald Trump’s failed impeachment, in which the Democratic party sought to make the case that “all roads lead to Putin”.
The conventional wisdom in US foreign policy is that military competition is necessary to contain Putin and circumscribe the Russian sphere of influence. “The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia over here,” said the Republican adviser Tim Morrison during the impeachment hearings – a quote then repeated by Adam Schiff, chairman of the House intelligence committee, in his opening argument.
Sanders has long been a leading advocate of military restraint, and he is campaigning on a platform of 'responsible foreign policy' that promises to end America’s 'endless war'
It is in this context that the rise of Bernie Sanders is raising fears inside the Democratic party establishment. Sanders has long been a leading advocate of military restraint, and he is campaigning on a platform of “responsible foreign policy” that promises to end America’s “endless war”. Despite speech after speech in which the senator decries Putin’s criminal authoritarianism, a narrative is now developing that his presidency would amount to a great gift to the Kremlin. “If I’m Russian, I go with Sanders this time around,” tweeted the former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein.
But most advocates of military competition fundamentally misunderstand the nature of Kremlin power – a misunderstanding that has led the US to fail, time and again, in its attempt to contain Putin. The promise of Sanders’ foreign policy platform is precisely that it turns the conventional wisdom on its head, showing how the US government can use domestic reform as a strategy to undermine Putin’s authoritarian aggression abroad.
To make sense of this strategy, it is necessary to see the three pillars on which Putin’s regime rests. The first of these pillars is hydrocarbons: the vast reserves of oil and gas in Russia that deliver large revenues and deep political loyalties both within Russia and across Europe. Russian oil and gas output is currently at a record high 11.25m barrels per day, generating $44.4bn each year from countries such as Germany that have become heavily reliant on Russian gas exports.
The second pillar of Putin’s power is corruption. Russia is today a kleptocracy, a political system that runs on kickbacks, bribes and pocketed public money for loyal oligarchs. Their dark money, of course, does not stay in Russia. Instead, it circulates through the vast international system of murky finance – into Deutsche Bank and Danske Bank, into London real estate and US shell companies – buying allegiance to the regime along the way.
And the third pillar is propaganda: Putin and his allies actively seek to stir up conflict abroad in order to strengthen nationalist loyalties at home. From the very beginning of his tenure, Putin has fomented violence and aggression against Russia’s “enemies” – be they Chechen, Ukrainian or American – as a strategy to boost his own popularity.
Far from attacking these pillars of Kremlin power, recent US foreign policy has served to strengthen them. The Barack Obama administration, for example, aggressively pursued a fossil fuels arms race against Russia, further entrenching the global addiction to hydrocarbons. Meanwhile, Obama presided over a flood of Russian oligarchs’ cash into the US, even as his secretary of state, Hillary Cinton, drew comparisons between Putin and Hitler.
Sanders, by contrast, seeks to dismantle each of the three pillars at their base. Rather than deepening US dependence on oil and gas, he is promoting a Green New Deal with major provisions to support a green transition beyond US borders. By driving decarbonisation among US allies in Europe and around the world, Sanders promises to reduce Putin’s geopolitical leverage.
Rather than ignoring the illicit financial system, Sanders is advocating a programme of “corporate accountability” to shut down tax havens, eliminate anonymous shell companies and strictly regulate the Wall Street banks that have facilitated the flow of kleptocrats’ cash all around the world.
Finally, Sanders avoids the lazy cold war rhetoric about “the Russians” that helps boost Putin’s legitimacy back at home. Instead, his approach is infrastructural, attacking the nodes of the illicit finance network rather than the individual “bad actors” operating within it.
In short, Sanders is shifting away from the antiquated paradigm of “foreign policy” – with its clear demarcations of home and abroad and its appeals to a unified national interest – and towards “foreign politics”. He is targeting the global architecture of kleptocracy in which many US firms and passport holders are complicit, and building ties with social movements around the world that can serve as allies in the fight against state corruption.
Progressives cannot afford to be naive in their approach to Putin. His efforts to consolidate a sphere of influence are unlikely to abate, regardless of the 2020 election outcome. But for all the Democratic party’s legitimate fears about Russian aggression, it cannot retreat to an outdated paradigm that approaches Russia as a question of military security alone.
It should come as no surprise, therefore, that those who understand Putin’s kleptocratic system – such the leader of the Russian opposition, Alexei Navalny – are now rooting for Sanders. It is only by undermining that system, not competing with it, that the US can truly weaken Putin’s authoritarian grip, and make way for a new democratic movement to flourish in Russia.