talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Roger Stone Sentenced To 40 Months In Prison

A federal judge sentenced Roger Stone — a longtime GOP operative and confidant to President Trump — to three years and four months in prison for several charges , including lying to Congress about Wikileaks-related matters in the House ’ s Russian election interference probe .
The sentence may not be the final word on Stone ’ s punishment , as he has already launched an effort to demand a new trial and Trump has suggested that he has not ruled out a pardon for his friend and former adviser .
In recent days , Stone ’ s case has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump is exerting inappropriate influence on the Justice Department .
First , early last week , Trump tweeted angrily about the prosecutors ’ handling of the case .
Then , the Department watered down its recommendation to the judge that Stone serve seven to nine years in jail .
That prompted the entire team of career DOJ attorneys who had been leading Stone ’ s prosecution to withdraw from the case .
Attorney General Bill Barr has claimed his decision to reverse the recommendation was not inspired by the President ’ s public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Berman Jackson said that Stone deserved 40 months in prison for the false statements and the other ways he meddled with the House Intelligence Committee ’ s Russia investigation in 2017 and 2018 .
In addition to the false statement charges , a jury in November convicted Stone of witness tampering and obstruction of Congress .
Stone was given 40 months on count one ( obstruction of proceeding ) , 12 months on counts two through six ( making false statements ) , which will be served concurrently , as well as 18 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , also served concurrently , “ This effort to obstruct investigation was deliberate , planned , not an isolated incident , and conducted ” over a considerable about of time , Berman Jackson said before handing down the sentence Thursday .
“ He was not prosecuted , as some have complained , for standing up for the President , he was prosecuted for covering up for the President , ” she added .
The one-week trial revealed that Stone had several contacts with then-candidate Trump amid , according to witness testimony , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign with information about Wikileaks ’ plans to release damaging emails about Trump ’ s opponent Hillary Clinton .
Stone misled the House about key aspects of that effort and then , using threatening language , sought to discourage another witness who could expose those lies from testifying .
During the sentencing hearing Berman Jackson took a direct shot at the sentencing memo debacle , suggesting that prosecutor John Crabb didn ’ t know a lot about the case or the trial , and probably knew less about the case than anyone else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Stone attorney who recently joined his team .
“ Anything you ’ d like to say about why you ’ re the one standing here today ?
” she asked Crabb , who apologized for the confusion and said it was not caused by the trial team .
He said their initial memo had the authorization of the U.S. Attorney in D.C .
Though there was consultation between the U.S. Attorney and Main Justice , there was ultimately a “ miscommunication ” between the U.S. Attorney and Attorney General Barr , Crabb @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentencing memo reversal “ unprecedented , ” Berman Jackson said she still would not have given Stone the seven to nine year sentence .
Special counsel Robert Mueller brought the charges against Stone in January 2019 .
The case was handed off to the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office in D.C. when Mueller completed his probe , and veterans of Mueller ’ s team remained involved in its day-to-day proceedings .
Stone found himself in hot water with the judge on several occasions leading up to his trial for his repeated violation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prompting her to ban his use of social media for the duration of the proceedings .
In their effort to prove to the jury the allegation that Stone lied to Congress , prosecutors shed new light on the push by Trump ’ s allies — and Trump himself — to weaponize the Democratic emails that had been hacked and disseminated by Russian actors .
Stone was convicted for lying to the House specifically about his attempts to use a backchannel intermediary to communicate with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and about what he told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was also convicted for lying about possessing Wikileaks-related documents and communications that the House demanded .
The witness tampering conviction stems from threats he lobbed at radio host Randy Credico to dissuade Credico from testifying in the House ’ s inquiry .
Stone had told House investigators that Credico was who Stone had been referring to when he bragged in 2016 about having a backchannel to Wikileaks .
According to prosecutors , the Stone actually sought to use far-right conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi as a backchannel to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all the charges the DOJ brought , Stone has tried to secure a new trial .
His first request to do so was rejected by Judge Jackson earlier this month .
Another request , alleging juror conduct , was filed last week , though the details of the allegations remain under seal .
Meanwhile , Trump has fanned the flames around baseless allegations — speculated to be the basis of Stone ’ s new claims — that a juror was biased against him .
Judge Berman Jackson decided on Tuesday to hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ request was dealt with , but said she will delay the sentence ’ s execution until she resolved that request .
Stone , 67 , has been a notorious figure in Republican politics for several decades , earning a reputation as a dirty trickster during his work for the 1972 Nixon campaign .
In the 1980s , Stone worked as a lobbyist at a firm with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort , who was also prosecuted by Mueller .
He ’ s known Trump for more than four decades , and reportedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stone officially parted ways with the Trump campaign in August 2015 , he remained in contact with Trump , according to the records shown at his trial .
At earlier points in the Russia probe , Trump distanced himself from Stone , but the President has in recent days embraced the idea that Stone had been unfairly prosecuted .
Trump on Tuesday denied that he had given “ any thought ” to pardoning Stone .
When asked by a reporter whether Stone deserved prison time , Trump said , “ You ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s see what happens .
”

A federal judge sentenced Roger Stone — a longtime GOP operative and confidant to President Trump — to three years and four months in prison for several charges, including lying to Congress about Wikileaks-related matters in the House’s Russian election interference probe.
In addition to the prison sentence, Stone received 24 months of supervised release and a $20,000 fine. The judge also stated that the Justice Department’s actions in the past week were “unprecedented,” but did not impact her ruling.
The sentence may not be the final word on Stone’s punishment, as he has already launched an effort to demand a new trial and Trump has suggested that he has not ruled out a pardon for his friend and former adviser.
In recent days, Stone’s case has become a flash point for concerns that Trump is exerting inappropriate influence on the Justice Department. First, early last week, Trump tweeted angrily about the prosecutors’ handling of the case. Then, the Department watered down its recommendation to the judge that Stone serve seven to nine years in jail. That prompted the entire team of career DOJ attorneys who had been leading Stone’s prosecution to withdraw from the case. Attorney General Bill Barr has claimed his decision to reverse the recommendation was not inspired by the President’s public dismay.
But U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said that Stone deserved 40 months in prison for the false statements and the other ways he meddled with the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia investigation in 2017 and 2018. In addition to the false statement charges, a jury in November convicted Stone of witness tampering and obstruction of Congress.
Stone was given 40 months on count one (obstruction of proceeding), 12 months on counts two through six (making false statements), which will be served concurrently, as well as 18 months for count seven (witness tampering), also served concurrently,
“This effort to obstruct investigation was deliberate, planned, not an isolated incident, and conducted” over a considerable about of time, Berman Jackson said before handing down the sentence Thursday.
“He was not prosecuted, as some have complained, for standing up for the President, he was prosecuted for covering up for the President,” she added.
The one-week trial revealed that Stone had several contacts with then-candidate Trump amid, according to witness testimony, an effort by Stone to provide the campaign with information about Wikileaks’ plans to release damaging emails about Trump’s opponent Hillary Clinton.
Stone misled the House about key aspects of that effort and then, using threatening language, sought to discourage another witness who could expose those lies from testifying.
During the sentencing hearing Berman Jackson took a direct shot at the sentencing memo debacle, suggesting that prosecutor John Crabb didn’t know a lot about the case or the trial, and probably knew less about the case than anyone else in the courtroom – besides Seth Ginsburg, Stone attorney who recently joined his team.
“Anything you’d like to say about why you’re the one standing here today?” she asked Crabb, who apologized for the confusion and said it was not caused by the trial team. He said their initial memo had the authorization of the U.S. Attorney in D.C. Though there was consultation between the U.S. Attorney and Main Justice, there was ultimately a “miscommunication” between the U.S. Attorney and Attorney General Barr, Crabb said.
Calling the DOJ’s sentencing memo reversal “unprecedented,” Berman Jackson said she still would not have given Stone the seven to nine year sentence.
Special counsel Robert Mueller brought the charges against Stone in January 2019. The case was handed off to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C. when Mueller completed his probe, and veterans of Mueller’s team remained involved in its day-to-day proceedings. Stone found himself in hot water with the judge on several occasions leading up to his trial for his repeated violation of her gag order in the case, prompting her to ban his use of social media for the duration of the proceedings.
In their effort to prove to the jury the allegation that Stone lied to Congress, prosecutors shed new light on the push by Trump’s allies — and Trump himself — to weaponize the Democratic emails that had been hacked and disseminated by Russian actors.
Stone was convicted for lying to the House specifically about his attempts to use a backchannel intermediary to communicate with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and about what he told the Trump campaign of those efforts. He was also convicted for lying about possessing Wikileaks-related documents and communications that the House demanded.
The witness tampering conviction stems from threats he lobbed at radio host Randy Credico to dissuade Credico from testifying in the House’s inquiry. Stone had told House investigators that Credico was who Stone had been referring to when he bragged in 2016 about having a backchannel to Wikileaks. According to prosecutors, the Stone actually sought to use far-right conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi as a backchannel to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
Since the jury decided to convict Stone of all the charges the DOJ brought, Stone has tried to secure a new trial. His first request to do so was rejected by Judge Jackson earlier this month. Another request, alleging juror conduct, was filed last week, though the details of the allegations remain under seal.
Meanwhile, Trump has fanned the flames around baseless allegations — speculated to be the basis of Stone’s new claims — that a juror was biased against him.
Judge Berman Jackson decided on Tuesday to hand down Thursday’s sentence before that request was dealt with, but said she will delay the sentence’s execution until she resolved that request.
Stone, 67, has been a notorious figure in Republican politics for several decades, earning a reputation as a dirty trickster during his work for the 1972 Nixon campaign. In the 1980s, Stone worked as a lobbyist at a firm with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was also prosecuted by Mueller. He’s known Trump for more than four decades, and reportedly encouraged his presidential run. Even after Stone officially parted ways with the Trump campaign in August 2015, he remained in contact with Trump, according to the records shown at his trial.
At earlier points in the Russia probe, Trump distanced himself from Stone, but the President has in recent days embraced the idea that Stone had been unfairly prosecuted.
“They say Roger Stone lied to Congress.” @CNN OH, I see, but so did Comey (and he also leaked classified information, for which almost everyone, other than Crooked Hillary Clinton, goes to jail for a long time), and so did Andy McCabe, who also lied to the FBI! FAIRNESS? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 20, 2020
“What has happened to Roger Stone should never happen to anyone in our Country again.” @TuckerCarlson @FoxNews — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 20, 2020
…..existence of these tweets in which you were so harshly negative about the President & the people who support him. Don’t you think we wanted to know that before we put you on this jury.’ Pretty obvious he should (get a new trial). I think almost any judge in the Country….. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2020
Trump on Tuesday denied that he had given “any thought” to pardoning Stone. When asked by a reporter whether Stone deserved prison time, Trump said, “You’re going to see what happens. Let’s see what happens.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Bloomberg’s Own Campaign Manager Concedes Ex-Mayor Tanked Last Night

Kevin Sheekey , former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg ’ s campaign manager , admitted on Thursday that his boss ’ debut in the Democratic presidential primary debate wasn ’ t pretty .
“ Listen , I think Mike ’ s got ta get his legs under him , ” Sheekey told MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle .
“ Certainly he had a better second half of debate than the first , I will admit that.
” Though he downplayed Bloomberg ’ s performance as a mere hiccup in the long election cycle ahead , the campaign manager agreed grimly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former mayor seemed incapable of defending himself against his rivals ’ blistering attacks .
“ Listen , I think you ’ re right , ” Sheekey said .
“ We need to push back a little harder against people who were screaming about things they haven ’ t done and get Mike ’ s record out there better than we did last night.
” The campaign aide said he welcomed the “ Bronx cheer ” Bloomberg had received , a reference to the multiple boos the crowd dealt to the billionaire when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ scathing jabs at his tax returns and the allegations of sexual misconduct at his company .
“ But I think Mike will be back , ” Sheekey said .
“ This is a campaign that right now is just getting interesting.
” Still , the campaign chief seemed already resigned to the possibility that Bloomberg ’ s campaign won ’ t survive Super Tuesday on March 3 , saying that he ’ s “ not sure ” the billionaire will manage to sink frontrunner Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much campaign in March after that date , but we ’ re certainly fighting hard as we can to make sure that there is , ” Sheekey said .

Kevin Sheekey, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s campaign manager, admitted on Thursday that his boss’ debut in the Democratic presidential primary debate wasn’t pretty.
“Listen, I think Mike’s gotta get his legs under him,” Sheekey told MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle. “Certainly he had a better second half of debate than the first, I will admit that.”
Though he downplayed Bloomberg’s performance as a mere hiccup in the long election cycle ahead, the campaign manager agreed grimly with Ruhle’s observation that the former mayor seemed incapable of defending himself against his rivals’ blistering attacks.
“Listen, I think you’re right,” Sheekey said. “We need to push back a little harder against people who were screaming about things they haven’t done and get Mike’s record out there better than we did last night.”
The campaign aide said he welcomed the “Bronx cheer” Bloomberg had received, a reference to the multiple boos the crowd dealt to the billionaire when he bungled his responses to the other candidates’ scathing jabs at his tax returns and the allegations of sexual misconduct at his company.
“But I think Mike will be back,” Sheekey said. “This is a campaign that right now is just getting interesting.”
Still, the campaign chief seemed already resigned to the possibility that Bloomberg’s campaign won’t survive Super Tuesday on March 3, saying that he’s “not sure” the billionaire will manage to sink frontrunner Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
“It may be there’s not much campaign in March after that date, but we’re certainly fighting hard as we can to make sure that there is,” Sheekey said.
Watch the interview below:
Bloomberg’s campaign manager admits the candidate didn’t do well in the debate: “Mike’s gotta get his legs under him.” pic.twitter.com/IFMf4K9KDv — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 20, 2020
Bloomberg's campaign manager says he's “not sure” the billionaire will manage to beat Sanders. pic.twitter.com/YMvusM2ui3 — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 21, 2020
This story has been updated to include the second clip of the interview.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Bloomberg Circulates Deceptively Edited Video Of Nevada Debate Moment On Twitter

The Michael Bloomberg Twitter account circulated a doctored clip the morning after the Nevada debate , edited to make it look like the former New York mayor had a winning moment in an otherwise panned debate performance .
In the video , Bloomberg turns to the row of his fellow candidates and asks : “ I ’ m the only one here , I think , that ’ s ever started a business , is that fair ?
” In the doctored video , the candidates appear to be rendered mute by the question .
Former Vice President Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stare blankly ahead , mouths agape .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) raises her hand halfheartedly and puts it down again .
Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-MN ) hangs her head , while former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg wears an expression of amused panic .
A soundtrack of cricket noises plays in the background .
In the actual exchange , Bloomberg asks the question of his peers and holds for about a second before saying “ okay ” and moving on with his answer .
Relative to the rest of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one for Bloomberg , and earned him some chuckles from the debate audience .
The comment came as Bloomberg was forced on the defensive by a NBC ’ s Chuck Todd ’ s question about a comment the billionaire made linking the 2008 financial crisis to the end of redlining bias in home loans .
Redlining is the practice where banks marked off neighborhoods populated by people of color , declining to give them loans for home ownership and depriving the areas of investment .
Bloomberg campaign spokeswoman Galia Slayen told TPM that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cheek .
There were obviously no crickets on the debate stage.
” The campaign did not address questions about the decision not to label the video as an edited clip , or if the doctored video will be used in any of the TV ads currently blanketing the Super Tuesday states .

The Michael Bloomberg Twitter account circulated a doctored clip the morning after the Nevada debate, edited to make it look like the former New York mayor had a winning moment in an otherwise panned debate performance.
In the video, Bloomberg turns to the row of his fellow candidates and asks: “I’m the only one here, I think, that’s ever started a business, is that fair?”
In the doctored video, the candidates appear to be rendered mute by the question. Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) stare blankly ahead, mouths agape. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) raises her hand halfheartedly and puts it down again. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) hangs her head, while former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg wears an expression of amused panic. A soundtrack of cricket noises plays in the background.
Here’s the heavily-edited Bloomberg video:
In the actual exchange, Bloomberg asks the question of his peers and holds for about a second before saying “okay” and moving on with his answer. Relative to the rest of the debate, the moment was a good one for Bloomberg, and earned him some chuckles from the debate audience.
Here’s the actual debate moment:
Moment Bloomberg campaign altered in post-debate video pic.twitter.com/bPZVGGC2L0 — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 20, 2020
The comment came as Bloomberg was forced on the defensive by a NBC’s Chuck Todd’s question about a comment the billionaire made linking the 2008 financial crisis to the end of redlining bias in home loans. Redlining is the practice where banks marked off neighborhoods populated by people of color, declining to give them loans for home ownership and depriving the areas of investment.
Bloomberg campaign spokeswoman Galia Slayen told TPM that “[The video] is tongue in cheek. There were obviously no crickets on the debate stage.”
The campaign did not address questions about the decision not to label the video as an edited clip, or if the doctored video will be used in any of the TV ads currently blanketing the Super Tuesday states.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Grenell Brings In Ex-Nunes Loyalist And Starts Digging Into Raw Intel On Russia

New acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell has already asked for access to information about Russian interference in the 2020 election from intelligence agencies under his watch , the New York Times reports .
As overseer of the nation ’ s constituent 17 intelligence agencies , Grenell has oversight authority and the ability to access whatever information he wants .
The job in part demands that he then brief the President .
Grenell also installed a deputy , Kash Patel , a former aide to Re .
Devin Nunes ( R-CA ) with a history spreading conspiracy theories favored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 memo baselessly accusing the Justice Department of abusing its powers to spy on the Trump campaign .
Grenell ’ s appointment and installation of Patel has stoked fears that he will use the role to run intelligence gathered by the government through a political filter .
Trump allegedly picked Grenell to replace his predecessor Joseph Maguire after a subordinate of Maguire ’ s told House lawmakers in a briefing that Russia was supporting the President in his 2020 reelection bid .
The New York Times ’ s report suggests that Grenell has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given to the House Intelligence Committee .
The New York Times also reported that an outgoing career official , replaced by Patel , included a reference in his departing note to the “ uncertainties that come with change .
”

New acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell has already asked for access to information about Russian interference in the 2020 election from intelligence agencies under his watch, the New York Times reports.
As overseer of the nation’s constituent 17 intelligence agencies, Grenell has oversight authority and the ability to access whatever information he wants. The job in part demands that he then brief the President.
Grenell also installed a deputy, Kash Patel, a former aide to Re. Devin Nunes (R-CA) with a history spreading conspiracy theories favored by the President. Patel wrote a 2018 memo baselessly accusing the Justice Department of abusing its powers to spy on the Trump campaign.
Grenell’s appointment and installation of Patel has stoked fears that he will use the role to run intelligence gathered by the government through a political filter.
Trump allegedly picked Grenell to replace his predecessor Joseph Maguire after a subordinate of Maguire’s told House lawmakers in a briefing that Russia was supporting the President in his 2020 reelection bid.
The New York Times’s report suggests that Grenell has requested the intelligence underpinning the briefing, given to the House Intelligence Committee.
The New York Times also reported that an outgoing career official, replaced by Patel, included a reference in his departing note to the “uncertainties that come with change.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--WaPo: Sanders Told By U.S. Officials That Russia Is Boosting His Campaign

U.S. officials have informed Sen. Bernie Senators ( I-VT ) , as well as President Trump and others on Capitol Hill , that Russia ’ s ongoing election interference efforts are also aimed at boosting Sanders ’ presidential run , the Washington Post reported Friday .
“ It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken , ” the Post reported .
The revelation comes on the heels of reports Thursday that lawmakers were last week briefed on Russia ’ s preference for President Trump in 2020 — a briefing that reportedly prompted President Trump to dress down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maguire .
Trump had earlier this week announced that McGuire was stepping down and that Twitter-gadfly-turned-Ambassador Richard Grenell was assuming the acting role for the time being .
In a statement , Sanders bashed the apparent efforts by Russia to interfere in the 2020 election and said that , “ Unlike Donald Trump , I do not consider Vladimir Putin a good friend.
” “ My message to Putin is clear : stay out of American elections , and as president I will make sure that you do , ” Sanders said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ report Thursday on the briefing lawmakers got on Russia ’ s Trump-friendly interference , Shelby Pierson , an aide to Maguire , told the Hill that the meddling Russia had engaged in 2016 had never stopped .
Friday ’ s Washington Post report did not provide much detail about what Sanders and others were told about the help Russia was trying to provide Sanders .
Sanders told reporters that he was briefed on the effort about a month ago and that he was told other countries may try to interfere in the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s 2016 revealed that , while Russian actors sought to damage Hillary Clinton , they also aired pro-Sanders material on social media .
“ The IRA ’ s left-leaning accounts focused their efforts on denigrating Clinton and supporting the candidacy of either fellow Democrat candidate Bernie Sanders or Green Party candidate Jill Stein , at the expense of Hillary , ” the Senate Intelligence Committee ’ s report on Russia ’ s social media efforts said .
Sanders statement on the latest revelations of Russia ’ s efforts suggested that Russia might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often attributed to his supporters .
“ Unlike Donald Trump , I do not consider Vladimir Putin a good friend .
He is an autocratic thug who is attempting to destroy democracy and crush dissent in Russia .
Let ’ s be clear , the Russians want to undermine American democracy by dividing us up and , unlike the current president , I stand firmly against their efforts , and any other foreign power that wants to interfere in our election .
“ I don ’ t care , frankly , who Putin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Putin is clear : stay out of American elections , and as president I will make sure that you do .
“ In 2016 , Russia used internet propaganda to sow division in our country , and my understanding is that they are doing it again in 2020 .
Some of the ugly stuff on the internet attributed to our campaign may well not be coming from real supporters .
“ In my view , because of our extraordinary grassroots organization , because of our grassroots fundraising and because of our agenda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class people , we are the strongest campaign to defeat Donald Trump and that is exactly what we will do .
”

U.S. officials have informed Sen. Bernie Senators (I-VT), as well as President Trump and others on Capitol Hill, that Russia’s ongoing election interference efforts are also aimed at boosting Sanders’ presidential run, the Washington Post reported Friday.
“It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken,” the Post reported.
The revelation comes on the heels of reports Thursday that lawmakers were last week briefed on Russia’s preference for President Trump in 2020 — a briefing that reportedly prompted President Trump to dress down his acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire. Trump had earlier this week announced that McGuire was stepping down and that Twitter-gadfly-turned-Ambassador Richard Grenell was assuming the acting role for the time being.
In a statement, Sanders bashed the apparent efforts by Russia to interfere in the 2020 election and said that, “Unlike Donald Trump, I do not consider Vladimir Putin a good friend.”
“My message to Putin is clear: stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do,” Sanders said.
According to the Daily Beast’s report Thursday on the briefing lawmakers got on Russia’s Trump-friendly interference, Shelby Pierson, an aide to Maguire, told the Hill that the meddling Russia had engaged in 2016 had never stopped.
Friday’s Washington Post report did not provide much detail about what Sanders and others were told about the help Russia was trying to provide Sanders.
Sanders told reporters that he was briefed on the effort about a month ago and that he was told other countries may try to interfere in the election.
The various investigations into Russia’s 2016 revealed that, while Russian actors sought to damage Hillary Clinton, they also aired pro-Sanders material on social media.
“The IRA’s left-leaning accounts focused their efforts on denigrating Clinton and supporting the candidacy of either fellow Democrat candidate Bernie Sanders or Green Party candidate Jill Stein, at the expense of Hillary,” the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on Russia’s social media efforts said.
Sanders statement on the latest revelations of Russia’s efforts suggested that Russia might be behind some of the toxic online rhetoric often attributed to his supporters.
Read Sanders full statement on Washington Post’s report below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Trump’s New Spy Chief Used to Work for a Foreign Politician the US Accused of Corruption

This article first appeared at ProPublica .
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom .
Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox .
President Donald Trump ’ s new acting intelligence director , Richard Grenell , used to do consulting work on behalf of an Eastern European oligarch who is now a fugitive and was recently barred from entering the U.S. under anti-corruption sanctions imposed last month by the State Department .
In 2016 , Grenell wrote several articles defending the oligarch , a Moldovan politician named Vladimir Plahotniuc , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid , according to records and interviews .
Grenell also did not register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act , which generally requires people to disclose work in the U.S. on behalf of foreign politicians .
FARA is the same law that Trump ’ s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and former deputy campaign manager Rick Gates were convicted of violating .
( Manafort went to trial .
Gates pleaded guilty . )
It ’ s not clear whether the articles were directly part of Grenell ’ s paid consulting work for Plahotniuc @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under FARA if it was directed by or primarily benefited a foreign politician , according to Matthew Sanderson , a lawyer at Caplin & Drysdale who advises people on complying with FARA .
FARA contains several exemptions , such as for lawyers and businesses , Sanderson said , but none appear to apply to Grenell ’ s op-eds about Plahotniuc .
“ There is real reason to believe that Mr. Grenell should have registered here , ” Sanderson said after ProPublica described the circumstances to him .
“ This is exactly the type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department of Justice to investigate further.
” Undisclosed work for a foreign politician would ordinarily pose a problem for anyone applying for a security clearance or a job in a U.S. intelligence agency because it could make the person susceptible to foreign influence or blackmail , according to the official policy from the office that Trump tapped Grenell to lead .
The policy specifies that among the “ conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying ” are : • “ Failure to report or fully disclose , when required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group , government or country.
” • “ Substantial business , financial , or property interests in a foreign country … that could subject the individual to a heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation or personal conflict of interest.
” • “ Acting to serve the interest of a foreign person , group , organization or government in any way that conflicts with U.S. national security interests.
” “ That ’ s really easy , he should not have a clearance , ” said Kel McClanahan , a Washington-area lawyer specializing in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of my clients and just a normal [ federal employee ] , he would almost assuredly not have a clearance.
” McClanahan said it ’ s unclear how Grenell could have already gotten a clearance as an ambassador .
The House Oversight Committee is investigating whether the Trump administration has overruled career officials in granting security clearances to political appointees .
As Trump ’ s pick for acting director of national intelligence , Grenell will have access to the country ’ s most sensitive secrets .
Grenell isn ’ t subject to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a temporary basis .
The White House , the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the State Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment .
Grenell , who is also continuing in his current posts as ambassador to Germany and special envoy for negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia , has gained Trump ’ s favor with his unwavering loyalty and combative tweets .
( In one instance , he attacked ProPublica in response to reporting that Vice President Mike Pence ’ s office had intervened in foreign aid decisions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by injecting himself into the country ’ s domestic politics , a departure from usual diplomatic protocol .
Grenell does not have prior experience in intelligence .
He was the U.S. spokesman at the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration .
In between his turns in government , Grenell had a public affairs consulting firm called Capitol Media Partners .
One of the firm ’ s clients , according to the financial disclosure that Grenell filed when he became an ambassador , was Arthur J. Finkelstein , the late Republican political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary .
Grenell ’ s financial disclosure indicates that he received more than $ 5,000 from Finkelstein ’ s firm but does not specify how much .
According to a person familiar with the relationship , Grenell worked for Finkelstein as a media consultant for clients in Eastern Europe .
That person and another individual said the client in Moldova was Plahotniuc , the country ’ s richest man and then a top official in its ruling political party .
In August 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Examiner and Washington Times defending Plahotniuc and attacking his enemies as serving Russian interests .
Plahotniuc and his allies at the time were fending off suspicions of their involvement in a $ 1 billion bank fraud in Moldova .
“ Blaming the ruling party and its leadership has its political benefits for Russia , ” Grenell wrote in the Examiner article .
“ Plahotniuc has been around Moldovan politics , business and civic life for decades and has turned out to be an easy target.
” This narrative aligned with Plahotniuc ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington and European capitals , according to lobbying disclosure records .
“ Certainly there was an effort by him to engage U.S. officials at the time , that despite all this corruption he was the guy most likely to keep Russia at bay and therefore you should accept him , ” said Jonathan Katz , who oversaw U.S. aid programs for Moldova at the time .
“ It didn ’ t match anything he was doing internally in the country , ” Katz said , because Plahotniuc didn ’ t advance U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rule of law .
Grenell was also quoted in an October 2016 article in the Houston Chronicle criticizing a resolution proposed by Rep. Randy Weber , R-Texas , that accused Plahotniuc and his allies of corruption .
“ He ’ s trying to attack the only pro-European group in Moldova , ” Grenell told the Chronicle .
“ The reality is he ’ s pro-himself and nothing more , ” Valeriu Pașa , who leads a prominent civil society group in Moldova called WatchDog.MD , said of Plahotniuc .
“ He was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least.
” Plahotniuc lost power in 2019 and fled Moldova .
His current whereabouts are unknown .
Last month , the State Department endorsed the corruption allegations against him , banning him and his family from entering the U.S. “ In his official capacity , Plahotniuc was involved in corrupt acts that undermined the rule of law and severely compromised the independence of democratic institutions in Moldova , ” the State Department said in its announcement .
“ Today ’ s action sends a strong signal the United States does not tolerate corruption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their fight against it .
”

This article first appeared at ProPublica.
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
President Donald Trump’s new acting intelligence director, Richard Grenell, used to do consulting work on behalf of an Eastern European oligarch who is now a fugitive and was recently barred from entering the U.S. under anti-corruption sanctions imposed last month by the State Department.
In 2016, Grenell wrote several articles defending the oligarch, a Moldovan politician named Vladimir Plahotniuc, but did not disclose that he was being paid, according to records and interviews. Grenell also did not register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which generally requires people to disclose work in the U.S. on behalf of foreign politicians.
FARA is the same law that Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and former deputy campaign manager Rick Gates were convicted of violating. (Manafort went to trial. Gates pleaded guilty.)
It’s not clear whether the articles were directly part of Grenell’s paid consulting work for Plahotniuc. Unpaid work could still require disclosures under FARA if it was directed by or primarily benefited a foreign politician, according to Matthew Sanderson, a lawyer at Caplin & Drysdale who advises people on complying with FARA. FARA contains several exemptions, such as for lawyers and businesses, Sanderson said, but none appear to apply to Grenell’s op-eds about Plahotniuc.
“There is real reason to believe that Mr. Grenell should have registered here,” Sanderson said after ProPublica described the circumstances to him. “This is exactly the type of circumstances I’d expect the Department of Justice to investigate further.”
Undisclosed work for a foreign politician would ordinarily pose a problem for anyone applying for a security clearance or a job in a U.S. intelligence agency because it could make the person susceptible to foreign influence or blackmail, according to the official policy from the office that Trump tapped Grenell to lead.
The policy specifies that among the “conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying” are:
“Failure to report or fully disclose, when required, association with a foreign person, group, government or country.”
“Substantial business, financial, or property interests in a foreign country … that could subject the individual to a heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation or personal conflict of interest.”
“Acting to serve the interest of a foreign person, group, organization or government in any way that conflicts with U.S. national security interests.”
“That’s really easy, he should not have a clearance,” said Kel McClanahan, a Washington-area lawyer specializing in security clearances. “If he were one of my clients and just a normal [federal employee], he would almost assuredly not have a clearance.”
McClanahan said it’s unclear how Grenell could have already gotten a clearance as an ambassador. The House Oversight Committee is investigating whether the Trump administration has overruled career officials in granting security clearances to political appointees.
As Trump’s pick for acting director of national intelligence, Grenell will have access to the country’s most sensitive secrets. Grenell isn’t subject to Senate confirmation because Trump appointed him on a temporary basis.
The White House, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the State Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Grenell, who is also continuing in his current posts as ambassador to Germany and special envoy for negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia, has gained Trump’s favor with his unwavering loyalty and combative tweets. (In one instance, he attacked ProPublica in response to reporting that Vice President Mike Pence’s office had intervened in foreign aid decisions.) He raised hackles in Berlin by injecting himself into the country’s domestic politics, a departure from usual diplomatic protocol.
Grenell does not have prior experience in intelligence. He was the U.S. spokesman at the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration.
In between his turns in government, Grenell had a public affairs consulting firm called Capitol Media Partners. One of the firm’s clients, according to the financial disclosure that Grenell filed when he became an ambassador, was Arthur J. Finkelstein, the late Republican political consultant whose international clients included Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary. Grenell’s financial disclosure indicates that he received more than $5,000 from Finkelstein’s firm but does not specify how much.
According to a person familiar with the relationship, Grenell worked for Finkelstein as a media consultant for clients in Eastern Europe. That person and another individual said the client in Moldova was Plahotniuc, the country’s richest man and then a top official in its ruling political party.
In August 2016, Grenell published op-eds in the right-leaning Washington Examiner and Washington Times defending Plahotniuc and attacking his enemies as serving Russian interests. Plahotniuc and his allies at the time were fending off suspicions of their involvement in a $1 billion bank fraud in Moldova. “Blaming the ruling party and its leadership has its political benefits for Russia,” Grenell wrote in the Examiner article. “Plahotniuc has been around Moldovan politics, business and civic life for decades and has turned out to be an easy target.”
This narrative aligned with Plahotniuc’s efforts to present himself as pro-Western in Washington and European capitals, according to lobbying disclosure records. “Certainly there was an effort by him to engage U.S. officials at the time, that despite all this corruption he was the guy most likely to keep Russia at bay and therefore you should accept him,” said Jonathan Katz, who oversaw U.S. aid programs for Moldova at the time. “It didn’t match anything he was doing internally in the country,” Katz said, because Plahotniuc didn’t advance U.S. interests such as promoting democratic institutions and the rule of law.
Grenell was also quoted in an October 2016 article in the Houston Chronicle criticizing a resolution proposed by Rep. Randy Weber, R-Texas, that accused Plahotniuc and his allies of corruption. “He’s trying to attack the only pro-European group in Moldova,” Grenell told the Chronicle.
“The reality is he’s pro-himself and nothing more,” Valeriu Pașa, who leads a prominent civil society group in Moldova called WatchDog.MD, said of Plahotniuc. “He was playing both sides for 15 years at least.”
Plahotniuc lost power in 2019 and fled Moldova. His current whereabouts are unknown. Last month, the State Department endorsed the corruption allegations against him, banning him and his family from entering the U.S.
“In his official capacity, Plahotniuc was involved in corrupt acts that undermined the rule of law and severely compromised the independence of democratic institutions in Moldova,” the State Department said in its announcement. “Today’s action sends a strong signal the United States does not tolerate corruption and stands with the people of Moldova in their fight against it.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Bloomberg Will Release Three Women Who Complained About Him From Their NDAs

Former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg will release three women who registered complaints about him from their nondisclosure agreements in a striking victory for Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) , who has been pressing the issue .
“ I ’ ve had the company go back over its record and they ’ ve identified 3 NDAs that we signed over the past 30-plus years with women to address complaints about comments they said I had made , ” Bloomberg said in a statement .
“ If any of them want to be released from their NDA so that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should contact the company and they ’ ll be given a release.
” “ I ’ ve done a lot of reflecting on this issue over the past few days and I ’ ve decided that for as long as I ’ m running the company , we won ’ t offer confidentiality agreements to resolve claims of sexual harassment or misconduct going forward , ” he added .
He also promised to institute cultural changes at his company , along with structural ones in the form of equal pay and family leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg weak point and went to town during the Nevada debate , challenging him to release all of his former employees from their non-disclosure agreements .
She even wrote up a text for him to use .
Her campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
During the debate , Bloomberg would not promise to free the employees from what he called their “ consensual ” agreements and cited statistics about women in leadership at his company in response .
His dismissal of “ jokes ” he may have made @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg will release three women who registered complaints about him from their nondisclosure agreements in a striking victory for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has been pressing the issue.
“I’ve had the company go back over its record and they’ve identified 3 NDAs that we signed over the past 30-plus years with women to address complaints about comments they said I had made,” Bloomberg said in a statement. “If any of them want to be released from their NDA so that they can talk about those allegations, they should contact the company and they’ll be given a release.”
“I’ve done a lot of reflecting on this issue over the past few days and I’ve decided that for as long as I’m running the company, we won’t offer confidentiality agreements to resolve claims of sexual harassment or misconduct going forward,” he added.
He also promised to institute cultural changes at his company, along with structural ones in the form of equal pay and family leave.
Warren identified the NDAs as a Bloomberg weak point and went to town during the Nevada debate, challenging him to release all of his former employees from their non-disclosure agreements. She even wrote up a text for him to use. Her campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
During the debate, Bloomberg would not promise to free the employees from what he called their “consensual” agreements and cited statistics about women in leadership at his company in response. His dismissal of “jokes” he may have made elicited boos from the debate audience.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Bloomberg Blames Sanders Camp For Vandalized Office, Citing Similar Vocab

The Knoxville campaign office of Michael Bloomberg was vandalized Thursday night — and the campaign manager is blaming the Bernie Sanders camp .
“ This latest incident at our Knoxville campaign office is exactly what we ’ ve been warning about , ” Campaign Manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement .
“ We don ’ t know who is responsible for this vandalism , but we do know it echoes language from the Sanders campaign and its supporters.
” Per Scott Erland , the Knoxville Police Department public information officer , there are no suspects , witness information or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened either late Thursday night or early Friday morning .
“ We are assigning an investigator from the Property Crimes Unit to investigate the incident , ” he added .
Campaign spokeswoman Galia Slayen told TPM that the vandals wrote “ Resist , ” “ Fuck Bloomberg ” and “ Oligarch ” on the building .
In his statement , Sheekey included examples of Sanders and his team using similar verbiage .
The Bloomberg campaign did not respond to a question about if they had any further evidence , but is calling on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say has happened at other campaign offices too .
The Sanders campaign did not respond to a request for comment .
Sanders and Bloomberg have been sparring for days , not least over transparency about their respective physical health .
Bloomberg has been calling for Sanders to release his full health records , and a Sanders surrogate falsely stated that Bloomberg had suffered from heart attacks .
However , Sanders has taken heat from multiple candidates about the infamously vicious behavior of some of his supporters , especially online .
He tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Nevada debate on Wednesday , suggesting that perhaps foreign bots were masquerading as badly behaving Sanders fans to create disruption .
Experts have concluded that there is no proof that that .

The Knoxville campaign office of Michael Bloomberg was vandalized Thursday night — and the campaign manager is blaming the Bernie Sanders camp.
“This latest incident at our Knoxville campaign office is exactly what we’ve been warning about,” Campaign Manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement. “We don’t know who is responsible for this vandalism, but we do know it echoes language from the Sanders campaign and its supporters.”
Per Scott Erland, the Knoxville Police Department public information officer, there are no suspects, witness information or nearby video cameras. The spray painting happened either late Thursday night or early Friday morning.
“We are assigning an investigator from the Property Crimes Unit to investigate the incident,” he added.
Campaign spokeswoman Galia Slayen told TPM that the vandals wrote “Resist,” “Fuck Bloomberg” and “Oligarch” on the building.
In his statement, Sheekey included examples of Sanders and his team using similar verbiage. The Bloomberg campaign did not respond to a question about if they had any further evidence, but is calling on Sanders to disavow the destruction which officials say has happened at other campaign offices too.
The Sanders campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Sanders and Bloomberg have been sparring for days, not least over transparency about their respective physical health. Bloomberg has been calling for Sanders to release his full health records, and a Sanders surrogate falsely stated that Bloomberg had suffered from heart attacks.
However, Sanders has taken heat from multiple candidates about the infamously vicious behavior of some of his supporters, especially online. He tried to wash his hands of the accusations during the Nevada debate on Wednesday, suggesting that perhaps foreign bots were masquerading as badly behaving Sanders fans to create disruption. Experts have concluded that there is no proof that that.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--She’s Running: Ilhan Omar’s GOP Challenger Is On The Lam Amid Shoplifting Charges

She ’ s running for Congress–and from the law .
Local Minnesota authorities are on the lookout for Rep. Ilhan Omar ’ s ( D-MN ) Republican challenger , Danielle Stella , who failed to appear in court after she was charged with theft .
Staffers at the Hennepin County District Court and the county sheriff ’ s office confirmed to TPM that a judge had issued an arrest warrant after Stella skipped her hearing on October 31 .
“ We can confirm that she does have an active felony theft warrant in Hennepin County , ” Jeremy Zoss , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said in an emailed statement .
The warrant was first reported by the Daily Beast .
Stella allegedly shoplifted over $ 2,000 worth of items from Target in January 2019 , then approximately $ 40 in “ cat merchandise ” from a grocery store several months later .
The GOP candidate insisted she was innocent when the Guardian first reported on the charges in July .
“ I am not guilty of these crimes , ” she told the Guardian .
“ In this country I am innocent until proven guilty and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the alleged shoplifting , Stella is infamous for her bombastic attacks on Omar and peddling racist conspiracy theories about the Somali-born congresswoman .
Twitter permanently suspended the Republican in November after she suggested that the Omar ought to be “ hanged ” for treason .
“ My suspension for advocating for the enforcement of federal code proves Twitter will always side with and fight to protect terrorists , traitors , pedophiles and rapists , ” Stella said in response to the ban .

She’s running for Congress–and from the law.
Local Minnesota authorities are on the lookout for Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) Republican challenger, Danielle Stella, who failed to appear in court after she was charged with theft.
Staffers at the Hennepin County District Court and the county sheriff’s office confirmed to TPM that a judge had issued an arrest warrant after Stella skipped her hearing on October 31.
“We can confirm that she does have an active felony theft warrant in Hennepin County,” Jeremy Zoss, the sheriff’s director of communications, said in an emailed statement.
The warrant was first reported by the Daily Beast.
Stella allegedly shoplifted over $2,000 worth of items from Target in January 2019, then approximately $40 in “cat merchandise” from a grocery store several months later.
The GOP candidate insisted she was innocent when the Guardian first reported on the charges in July.
“I am not guilty of these crimes,” she told the Guardian. “In this country I am innocent until proven guilty and that is the law.”
In addition to the alleged shoplifting, Stella is infamous for her bombastic attacks on Omar and peddling racist conspiracy theories about the Somali-born congresswoman.
Twitter permanently suspended the Republican in November after she suggested that the Omar ought to be “hanged” for treason.
“My suspension for advocating for the enforcement of federal code proves Twitter will always side with and fight to protect terrorists, traitors, pedophiles and rapists,” Stella said in response to the ban.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Will L.A.’s Voting Overhaul Be An Industry Disrupter Or The Next Election Debacle?

If you want something done right , do it yourself , the old adage goes .
But whether that adage can apply to election systems is a major question in the voting rights world and one that Los Angeles County will be trying to answer this election cycle .
With in-person primary voting starting in earnest on Saturday , L.A. County is rolling out a comprehensive overhaul of its election system that was more than a decade in the making and that costs some $ 300 million .
In a first , the system is entirely publicly owned , meaning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and is controlled by the local government .
The stakes for L.A. were always going to be high , given the county ’ s massive and incredibly diverse population .
The county has 5.4 million registered voters , more than 42 states .
Recent debacles in other primary elections have only added more scrutiny , and the technology is being launched at a pivotal time in the Democratic presidential primary .
The new system has been praised broadly by election administration wonks , some of whom having advised the county directly on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticism from some security experts , while prompting a lawsuit from one of L.A. ’ s cities .
“ The problem is that there are just unsolvable technical difficulties in trying to create a one-size-fits-all system , ” said Philip Stark , a professor at U.C .
Berkeley who has warned there is a “ perfect storm ” of things that could go wrong .
A major focus of the overhaul was to create a system that was more accessible for the county ’ s millions of voters while also having the capability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ L.A. ’ s changing demographics .
The technological improvements come as L.A. also moves to a so-called vote center system , which will replace the traditional precinct-based model .
In doing so , L.A. is reducing the number of polling places , in favor of larger , more sophisticated vote centers , where voters from any precinct in the county can go to cast their ballots .
While voters in other states have benefitted from a switch to vote centers , they have also sometimes caused confusion and long lines , as was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic primary .
California also offers a mail-in ballot option , which more than half of L.A. County ’ s voters has requested to use .
Once a voter shows up to a vote center , she will be given a ballot with a special barcode that will tell the voting machine — a tablet resembling an iPad — which of the county ’ s 524 different ballot-types for the March primary should be brought up .
The voter will also have the choice of 13 different languages , and the tablets have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ audio function , adjustable font and contrast , a braille keyboard , among many others ) that will make it easier for voters of all abilities to submit their selections .
“ It was so intuitive to interact with , ” said Tammy Patrick , an elections expert at Democracy Fund who participated in a demonstration of the system .
“ It works like the technology that we ’ re accustomed to in our day-to-day life.
” The system is called Voting Solutions for All People ( VSAP ) , as it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ various abilities in mind and because all voters can use the same equipment .
“ It ’ s an inclusive voting experience for every voter , no matter if you have a disability or if you don ’ t , ” said Gabe Taylor , a voting rights advocate for the nonprofit Disability Rights California , which worked with the county to design the system .
Those who have criticized the system have no doubts about the county ’ s good intentions , but their skepticism arises from the larger debate over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as the VSAP tablets ) versus equipment that requires voters to mark a paper ballot with their own hands .
L.A. County ’ s new system creates a paper trail by printing out a paper ballot for the voter to examine herself before she submits it .
The problem , according to Stark , is that if a voter does see an issue on her paper ballot , there ’ s no way for the poll worker to know if the discrepancy is the result of user error or was caused by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ malfunctions caused by a bad actor .
Stark and other critics , including Sen. Ron Wyden ( D-OR ) , have argued that ballot marking devices should be available for those who need them , but that hand-marked paper ballots should be the standard offer to voters who can vote that way .
There are other aspects specific to L.A. ’ s system that have attracted scrutiny .
Some have taken issue with the so-called “ poll pass ” feature , which allows voters to bring with them a pre-made barcode that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make all of their choices .
Compared to the rest of the system , “ poll pass has not been thoroughly tested or reviewed , ” said David Holtzman , the former head of L.A. ’ s League of Women Voters , adding that “ it leaves the system vulnerable to a few problems.
” Additionally , the county was sued by the city of Beverly Hills for the way the system deals with contests that have more than four candidates .
The tablets use a “ more ” button to bring up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which , according to the lawsuit , creates “ a significant electoral disadvantage ” for candidates listed on later pages compared to those listed on the first .
The “ more ” button issue was also highlighted as a concern by California Secretary of State Alex Padilla during the certification process .
California law required that L.A. County , like private vendors , go through the state ’ s certification process , perhaps the most rigorous in the country .
All in all , in Padilla ’ s approval of the system , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the approval , spelling out several aspects of the system that L.A. County will need to continue to work on fixing or improving .
Among the conditions was that the county make available hand-marked paper ballots at vote centers , which was something that the county initially sought to avoid .
VSAP ’ s critics pointed to the sheer number of conditions as reason to be worried about the system , though an official in the secretary of state ’ s office told TPM that every certification that ’ s issued is conditional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s certification system — and of L.A. ’ s overhaul process more broadly — may have further opened the new system to criticism .
Justin Levitt , a Loyola Marymount law school professor who advised the county on the overhaul , said that the criticisms came down to trade-offs that are inevitably involved in a project like this .
“ I don ’ t mean to minimize the concerns that people are raising , but in order to eliminate them entirely you ’ ve got to trade off something else , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the risk of the problems manifesting isn ’ t worth the trade-off to me.
” Despite the criticisms , VSAP ’ s designers and supporters are heading into this month ’ s primary with confidence because of the intensive process the county went through in creating and testing the system .
Seeking to replace equipment dating back to the 1960s , L.A. started the initiative in 2009 , as it struggled to find a private vendor that offered a comprehensive system that could address the county ’ s complicated needs .
Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said officials began designing the system in 2014 , and have continued to refine it based on stakeholder feedback as recently as this year .
Testing for the system included a pilot election in a municipal contest in November .
“ They planned to give it enough time to work , ” Levitt said , avoiding the temptation to focus on short-term fixes to the detriment of a longterm solution .
Beyond just the example the county set in its process , there are other ways VSAP could be “ a game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections systems industry , as Patrick put it .
L.A. County has said it intends to make the technology available for other jurisdictions to use and experts generally expect that the overhaul will put more pressure on the election equipment industry — which is currently dominated by a few private vendors not known for their transparency — to innovate .
“ In some ways , there ’ s nothing revolutionary about VSAP , ” said Whitney Quesenbery , co-director of the Center for Civic Design , who sat on an advisory board for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways , what ’ s revolutionary is how well they put it together .
”

If you want something done right, do it yourself, the old adage goes.
But whether that adage can apply to election systems is a major question in the voting rights world and one that Los Angeles County will be trying to answer this election cycle.
With in-person primary voting starting in earnest on Saturday, L.A. County is rolling out a comprehensive overhaul of its election system that was more than a decade in the making and that costs some $300 million.
In a first, the system is entirely publicly owned, meaning that all of the equipment was commissioned and is controlled by the local government.
The stakes for L.A. were always going to be high, given the county’s massive and incredibly diverse population. The county has 5.4 million registered voters, more than 42 states.
Recent debacles in other primary elections have only added more scrutiny, and the technology is being launched at a pivotal time in the Democratic presidential primary.
The new system has been praised broadly by election administration wonks, some of whom having advised the county directly on the overhaul. But it has also attracted criticism from some security experts, while prompting a lawsuit from one of L.A.’s cities.
“The problem is that there are just unsolvable technical difficulties in trying to create a one-size-fits-all system,” said Philip Stark, a professor at U.C. Berkeley who has warned there is a “perfect storm” of things that could go wrong.
Voting Solutions for All People
A major focus of the overhaul was to create a system that was more accessible for the county’s millions of voters while also having the capability to evolve with the shifting needs of L.A.’s changing demographics.
The technological improvements come as L.A. also moves to a so-called vote center system, which will replace the traditional precinct-based model. In doing so, L.A. is reducing the number of polling places, in favor of larger, more sophisticated vote centers, where voters from any precinct in the county can go to cast their ballots.
While voters in other states have benefitted from a switch to vote centers, they have also sometimes caused confusion and long lines, as was the case in Arizona’s 2016 Democratic primary. California also offers a mail-in ballot option, which more than half of L.A. County’s voters has requested to use.
Once a voter shows up to a vote center, she will be given a ballot with a special barcode that will tell the voting machine — a tablet resembling an iPad — which of the county’s 524 different ballot-types for the March primary should be brought up. The voter will also have the choice of 13 different languages, and the tablets have been equipped with several features (an audio function, adjustable font and contrast, a braille keyboard, among many others) that will make it easier for voters of all abilities to submit their selections.
“It was so intuitive to interact with,” said Tammy Patrick, an elections expert at Democracy Fund who participated in a demonstration of the system. “It works like the technology that we’re accustomed to in our day-to-day life.”
The system is called Voting Solutions for All People (VSAP), as it has been designed with needs of people of various abilities in mind and because all voters can use the same equipment.
“It’s an inclusive voting experience for every voter, no matter if you have a disability or if you don’t,” said Gabe Taylor, a voting rights advocate for the nonprofit Disability Rights California, which worked with the county to design the system.
‘It Leaves The System Vulnerable’
Those who have criticized the system have no doubts about the county’s good intentions, but their skepticism arises from the larger debate over the use of so-called ballot marking devices (such as the VSAP tablets) versus equipment that requires voters to mark a paper ballot with their own hands.
L.A. County’s new system creates a paper trail by printing out a paper ballot for the voter to examine herself before she submits it. The problem, according to Stark, is that if a voter does see an issue on her paper ballot, there’s no way for the poll worker to know if the discrepancy is the result of user error or was caused by some malfunction of the machine, including malfunctions caused by a bad actor.
Stark and other critics, including Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), have argued that ballot marking devices should be available for those who need them, but that hand-marked paper ballots should be the standard offer to voters who can vote that way.
There are other aspects specific to L.A.’s system that have attracted scrutiny. Some have taken issue with the so-called “poll pass” feature, which allows voters to bring with them a pre-made barcode that they can scan at the tablets to automatically make all of their choices.
Compared to the rest of the system, “poll pass has not been thoroughly tested or reviewed,” said David Holtzman, the former head of L.A.’s League of Women Voters, adding that “it leaves the system vulnerable to a few problems.”
Additionally, the county was sued by the city of Beverly Hills for the way the system deals with contests that have more than four candidates. The tablets use a “more” button to bring up the next page of four candidates, which, according to the lawsuit, creates “a significant electoral disadvantage” for candidates listed on later pages compared to those listed on the first.
The “more” button issue was also highlighted as a concern by California Secretary of State Alex Padilla during the certification process. California law required that L.A. County, like private vendors, go through the state’s certification process, perhaps the most rigorous in the country.
All in all, in Padilla’s approval of the system, he listed about three dozen conditions for the approval, spelling out several aspects of the system that L.A. County will need to continue to work on fixing or improving. Among the conditions was that the county make available hand-marked paper ballots at vote centers, which was something that the county initially sought to avoid.
VSAP’s critics pointed to the sheer number of conditions as reason to be worried about the system, though an official in the secretary of state’s office told TPM that every certification that’s issued is conditional.
Ironically, the transparency of California’s certification system — and of L.A.’s overhaul process more broadly — may have further opened the new system to criticism.
Justin Levitt, a Loyola Marymount law school professor who advised the county on the overhaul, said that the criticisms came down to trade-offs that are inevitably involved in a project like this.
“I don’t mean to minimize the concerns that people are raising, but in order to eliminate them entirely you’ve got to trade off something else,” Levitt said. “From my view, the risk of the problems manifesting isn’t worth the trade-off to me.”
‘A Game Changer in the Marketplace’
Despite the criticisms, VSAP’s designers and supporters are heading into this month’s primary with confidence because of the intensive process the county went through in creating and testing the system.
Seeking to replace equipment dating back to the 1960s, L.A. started the initiative in 2009, as it struggled to find a private vendor that offered a comprehensive system that could address the county’s complicated needs.
Mike Sanchez, a spokesperson for County Registrar-Recorder, said officials began designing the system in 2014, and have continued to refine it based on stakeholder feedback as recently as this year. Testing for the system included a pilot election in a municipal contest in November.
“They planned to give it enough time to work,” Levitt said, avoiding the temptation to focus on short-term fixes to the detriment of a longterm solution.
Beyond just the example the county set in its process, there are other ways VSAP could be “a game changer in the marketplace” for the elections systems industry, as Patrick put it.
L.A. County has said it intends to make the technology available for other jurisdictions to use and experts generally expect that the overhaul will put more pressure on the election equipment industry — which is currently dominated by a few private vendors not known for their transparency — to innovate.
“In some ways, there’s nothing revolutionary about VSAP,” said Whitney Quesenbery, co-director of the Center for Civic Design, who sat on an advisory board for the project. “And in other ways, what’s revolutionary is how well they put it together.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Navarro Hunting ‘Anonymous’ Writer To Get In Good With Trump: ‘Suspects Are Everywhere’

Though Peter Navarro is director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy in name , he ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ ” the administration official who wrote the anonymous New York Times op-ed in September 2018 @ @ @ @ @ A Warning.
” On CNN ’ s New Day Friday , Navarro said it ’ @ @ @ @ @ and that there are “ suspects everywhere.
” His amateur sleuthing has already cost one @ @ @ @ @ Victoria Coates left the National Security Council for the Department of Energy .
Though the @ @ @ @ @ was not the author , Navarro ’ s suspicion was enough to make her job @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump claimed that he knows the identity of the author earlier this week @ @ @ @ @ name names , saying he wasn ’ t at liberty to say .

Though Peter Navarro is director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy in name, he’s been spending considerable time “hunting” the administration official who wrote the anonymous New York Times op-ed in September 2018 and the book, “A Warning.”
On CNN’s New Day Friday, Navarro said it’s a “vocation” and that there are “suspects everywhere.”
His amateur sleuthing has already cost one official her job, as Victoria Coates left the National Security Council for the Department of Energy.
Though the book publishers insisted that Coates was not the author, Navarro’s suspicion was enough to make her job at the NSC untenable.
President Donald Trump claimed that he knows the identity of the author earlier this week, but wouldn’t name names, saying he wasn’t at liberty to say.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--‘Parasite’ Distributor Says Trump ‘Can’t Read’ After He Moans About Subtitled Film’s Oscar Win

NEON , the film distributor of the Korean blockbuster film “ Parasite , ” swiped at President Donald Trump on Thursday night after he complained about the subtitled movie winning “ Best Picture ” at the Oscars .
A few hours earlier , Trump had ranted about the Oscar for “ this foreign film ” during his campaign rally in Colorado Springs , Colorado .
“ What the hell was that all that about ?
” he asked .
“ We ’ ve got enough problems with South Korea , with trade .
On top of that , they give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump waxed nostalgic for the 1939 film “ Gone With the Wind , ” which is infamous for its racist portrayal of the Civil War-era American South .
“ Let ’ s get ‘ Gone With the Wind , ” he said .
“ Can we get ‘ Gone With the Wind ’ back , please ?
” The President also attacked actor Brad Pitt , who had noted during his Oscar acceptance speech that he only had 45 seconds to speak , “ which is 45 seconds more than the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial .
“ He ’ s a little wiseguy , ” said Trump , ever sensitive to criticism from Hollywood .

NEON, the film distributor of the Korean blockbuster film “Parasite,” swiped at President Donald Trump on Thursday night after he complained about the subtitled movie winning “Best Picture” at the Oscars.
“Understandable, he can’t read,” the distributor tweeted.
A few hours earlier, Trump had ranted about the Oscar for “this foreign film” during his campaign rally in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
“What the hell was that all that about?” he asked. “We’ve got enough problems with South Korea, with trade. On top of that, they give them the best movie of the year.”
Trump waxed nostalgic for the 1939 film “Gone With the Wind,” which is infamous for its racist portrayal of the Civil War-era American South.
“Let’s get ‘Gone With the Wind,” he said. “Can we get ‘Gone With the Wind’ back, please?”
The President also attacked actor Brad Pitt, who had noted during his Oscar acceptance speech that he only had 45 seconds to speak, “which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton” in the impeachment trial.
“He’s a little wiseguy,” said Trump, ever sensitive to criticism from Hollywood.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-21--Warren Doesn’t Let Up On Bloomberg NDAs

Warren Doesn’t Let Up On Bloomberg NDAs

Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) , capitalizing on one of her winningest moments from the Nevada debate , opened her CNN town hall Thursday by reading a contract she wrote to release former Bloomberg employees from Michael Bloomberg ’ s non-disclosure agreements .
“ So I used to teach contract law , ” she said .
“ And I thought I would make this easy .
I wrote up a release and covenant not to sue .
And all that Mayor Bloomberg has to do is download it.
” She then proceeding to read the text of the contract @ @ @ @ @ @ @ performance Wednesday , Warren had one of the best moments of the night when she challenged Bloomberg to release his former employees from their NDAs right there on stage .
The former New York mayor tried to counter with statistics about women in leadership roles at his company , but Warren dismissed the line of defense as being “ nice to some women.
” Bloomberg rolled his eyes at the comment .
Bloomberg also claimed that the contracts were formed with “ consensual ” agreement and claimed that the only possibly objectionable thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ jokes.
” The debate audience booed .
As her campaign aides told the New York Times , the attacks were unscripted and improvised by Warren on the spot .
She had planned to train her fire on Bloomberg in general , though , opening the night with a blistering reminder of terms Bloomberg has called women , including “ fat broads ” and “ horse-faced lesbians.
” Warren raked in cash during and after her fierce and aggressive performance , adding a much-needed infusion to her previously anemic fundraising .

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), capitalizing on one of her winningest moments from the Nevada debate, opened her CNN town hall Thursday by reading a contract she wrote to release former Bloomberg employees from Michael Bloomberg’s non-disclosure agreements.
“So I used to teach contract law,” she said. “And I thought I would make this easy. I wrote up a release and covenant not to sue. And all that Mayor Bloomberg has to do is download it.”
She then proceeding to read the text of the contract out loud.
Warren reads a contract she wrote to release Bloomberg’s former employees from their non-disclosure agreements pic.twitter.com/nub3PQ1CSQ — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 21, 2020
During her strong debate performance Wednesday, Warren had one of the best moments of the night when she challenged Bloomberg to release his former employees from their NDAs right there on stage.
The former New York mayor tried to counter with statistics about women in leadership roles at his company, but Warren dismissed the line of defense as being “nice to some women.” Bloomberg rolled his eyes at the comment.
Bloomberg also claimed that the contracts were formed with “consensual” agreement and claimed that the only possibly objectionable thing he’d done is tell some “jokes.” The debate audience booed.
As her campaign aides told the New York Times, the attacks were unscripted and improvised by Warren on the spot. She had planned to train her fire on Bloomberg in general, though, opening the night with a blistering reminder of terms Bloomberg has called women, including “fat broads” and “horse-faced lesbians.”
Warren raked in cash during and after her fierce and aggressive performance, adding a much-needed infusion to her previously anemic fundraising.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-22--Stone Tries To Get Judge Booted From Case Because She Mentioned Jurors’ ‘Integrity’

In a last-ditch effort to get a new trial , former President Trump associate Roger Stone filed a motion Friday night to disqualify the federal judge who presided over his case and just sentenced him to more than three years in prison .
In a new motion filed Friday , Stone ’ s legal team argues that Judge Amy Berman Jackson should be pulled from the case because she made a remark about the “ integrity ” about the jurors on the case .
Stone ’ s team , and several other conservative conspiracists , including the President , made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the jurors on the case was biased against Stone .
“ Stone ’ s motion for new trial is directly related to the integrity of a juror .
It is alleged that a juror misled the court regarding her ability to be unbiased and fair and the juror attempted to cover up evidence that would directly contradict her false claims of impartiality , ” the motion said .
The new motion references an exchange between Berman Jackson and Stone lawyers : “ Sure , the defense is free to say , ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But I ’ ll say this : Congress cared , ” Berman Jackson said .
“ The United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case cared .
The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared .
The American people cared .
And I care.
” Stone already filed a motion for a new trial before he was sentenced this week , using the debacle in the Justice Department over his sentencing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Friday ’ s motion appears to be just the latest attempt by Stone to avoid jail time .
But as experts pointed out to The Washington Post , it ’ s possible this is also a bid for a presidential pardon because the move gives fodder to political claims that Berman Jackson was unfair .
Stone was sentenced to 40 months in prison for , among other things , lying to Congress about his contacts with Wikileaks during its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election .

In a last-ditch effort to get a new trial, former President Trump associate Roger Stone filed a motion Friday night to disqualify the federal judge who presided over his case and just sentenced him to more than three years in prison.
In a new motion filed Friday, Stone’s legal team argues that Judge Amy Berman Jackson should be pulled from the case because she made a remark about the “integrity” about the jurors on the case. Stone’s team, and several other conservative conspiracists, including the President, made an outrageous claim that at least one of the jurors on the case was biased against Stone.
“Stone’s motion for new trial is directly related to the integrity of a juror. It is alleged
that a juror misled the court regarding her ability to be unbiased and fair and the juror attempted to cover up evidence that would directly contradict her false claims of impartiality,” the motion said.
The new motion references an exchange between Berman Jackson and Stone lawyers:
“Sure, the defense is free to say, ‘So what? Who cares?’ But I’ll say this: Congress cared,” Berman Jackson said. “The United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case cared. The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared. The American people cared. And I care.”
Stone already filed a motion for a new trial before he was sentenced this week, using the debacle in the Justice Department over his sentencing as rationale for scrapping the months-long trial. Friday’s motion appears to be just the latest attempt by Stone to avoid jail time. But as experts pointed out to The Washington Post, it’s possible this is also a bid for a presidential pardon because the move gives fodder to political claims that Berman Jackson was unfair.
Stone was sentenced to 40 months in prison for, among other things, lying to Congress about his contacts with Wikileaks during its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Read the full motion below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-23--The Frontrunner: Bernie Sanders Projected To Win Nevada Caucuses

2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) is projected to win Nevada ’ s Democratic caucus handily on Saturday night , giving his campaign another boost after his win in New Hampshire and strong showing in the unsettled Iowa caucuses .
With about 4 percent of the vote in , Sanders emerged as the victor winning 54 percent of delegates , according to the New York Times .
A jubilant Sanders gave a victory speech to a roaring crowd during his campaign stop in San Antonio , Texas , with his wife , whom he introduced as “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States.
” “ In Nevada we have just put together a multigenerational , multiracial coalition which is going to not only win in Nevada , it ’ s going to sweep this country , ” Sanders told his cheering supporters .
“ And in Nevada and in New Hampshire and in Iowa , what we showed is that our volunteers are prepared to knock on hundreds and hundreds of thousands of doors , ” he continued .
“ That no campaign has a grassroots movement like we do , which is another reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this election.
” Former Vice President Joe Biden is projected to come in second at 17.2 percent .
Fox News was the first to call the race earlier in the night , followed by NBC News at approximately 7:30 , then ABC News , the Associated Press , CBS News , and finally CNN .
The caucuses in the Silver State went smoothly for the most part , in stark contrast with their counterparts in Iowa , which still has not declared an official winner in the midst of a recanvass .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official results , clearly wanting to avoid the errors that plagued the Iowa contest .
Nevada , with its large Latinx population , is the first state in the primaries in which candidates need to prove whether their campaigns resonate with more diverse communities than those in the heavily white states of Iowa and New Hampshire .
According to early entrance poll results , Sanders was far and away the favorite among Hispanic voters .

2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is projected to win Nevada’s Democratic caucus handily on Saturday night, giving his campaign another boost after his win in New Hampshire and strong showing in the unsettled Iowa caucuses.
With about 60 percent of the vote in, Sanders emerged as the victor by winning 46 percent of delegates, according to the New York Times.
A jubilant Sanders gave a victory speech to a roaring crowd during his campaign stop in San Antonio, Texas, with his wife, whom he introduced as “the next First Lady of the United States.”
“In Nevada we have just put together a multigenerational, multiracial coalition which is going to not only win in Nevada, it’s going to sweep this country,” Sanders told his cheering supporters.
“And in Nevada and in New Hampshire and in Iowa, what we showed is that our volunteers are prepared to knock on hundreds and hundreds of thousands of doors,” he continued. “That no campaign has a grassroots movement like we do, which is another reason why we’re going to win this election.”
Former Vice President Joe Biden is projected to come in second at 19.6 percent.
Fox News was the first to call the race earlier in the night, followed by NBC News at approximately 7:30, then ABC News, the Associated Press, CBS News, and finally CNN.
The caucuses in the Silver State went smoothly for the most part, in stark contrast with their counterparts in Iowa, which still has not declared an official winner in the midst of a recanvass. The Nevada Democratic Party was slow to report official results, clearly wanting to avoid the errors that plagued the Iowa contest.
Nevada, with its large Latinx population, is the first state in the primaries in which candidates need to prove whether their campaigns resonate with more diverse communities than those in the heavily white states of Iowa and New Hampshire. According to early entrance poll results, Sanders was far and away the favorite among Hispanic voters.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-23--Trump Threatens Schiff Again By Baselessly Claiming That He Leaked Briefing Info

President Trump appeared to suggest in a Sunday afternoon tweet that Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) could face consequences over reports of a classified intelligence briefing earlier this month warning House lawmakers of Russian interference in the 2020 presidential election .
In his Sunday afternoon tweet , Trump baselessly claimed that Schiff leaked classified information from the briefing and warned that “ someday he will be caught.
” Trump ’ s tweet comes days after The New York Times first reported Thursday that the President was angered by a classified briefing earlier this month hosted by intelligence officials .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ House lawmakers that Russia was interfering in the 2020 presidential election in an effort to help the President ’ s re-election .
Intelligence official Shelby Pierson reportedly told members of Schiff ’ s House Intelligence Committee during the classified briefing that Russia has “ developed a preference ” for Trump .
A few minutes after his tweet slamming Schiff , Trump seemed to mockingly suggest in another tweet that Mueller should do another investigation following Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ ( I-VT ) win in the Nevada caucuses .
On Friday , the Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. officials that Russia is attempting to help his campaign in the Democratic presidential primary .
Earlier Sunday , Trump said that he ’ s “ not been briefed at all ” about Russian interference in the 2020 presidential election before departing the White House for India .
“ I read where Russia ’ s helping Bernie Sanders .
Nobody said it to me at all .
Nobody briefed me about that at all , ” Trump said .
“ I have not been briefed on that at all .
Nobody told me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Sunday morning tweet by accusing Trump of “ deflection.
” This isn ’ t the first time that Trump threatened Schiff .
Last month , Trump tweeted that Schiff “ has not paid the price yet ” for his impeachment manager role in the Senate trial .

President Trump appeared to suggest in a Sunday afternoon tweet that Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) could face consequences over reports of a classified intelligence briefing earlier this month warning House lawmakers of Russian interference in the 2020 presidential election.
In his Sunday afternoon tweet, Trump baselessly claimed that Schiff leaked classified information from the briefing and warned that “someday he will be caught.”
Somebody please tell incompetent (thanks for my high poll numbers) & corrupt politician Adam “Shifty” Schiff to stop leaking Classified information or, even worse, made up information, to the Fake News Media. Someday he will be caught, & that will be a very unpleasant experience! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 23, 2020
Trump’s tweet comes days after The New York Times first reported Thursday that the President was angered by a classified briefing earlier this month hosted by intelligence officials. During the briefing, intelligence officials warned House lawmakers that Russia was interfering in the 2020 presidential election in an effort to help the President’s re-election.
Intelligence official Shelby Pierson reportedly told members of Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee during the classified briefing that Russia has “developed a preference” for Trump.
A few minutes after his tweet slamming Schiff, Trump seemed to mockingly suggest in another tweet that Mueller should do another investigation following Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) win in the Nevada caucuses. On Friday, the Washington Post reported that Sanders was briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is attempting to help his campaign in the Democratic presidential primary.
Are any Democrat operatives, the DNC, or Crooked Hillary Clinton, blaming Russia, Russia, Russia for the Bernie Sanders win in Nevada. If so I suggest calling Bob Mueller & the 13 Angry Democrats to do a new Mueller Report, Democrat Edition. Bob will get to the bottom of it! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 23, 2020
Earlier Sunday, Trump said that he’s “not been briefed at all” about Russian interference in the 2020 presidential election before departing the White House for India.
“I read where Russia’s helping Bernie Sanders. Nobody said it to me at all. Nobody briefed me about that at all,” Trump said. “I have not been briefed on that at all. Nobody told me about it.”
Schiff hit back in a Sunday morning tweet by accusing Trump of “deflection.”
Nice deflection, Mr. President. But your false claims fool no one. You welcomed Russian help in 2016, tried to coerce Ukraine’s help in 2019, and won’t protect our elections in 2020. Now you fired your intel chief for briefing Congress about it. You’ve betrayed America. Again. https://t.co/WlMDaz8stF — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 23, 2020
This isn’t the first time that Trump threatened Schiff. Last month, Trump tweeted that Schiff “has not paid the price yet” for his impeachment manager role in the Senate trial.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-23--Pence Aide Struggles To Justify Trump’s Lack Of Concern Towards Russian Interference

Vice President Mike Pence ’ s chief of staff Marc Short struggled to provide a straightforward response Sunday when pressed on President Trump ’ s reaction to reports of Russia ’ s interference in the 2020 presidential election to benefit his re-election .
When asked by MSNBC ’ s Chuck Todd of “ Meet the Press ” whether Trump believes that Russia is trying to interfere in the 2020 election , Short said that “ Russia and other nations have consistently tried to interfere in American elections.
” “ The question that I think is out in some of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia was intentionally trying to help Donald Trump , ” Short said .
“ That ’ s different than four nations consistently looking to undermine America ’ s democracy .
They always try to do that.
” Todd then pointed out how Trump has called the reports a “ disinformation campaign ” and asked if he believes his intel officials are passing on disinformation to him .
Short denied that is Trump ’ s belief , before saying that what “ he believes is that the people leading the House Intelligence Committee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and leak information that is false.
” After Todd mentioned that the information didn ’ t come from the House Intelligence Committee but from intelligence officials , Short said that he attended the classified briefing earlier this month when intelligence officials warned House lawmakers of Russian interference and didn ’ t recall “ an assertion that Russia is trying to benefit ” Trump .
Short then went on the defensive when Todd said that he didn ’ t understand why the President isn ’ t concerned about Russian interference itself .
“ Concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covering the fact that in 2018 , when Donald Trump was president , we had midterm elections that went off without a hitch ?
” Short said .
“ In 2016 , when there was interference , it was under the Obama administration ’ s regime.
” Short also appeared on “ Fox News Sunday ” where he argued that Trump went after Democrats after the reports because of the lack of intelligence saying that Russians were trying to help his re-election .
“ I think that there ’ s not intelligence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help Donald Trump win election , ” Short said .
“ We know that foreign government has been trying to interfere in elections to try to soak chaos , it ’ s not just limited to Russia , there ’ s not intelligence that is trying to help Trump.
” After Short touted the administration ’ s sanctions on Russia , Wallace pointed to the reports of the classified briefing earlier this month saying that intelligence official Shelby Pierson told House lawmakers that Russians are trying to help Trump ’ s re-election .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was to fire Pierson ’ s boss , acting DNI chief Joseph Maguire , before asking Short if he ’ s saying that none of that happened .
“ Let me correct you on several fronts .
First of all , I think it ’ s disconcerting that the briefing that you mentioned was a classified briefing in the House , ” Short said .
“ That ’ s one of the President ’ s concern that [ Rep. Adam Schiff ’ s ( D-CA ) ] committee continue to leak selective information.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t say it didn ’ t happen , ” Short responded by refusing to comment on what Pierson said exactly .

Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff Marc Short struggled to provide a straightforward response Sunday when pressed on President Trump’s reaction to reports of Russia’s interference in the 2020 presidential election to benefit his re-election.
When asked by MSNBC’s Chuck Todd of “Meet the Press” whether Trump believes that Russia is trying to interfere in the 2020 election, Short said that “Russia and other nations have consistently tried to interfere in American elections.”
“The question that I think is out in some of the fake news media was an assertion that Russia was intentionally trying to help Donald Trump,” Short said. “That’s different than four nations consistently looking to undermine America’s democracy. They always try to do that.”
Todd then pointed out how Trump has called the reports a “disinformation campaign” and asked if he believes his intel officials are passing on disinformation to him. Short denied that is Trump’s belief, before saying that what “he believes is that the people leading the House Intelligence Committee, particularly Chairman Schiff, intentionally distort information and leak information that is false.”
After Todd mentioned that the information didn’t come from the House Intelligence Committee but from intelligence officials, Short said that he attended the classified briefing earlier this month when intelligence officials warned House lawmakers of Russian interference and didn’t recall “an assertion that Russia is trying to benefit” Trump.
Short then went on the defensive when Todd said that he didn’t understand why the President isn’t concerned about Russian interference itself.
“Concerned, Chuck? How about the media covering the fact that in 2018, when Donald Trump was president, we had midterm elections that went off without a hitch?” Short said. “In 2016, when there was interference, it was under the Obama administration’s regime.”
Watch Short’s remarks on MSNBC below:
Chuck Todd asks Marc Short why Trump isn't concerned about Russian interference pic.twitter.com/gqwEelIzej — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 23, 2020
Short also appeared on “Fox News Sunday” where he argued that Trump went after Democrats after the reports because of the lack of intelligence saying that Russians were trying to help his re-election.
“I think that there’s not intelligence that said that the Russians were trying to help Donald Trump win election,” Short said. “We know that foreign government has been trying to interfere in elections to try to soak chaos, it’s not just limited to Russia, there’s not intelligence that is trying to help Trump.”
After Short touted the administration’s sanctions on Russia, Wallace pointed to the reports of the classified briefing earlier this month saying that intelligence official Shelby Pierson told House lawmakers that Russians are trying to help Trump’s re-election. Wallace added that Trump’s reaction was to fire Pierson’s boss, acting DNI chief Joseph Maguire, before asking Short if he’s saying that none of that happened.
“Let me correct you on several fronts. First of all, I think it’s disconcerting that the briefing that you mentioned was a classified briefing in the House,” Short said. “That’s one of the President’s concern that [Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA)] committee continue to leak selective information.”
When Wallace responded that he “can’t say it didn’t happen,” Short responded by refusing to comment on what Pierson said exactly.
Watch Short’s remarks on “Fox News Sunday” below: