talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Manafort Client Laid Foundation For Theory At Center Of Trump’s Pressure Campaign

One of Paul Manafort ’ s clients in Ukraine appears to have laid the foundation for theories of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election that are now at the heart of President Trump ’ s pressure campaign on Kyiv , according to an FBI interview released on Friday .
The interview notes say that Ukrainian politician Serhiy Lyovochkin — Manafort ’ s longtime client in Kyiv — told the former Trump campaign chairman that the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv had demanded information about Manafort from a specialized anti-corruption law enforcement body .
The notes came out in FOIA litigation pursued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pried open redacted copies of FBI interview notes from the Mueller investigation .
In this interview , Manafort told the special counsel that Lyovochkin had “ heard from Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko that the U.S. Embassy was pressuring Ukraine ’ s National Anti-Corruption Bureau for information on Manafort.
” TPM reported last month that the pressure campaign on Ukraine which led to the third impeachment in U.S. history began largely because of a belief among Trump and his allies that Manafort had been the target of a Ukrainian plot to damage Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Specifically , the theory boils down to an August 2016 New York Times article reporting that Manafort ’ s name appeared next to $ 12.7 million in alleged bribes on a ledger belonging to the political party for which he consulted while working in Ukraine .
The article forced Manafort ’ s resignation from Trump ’ s campaign , and cited statements from Ukraine ’ s National Anti-Corruption Bureau , which was investigating the ledger .
The bureau was set up during the Obama administration as a specialized anti-corruption prosecutor with access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ giving it an edge in probing the kind of financial crime that bedevils Ukraine .
But to Trump and his allies , the suggestion that a Ukrainian law enforcement body released damaging information about the Trump campaign ’ s chairman constituted an example of “ election interference ” during 2016 .
Giuliani himself reportedly consulted with Manafort ’ s legal team about the allegations , and has said that he began pushing Ukraine for investigations out of a desire to probe Ukraine ’ s “ interference ” in 2016 .
The FBI interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory came directly through Manafort from his Ukrainian client .
Poroshenko , the predecessor of current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky , faced tough headwinds after Trump was elected , being forced to cope with a U.S. President who believed that Ukraine had lashed out against his Presidential campaign .

One of Paul Manafort’s clients in Ukraine appears to have laid the foundation for theories of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election that are now at the heart of President Trump’s pressure campaign on Kyiv, according to an FBI interview released on Friday.
The interview notes say that Ukrainian politician Serhiy Lyovochkin — Manafort’s longtime client in Kyiv — told the former Trump campaign chairman that the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv had demanded information about Manafort from a specialized anti-corruption law enforcement body.
The notes came out in FOIA litigation pursued by Buzzfeed and CNN, which has pried open redacted copies of FBI interview notes from the Mueller investigation.
In this interview, Manafort told the special counsel that Lyovochkin had “heard from Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko that the U.S. Embassy was pressuring Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau for information on Manafort.”
TPM reported last month that the pressure campaign on Ukraine which led to the third impeachment in U.S. history began largely because of a belief among Trump and his allies that Manafort had been the target of a Ukrainian plot to damage Trump’s chances in the 2016 election.
Specifically, the theory boils down to an August 2016 New York Times article reporting that Manafort’s name appeared next to $12.7 million in alleged bribes on a ledger belonging to the political party for which he consulted while working in Ukraine.
The article forced Manafort’s resignation from Trump’s campaign, and cited statements from Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau, which was investigating the ledger.
The bureau was set up during the Obama administration as a specialized anti-corruption prosecutor with access to help from the FBI, in theory giving it an edge in probing the kind of financial crime that bedevils Ukraine.
But to Trump and his allies, the suggestion that a Ukrainian law enforcement body released damaging information about the Trump campaign’s chairman constituted an example of “election interference” during 2016.
Giuliani himself reportedly consulted with Manafort’s legal team about the allegations, and has said that he began pushing Ukraine for investigations out of a desire to probe Ukraine’s “interference” in 2016.
The FBI interview notes suggest that the genesis of the theory came directly through Manafort from his Ukrainian client.
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump campaign – "quietly working to boost Clinton." So where is the investigation A.G. @seanhannity — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 25, 2017
Poroshenko, the predecessor of current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, faced tough headwinds after Trump was elected, being forced to cope with a U.S. President who believed that Ukraine had lashed out against his Presidential campaign.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--READ: DOJ Releases New Batch Of FBI Memos From Mueller Probe Records Lawsuit

WASHINGTON , DC - JULY 24 : Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about his @ @ @ @ @ the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Bu ... WASHINGTON , DC - @ @ @ @ @ Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference @ @ @ @ @ in the Rayburn House Office Building July 24 , 2019 in Washington , DC .
@ @ @ @ @ Deputy Special Counsel Aaron Zebley , will later testify before the House Intelligence Committee in @ @ @ @ @ .
( Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images )

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 24: Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Bu...
WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 24: Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Building July 24, 2019 in Washington, DC. Mueller, along with former Deputy Special Counsel Aaron Zebley, will later testify before the House Intelligence Committee in back-to-back hearings on Capitol Hill. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
MORE
LESS


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Engel: I Will Use ‘All Legal Means’ To Force Pompeo’s Presence At Iran Briefing

Eliot Engel , chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs , demanded Secretary of State Mike Pompeo ’ s presence at an Iran hearing on Jan. 29 after America ’ s top diplomat skipped the last one .
“ This hearing deals with the most weighty issues with which our country and Congress deals , including the use of force , ” Engel wrote to Pompeo in a letter dated Thursday .
“ Therefore , I consider your testimony to be of extremely high importance and am prepared to use all legal means to ensure your attendance .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be necessary.
” As Engel mentioned in the letter , Pompeo skipped the public hearing in favor of a trip to California , where Pompeo delivered remarks on U.S.-Iranian relations at Stanford University ’ s Hoover Institute .
Engel wrote that the committee expects answers on the vague “ imminent threat ” the administration has been citing as motivation for the drone strike against Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani .
He also said that they are seeking clarification on how the “ maximum pressure campaign ” will help deescalate tensions in the region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classified Iran briefing , in addition to one on embassy security , intended for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this week after Democrats published the messages from Lev Parnas given to the House Intelligence Committee .
Pompeo commented on the contents of those messages for the first time Friday , initially saying only that he ’ d never met Parnas and knew nothing of the alleged surveillance of former U.S .
Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yavonivitch that Parnas and congressional candidate Robert Hyde discussed .
Later in the day , he promised to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the situation as part of his “ obligation ” as secretary of state .

Eliot Engel, chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, demanded Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s presence at an Iran hearing on Jan. 29 after America’s top diplomat skipped the last one.
“This hearing deals with the most weighty issues with which our country and Congress deals, including the use of force,” Engel wrote to Pompeo in a letter dated Thursday. “Therefore, I consider your testimony to be of extremely high importance and am prepared to use all legal means to ensure your attendance. I trust, however, that this will not be necessary.”
As Engel mentioned in the letter, Pompeo skipped the public hearing in favor of a trip to California, where Pompeo delivered remarks on U.S.-Iranian relations at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute.
Engel wrote that the committee expects answers on the vague “imminent threat” the administration has been citing as motivation for the drone strike against Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani. He also said that they are seeking clarification on how the “maximum pressure campaign” will help deescalate tensions in the region.
The State Department abruptly scrapped a classified Iran briefing, in addition to one on embassy security, intended for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this week after Democrats published the messages from Lev Parnas given to the House Intelligence Committee.
Pompeo commented on the contents of those messages for the first time Friday, initially saying only that he’d never met Parnas and knew nothing of the alleged surveillance of former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yavonivitch that Parnas and congressional candidate Robert Hyde discussed.
Later in the day, he promised to “investigate” and “evaluate” the situation as part of his “obligation” as secretary of state.
Read Engel’s letter here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Pompeo Finally Promises To Look Into Possible Yovanovitch Surveillance

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally promised an investigation into alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch Friday , saying that it ’ s his “ obligation ” to “ investigate ” and “ evaluate , ” though he doubts that she was truly being tracked .
“ We will do everything we need to do to evaluate whether there was something that took place there , ” he told conservative radio host Tony Katz .
“ I suspect that much of what ’ s been reported will ultimately prove wrong , but our obligation , my obligation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make sure that we evaluate , investigate , ” he added .
“ Any time there is someone who posits that there may have been a risk to one of our officers , we ’ ll obviously do that.
” The interview marks only the second time Pompeo has spoken about the alleged tracking of Yovanovitch and the first time he has registered any objection to it .
Earlier on Friday , Pompeo spoke to another rightwing radio personality , Hugh Hewitt , saying only that he ’ d “ never heard of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asserted in both interviews that he ’ d never met Lev Parnas , the associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani whose messages , provided to the House Intel Committee , revealed the alleged surveillance in the first place .
Robert Hyde , a Connecticut landscaper and congressional candidate , told Parnas in the exchanges about Yovanovitch ’ s movements .
Both Hyde and Parnas have now dismissed the conversations as unserious .
Parnas insinuated that Hyde is a heavy drinker ; Hyde called Parnas a “ scumbag con artist.
” Pompeo ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy experts and questions about how much he knew , and when .
According to the New York Times , Pompeo had two calls with Giuliani in late March , during which Giuliani shared with his research he ’ d been doing in Ukraine .
At the time , Pompeo was feeling the pressure from Giuliani and the White House to oust Yovanovitch , to clear the position for someone more amendable to assisting with the Ukraine pressure campaign .
She was unceremoniously recalled to Washington a month later .

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally promised an investigation into alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch Friday, saying that it’s his “obligation” to “investigate” and “evaluate,” though he doubts that she was truly being tracked.
“We will do everything we need to do to evaluate whether there was something that took place there,” he told conservative radio host Tony Katz.
“I suspect that much of what’s been reported will ultimately prove wrong, but our obligation, my obligation as secretary of state, is to make sure that we evaluate, investigate,” he added. “Any time there is someone who posits that there may have been a risk to one of our officers, we’ll obviously do that.”
Pompeo vows to “evaluate” whether there was surveillance of former Ambassador Yovanovitch pic.twitter.com/RrDHxXYBMV — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) January 17, 2020
The interview marks only the second time Pompeo has spoken about the alleged tracking of Yovanovitch and the first time he has registered any objection to it.
Earlier on Friday, Pompeo spoke to another rightwing radio personality, Hugh Hewitt, saying only that he’d “never heard of” the alleged surveillance.
Pompeo also asserted in both interviews that he’d never met Lev Parnas, the associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani whose messages, provided to the House Intel Committee, revealed the alleged surveillance in the first place.
Robert Hyde, a Connecticut landscaper and congressional candidate, told Parnas in the exchanges about Yovanovitch’s movements. Both Hyde and Parnas have now dismissed the conversations as unserious. Parnas insinuated that Hyde is a heavy drinker; Hyde called Parnas a “scumbag con artist.”
Pompeo’s silence has prompted anger from some foreign policy experts and questions about how much he knew, and when.
According to the New York Times, Pompeo had two calls with Giuliani in late March, during which Giuliani shared with his research he’d been doing in Ukraine. At the time, Pompeo was feeling the pressure from Giuliani and the White House to oust Yovanovitch, to clear the position for someone more amendable to assisting with the Ukraine pressure campaign. She was unceremoniously recalled to Washington a month later.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Three Neo-Nazis Arrested Over Plot To Murder Antifa Couple

Three members of neo-Nazi group “ The Base ” were arrested Wednesday on murder conspiracy charges , bringing the total number of the group ’ s members arrested to six this week alone .
In total , the arrests of the six men — three from Georgia , two from Maryland , and one from Canada — mark a broad-based law enforcement response to a group that has largely operated anonymously as its membership has grown in recent months .
Luke Austin Lane , Jacob Kaderli , and Michael John Helterband were arrested on Wednesday on charges of conspiracy to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gang , the Georgia newspaper Rome News Tribune first reported Thursday night .
It wasn ’ t clear Friday whether the men had legal representation .
According to an affidavit provided to TPM by the Floyd County Police Department , all three men were members of The Base .
The affidavit narrates how an FBI agent went undercover and participated in the vetting process for the group , gaining information on its membership and training regimen , which included “ retreating under fire ” drills and moving-and-shooting drills .
The Base is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepare members for race war , and has seen its footprint grow in recent months as it tries to become an international neo-Nazi network .
The arrests added to three others that took place Thursday , as a trio of The Base members were reportedly planning to travel to a January 20 pro-gun rally in Richmond , Virginia .
The Georgia affidavit identifies a meeting in which the FBI agent participated “ with Kaderli , Lane , and another member of The Base who crossed into the United States illegally.
” During that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kaderli and Lane allegedly “ discussed The Base ’ s violent opposition to members of Antifa , their desire to fight , and ultimately a veiled plan to murder an unspecified vicim or victims.
” The affidavit contains internal conversations from The Base , including statements by an unnamed member who allegedly advocates killing anyone “ engag [ ed ] in anti-fascist activity.
” In one exchange , Kaderli allegedly told Lane and the unnamed Base member that he was ready for “ martyrdom , ” so long as it wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Helterbrand purportedly told the undercover agent that he was ready to start “ whackin ’ people , ” before the group allegedly began to plan a series of murders .
The alleged plan would focus on killing a Georgia couple who were “ high-ranking Antifa members.
” The defendants are also accused of discussing a separate plan to kill another The Base member who was aware of the plan , but was “ too stupid ” to keep quiet about it , the affidavit states .
“ Lane believed killing the couple would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the previous actions undertaken by antifascists like VICTIM 1 and VICTIM 2 , such as doxing white supremacists , would not continue to go unpunished , ” the affidavit reads .
Along with the undercover FBI agent , the group allegedly traveled to the would-be victims ’ home in December to surveil the house and plan their attack .
That , the document says , would have involved using either a “ lock pick gun ” or a “ sledgehammer to breach the door , ” before Lane and Kaderli would enter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with revolvers , ” as Helterbrand guarded outside with an AR-style rifle .
The men appeared intent on covering their tracks , according to the affidavit : Lane instructed the undercover FBI agent to rent a car from another state to use on the night of the planned murders , and further advised the conspirators to not use clothes that could be identified with The Base , such as skull masks .
Lane allegedly discussed renting a room at a cheap motel where staff wouldn ’ t ask too many questions of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he allegedly suggested , and tuck in their shirtsleeves and pants , tape their gloves onto the sleeves and smear Vaseline on their eyebrows and lashes — all to avoid dead skin or hair falling onto the crime scene .
Lane allegedly said at one meeting that the group would tell the Antifa couple to “ get the fuck on the ground , I ’ ll take a pistol out and pop ‘ em.
” Kaderli would then torch their house after “ dumping gas all over the place.
” Helterbrand , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plan , allegedly responded , “ I figured this conversation was coming .
I ’ m excited .
”

Three members of neo-Nazi group “The Base” were arrested Wednesday on murder conspiracy charges, bringing the total number of the group’s members arrested to six this week alone.
In total, the arrests of the six men — three from Georgia, two from Maryland, and one from Canada — mark a broad-based law enforcement response to a group that has largely operated anonymously as its membership has grown in recent months.
Luke Austin Lane, Jacob Kaderli, and Michael John Helterband were arrested on Wednesday on charges of conspiracy to commit murder and participation in a criminal gang, the Georgia newspaper Rome News Tribune first reported Thursday night. It wasn’t clear Friday whether the men had legal representation.
According to an affidavit provided to TPM by the Floyd County Police Department, all three men were members of The Base.
The affidavit narrates how an FBI agent went undercover and participated in the vetting process for the group, gaining information on its membership and training regimen, which included “retreating under fire” drills and moving-and-shooting drills.
The Base is an “accelerationist” organization that seeks to prepare members for race war, and has seen its footprint grow in recent months as it tries to become an international neo-Nazi network.
The arrests added to three others that took place Thursday, as a trio of The Base members were reportedly planning to travel to a January 20 pro-gun rally in Richmond, Virginia.
The Georgia affidavit identifies a meeting in which the FBI agent participated “with Kaderli, Lane, and another member of The Base who crossed into the United States illegally.”
During that meeting, according to the affidavit, Kaderli and Lane allegedly “discussed The Base’s violent opposition to members of Antifa, their desire to fight, and ultimately a veiled plan to murder an unspecified vicim or victims.”
The affidavit contains internal conversations from The Base, including statements by an unnamed member who allegedly advocates killing anyone “engag[ed] in anti-fascist activity.”
In one exchange, Kaderli allegedly told Lane and the unnamed Base member that he was ready for “martyrdom,” so long as it wasn’t “for an Antifa fucking faggot.”
Helterbrand purportedly told the undercover agent that he was ready to start “whackin’ people,” before the group allegedly began to plan a series of murders.
The alleged plan would focus on killing a Georgia couple who were “high-ranking Antifa members.” The defendants are also accused of discussing a separate plan to kill another The Base member who was aware of the plan, but was “too stupid” to keep quiet about it, the affidavit states.
“Lane believed killing the couple would ultimately send the right message and show that the previous actions undertaken by antifascists like VICTIM 1 and VICTIM 2, such as doxing white supremacists, would not continue to go unpunished,” the affidavit reads.
Along with the undercover FBI agent, the group allegedly traveled to the would-be victims’ home in December to surveil the house and plan their attack.
That, the document says, would have involved using either a “lock pick gun” or a “sledgehammer to breach the door,” before Lane and Kaderli would enter the home and kill the victims “with revolvers,” as Helterbrand guarded outside with an AR-style rifle.
The men appeared intent on covering their tracks, according to the affidavit: Lane instructed the undercover FBI agent to rent a car from another state to use on the night of the planned murders, and further advised the conspirators to not use clothes that could be identified with The Base, such as skull masks.
Lane allegedly discussed renting a room at a cheap motel where staff wouldn’t ask too many questions of the men. They would use leather gloves, he allegedly suggested, and tuck in their shirtsleeves and pants, tape their gloves onto the sleeves and smear Vaseline on their eyebrows and lashes — all to avoid dead skin or hair falling onto the crime scene.
Lane allegedly said at one meeting that the group would tell the Antifa couple to “get the fuck on the ground, I’ll take a pistol out and pop ‘em.” Kaderli would then torch their house after “dumping gas all over the place.”
Helterbrand, when he was told the details of the plan, allegedly responded, “I figured this conversation was coming. I’m excited.”
Read the affidavit here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Hyde Distances Himself From Parnas In Tweet Frenzy

Robert Hyde , Trump donor , landscaper from Connecticut and congressional candidate , took pains to distance himself from Lev Parnas Friday with a flurry of tweets and a video .
He spends much of the video bashing House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) , whom he refers to as a “ piece o ’ Schiff.
” Hyde also insists that he has no ties to Ukraine .
In his tweets , Hyde calls Parnas a “ scumbag con artist ” who stole “ millions ” from “ innocent investors.
” Parnas has also sought to distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tranche of messages he gave to the House Intel Committee were published .
In interactions between Hyde and Parnas specifically , Hyde talks about alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch .
“ She under heavy protection outside Kyiv , ” Hyde sent to Parnas in March .
“ They are moving her tomorrow , ” he added days later .
“ They are willing to help if we/you would like a price , ” he texted Parnas later that day , March 25 .
“ Guess you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what I was told.
” Parnas told MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow that Hyde was possibly drinking when he sent the messages .
“ I don ’ t believe it ’ s true , ” he said .
“ I think he was either drunk or he was trying to make himself bigger than he was .
So I didn ’ t take it seriously.
” The FBI visited Hyde ’ s home and workplace on Thursday .

Robert Hyde, Trump donor, landscaper from Connecticut and congressional candidate, took pains to distance himself from Lev Parnas Friday with a flurry of tweets and a video.
He spends much of the video bashing House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), whom he refers to as a “piece o’ Schiff.” Hyde also insists that he has no ties to Ukraine.
In his tweets, Hyde calls Parnas a “scumbag con artist” who stole “millions” from “innocent investors.”
Parnas has also sought to distance himself from Hyde this week, after a tranche of messages he gave to the House Intel Committee were published. In interactions between Hyde and Parnas specifically, Hyde talks about alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.
“She under heavy protection outside Kyiv,” Hyde sent to Parnas in March. “They are moving her tomorrow,” he added days later.
“They are willing to help if we/you would like a price,” he texted Parnas later that day, March 25. “Guess you can do anything in Ukraine with the money… what I was told.”
“Lol,” Parnas said in response.
Parnas told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that Hyde was possibly drinking when he sent the messages.
“I don’t believe it’s true,” he said. “I think he was either drunk or he was trying to make himself bigger than he was. So I didn’t take it seriously.”
The FBI visited Hyde’s home and workplace on Thursday.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--GOP Sen. Facing Tough Election Takes Trumpy Victory Lap After Calling Reporter A Hack

Sen. Martha McSally ( R-AZ ) , who faces a tough election fight in 2020 , took a campaign victory lap Thursday after calling a CNN reporter a hack .
The day started with a straightforward question from CNN ’ s Manu Raju , who approached McSally in a Senate hallway just hours after hundreds of pages of records from Lev Parnas ’ iPhone were released publicly by congressional investigators .
“ Sen .
McSally , should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial ?
” he asked .
Raju asked if she would comment at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal hack , ” McSally repeated as she walked out of sight .
McSally ’ s staffer was apparently recording the exchange , which the senator posted on her official Twitter page within an hour .
Within an hour of the video hitting Twitter , Politico ’ s Kyle Cheney noted , McSally ’ s campaign had reserved the domain name Liberalhack.com — prime real estate .
The site features a shirt with the senator ’ s phrase , a gift for those who donate $ 35 or more to her campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump ’ s campaign , of course , endorsed McSally ’ s remark .
They also tweeted a link to her campaign donation page : By Thursday evening , McSally appeared on Fox News host Laura Ingraham ’ s show to talk about the viral video hit .
Ingraham ’ s is the fourth most watched cable news show in the country , according to Nielsen data released in December , with 2.567 million total viewers last year .
“ Do you regret what you said ?
” Ingraham asked , dead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I do not .
And I said it again , actually , as I went in .
I said , you ’ re a liberal hack buddy !
” the senator responded gleefully .
Notably , though , McSally refused to answer a question similar to Raju ’ s , when Ingraham asked whether she would vote to hear witnesses at the impeachment trial .
“ We ’ re going to get to that , ” McSally said , dodging .
“ I ’ m not going to tell everybody what all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McSally may face off against the former astronaut Mark Kelly in 2020 — the primary elections are in August .
Kelly , husband of former congresswoman and shooting survivor Gabby Giffords , has a big cash lead over McSally .
The senator , who was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2014 , unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2018 against Arizona ’ s other current senator , Kyrsten Sinema .
McSally ultimately did reach the Senate — after she was appointed by Arizona Gov .
Doug Ducey ( R ) to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ( R-AZ ) vacant Senate seat , which had been temporarily filled by John Kyl .
Notably , McSally took a couple of veiled swipes at McCain toward the end of his life .
The late senator was well-known for joking around with members of the press , including Raju .
So when CNN ’ s Jake Tapper asked an unnamed McCain family member what they thought of the “ hack ” hubbub , they were blunt : “ There ’ s no love lost between our family and her .
”

Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ), who faces a tough election fight in 2020, took a campaign victory lap Thursday after calling a CNN reporter a hack.
The day started with a straightforward question from CNN’s Manu Raju, who approached McSally in a Senate hallway just hours after hundreds of pages of records from Lev Parnas’ iPhone were released publicly by congressional investigators.
“Sen. McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?” he asked.
“Manu, you’re a liberal hack,” McSally replied. “I’m not talking to you.”
Raju asked if she would comment at all.
“You’re a liberal hack,” McSally repeated as she walked out of sight.
McSally’s staffer was apparently recording the exchange, which the senator posted on her official Twitter page within an hour.
Then, the campaigning began.
Within an hour of the video hitting Twitter, Politico’s Kyle Cheney noted, McSally’s campaign had reserved the domain name Liberalhack.com — prime real estate.
NEW SHIRT!! ? I’m in the Senate to fight for all Arizonans, not play politics and games with the liberal hacks of the left-wing media! https://t.co/tNbKJa49JN — McSally For Senate (@MarthaMcSally) January 17, 2020
The site features a shirt with the senator’s phrase, a gift for those who donate $35 or more to her campaign. It has a ’70s vibe.
President Trump’s campaign, of course, endorsed McSally’s remark. They also tweeted a link to her campaign donation page:
THREE CHEERS for Senator @MarthaMcSally!!! THIS is how you handle FAKE NEWS @CNN. DONATE to Martha NOW ➡ https://t.co/6SuZq3HR7r pic.twitter.com/K9YAsxvYwb — Trump War Room — Text FIGHT to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2020
By Thursday evening, McSally appeared on Fox News host Laura Ingraham’s show to talk about the viral video hit. Ingraham’s is the fourth most watched cable news show in the country, according to Nielsen data released in December, with 2.567 million total viewers last year.
“Do you regret what you said?” Ingraham asked, dead panning.
“Uh, no Laura, I do not. And I said it again, actually, as I went in. I said, you’re a liberal hack buddy!” the senator responded gleefully.
Notably, though, McSally refused to answer a question similar to Raju’s, when Ingraham asked whether she would vote to hear witnesses at the impeachment trial.
“We’re going to get to that,” McSally said, dodging. “I’m not going to tell everybody what all my votes are going to be.”
McSally may face off against the former astronaut Mark Kelly in 2020 — the primary elections are in August. Kelly, husband of former congresswoman and shooting survivor Gabby Giffords, has a big cash lead over McSally.
The senator, who was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2014, unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2018 against Arizona’s other current senator, Kyrsten Sinema. McSally ultimately did reach the Senate — after she was appointed by Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) to fill the late Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) vacant Senate seat, which had been temporarily filled by John Kyl.
Notably, McSally took a couple of veiled swipes at McCain toward the end of his life. The late senator was well-known for joking around with members of the press, including Raju. So when CNN’s Jake Tapper asked an unnamed McCain family member what they thought of the “hack” hubbub, they were blunt: “There’s no love lost between our family and her.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Trump Screamed At Pentagon Leaders And Told Them They Were ‘Dopes’ And ‘Babies’

President Donald Trump repeatedly berated U.S. military leaders while throwing a massive fit during a Pentagon meeting in 2017 , according to “ A Very Stable Genius : Donald J. Trump ’ s Testing of America , ” a book penned by Washington Post reporters Carol D. Leonnig and Philip Rucker .
An excerpt from the book describes how Trump ’ s meeting with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Joseph F. Dunford Jr. and flag officials on July 20 , 2017 ( arranged by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson , then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis , and then-National Economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the rails .
The temper tantrum began when Trump started complaining about the “ loser war ” in Afghanistan and demanded to know “ where is the fucking oil ” that he felt the U.S. deserved for its military presence in the Persian Gulf .
“ You ’ re all losers , ” he told them .
“ You don ’ t know how to win anymore.
” It didn ’ t end there ; According to Leonnig and Rucker , Trump became so angry that “ he wasn ’ t taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commanders in a fit of rage , “ I wouldn ’ t go to war with you people.
” “ You ’ re a bunch of dopes and babies , ” he shouted .
Everyone in the room was shocked .
“ How does the commander in chief say that ?
” one participant thought , according to the Post .
“ What would our worst adversaries think if they knew he said this ?
” “ No , that ’ s just wrong , ” he said to Trump .
“ Mr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong .
None of that is true.
” The secretary of state asserted that those who join the military “ don ’ t do it to become soldiers of fortune.
” “ That ’ s not why they put on a uniform and go out and die , ” he said .
“ They do it to protect our freedom.
” In a private conversation with Cohn and Mattis right after the meeting , Tillerson let loose and made the infamous comment about Trump that would get leaked to the press a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fucking moron , ” the secretary of state said .

President Donald Trump repeatedly berated U.S. military leaders while throwing a massive fit during a Pentagon meeting in 2017, according to “A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump’s Testing of America,” a book penned by Washington Post reporters Carol D. Leonnig and Philip Rucker.
An excerpt from the book describes how Trump’s meeting with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Joseph F. Dunford Jr. and flag officials on July 20, 2017 (arranged by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and then-National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn) went completely off the rails.
The temper tantrum began when Trump started complaining about the “loser war” in Afghanistan and demanded to know “where is the fucking oil” that he felt the U.S. deserved for its military presence in the Persian Gulf.
“You’re all losers,” he told them. “You don’t know how to win anymore.”
It didn’t end there; According to Leonnig and Rucker, Trump became so angry that “he wasn’t taking many breaths” and bellowed to the commanders in a fit of rage, “I wouldn’t go to war with you people.”
“You’re a bunch of dopes and babies,” he shouted.
Everyone in the room was shocked.
“How does the commander in chief say that?” one participant thought, according to the Post. “What would our worst adversaries think if they knew he said this?”
Trump’s attack was apparently Tillerson’s breaking point.
“No, that’s just wrong,” he said to Trump. “Mr. President, you’re totally wrong. None of that is true.”
The secretary of state asserted that those who join the military “don’t do it to become soldiers of fortune.”
“That’s not why they put on a uniform and go out and die,” he said. “They do it to protect our freedom.”
In a private conversation with Cohn and Mattis right after the meeting, Tillerson let loose and made the infamous comment about Trump that would get leaked to the press a few months later.
“He’s a fucking moron,” the secretary of state said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-18--Trump Does Not Mention ‘Threat’ As Reason For Killing Soleimani In Private Speech

President Donald Trump gave a speech at a private fundraiser that divulged the details of his assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani on Friday evening–but did not mention any “ imminent threat ” that his administration has cited as the reason for Soleimani ’ s killing .
On Saturday , CNN obtained audio of the fundraiser , which was held at Trump ’ s Mar-A-Lago resort in Palm Beach , Florida .
In the audio , Trump is heard telling donors that he had decided to order a drone strike on Soleimani because the military leader was “ saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How much of this shit do we have to listen to ?
” the President said in his speech .
“ How much are we going to listen to ?
” The “ threat ” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other top administration officials have claimed Soleimani posed to the U.S. did not come up in Trump ’ s remarks , CNN reported .
Ever since Soleimani ’ s assassination on January 3 , Trump , Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark Esper have made vague and inconsistent claims to the public about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. Democrats have slammed Trump ’ s authorization of the strike as unnecessary aggression toward Iran , and even GOP Sens .
Mike Lee ( R-UT ) and Rand Paul ( R-KY ) criticized the move after the administration gave lawmakers what Lee called “ probably the worst briefing I ’ ve seen ” on the strike .

President Donald Trump gave a speech at a private fundraiser that divulged the details of his assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani on Friday evening–but did not mention any “imminent threat” that his administration has cited as the reason for Soleimani’s killing.
On Saturday, CNN obtained audio of the fundraiser, which was held at Trump’s Mar-A-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida.
In the audio, Trump is heard telling donors that he had decided to order a drone strike on Soleimani because the military leader was “saying bad things about our country.”
“How much of this shit do we have to listen to?” the President said in his speech. “How much are we going to listen to?”
The “threat” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other top administration officials have claimed Soleimani posed to the U.S. did not come up in Trump’s remarks, CNN reported.
Ever since Soleimani’s assassination on January 3, Trump, Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark Esper have made vague and inconsistent claims to the public about Soleimani’s alleged planned attacks against the U.S.
Democrats have slammed Trump’s authorization of the strike as unnecessary aggression toward Iran, and even GOP Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized the move after the administration gave lawmakers what Lee called “probably the worst briefing I’ve seen” on the strike.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-18--READ: Newly Released Texts Show Lev Parnas In Frequent Contact With Nunes’ Aide

Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee published a new tranche of documents from indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas on Friday night , including texts that further expose Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes ’ ( R-CA ) ties to President Donald Trump ’ s Ukraine scheme to dig up dirt on Joe Biden .
Parnas had several text exchanges with Dereck Harvey , one of Nunes ’ aides , that show they had Skyped each other and met in person from at least February through May of 2019 .
In the texts , Harvey requested certain documents related to Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you going to keep working through Solomon ?
” Harvey asked Parnas on April 3 , referring to the Hill columnist John Solomon , who used his platform to spread false information about Biden and then-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch .
“ I ’ m in Israel will call you when I get back and we can meet up , ” Parnas responded .
“ Coming to dc tomorrow night.
” Previously released documents revealed that Nunes , who used his committee ’ s impeachment hearings to loudly defend Trump against the proceedings , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Giuliani during Giuliani ’ s sustained smear campaign against Yovanovitch .
Nunes initially denied ever speaking to Parnas , then admitted this week that he had , in fact , spoken to him on the phone .
The documents also include new photos of Parnas palling around with Trump and his son , Don Jr .

Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee published a new tranche of documents from indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas on Friday night, including texts that further expose Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes’ (R-CA) ties to President Donald Trump’s Ukraine scheme to dig up dirt on Joe Biden.
Parnas had several text exchanges with Dereck Harvey, one of Nunes’ aides, that show they had Skyped each other and met in person from at least February through May of 2019.
In the texts, Harvey requested certain documents related to Ukraine
“Any documents for us or are you going to keep working through Solomon?” Harvey asked Parnas on April 3, referring to the Hill columnist John Solomon, who used his platform to spread false information about Biden and then-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.
“I’m in Israel will call you when I get back and we can meet up,” Parnas responded. “Coming to dc tomorrow night.”
“Good,” Harvey replied.
Previously released documents revealed that Nunes, who used his committee’s impeachment hearings to loudly defend Trump against the proceedings, was in contact with Parnas and Rudy Giuliani during Giuliani’s sustained smear campaign against Yovanovitch. Nunes initially denied ever speaking to Parnas, then admitted this week that he had, in fact, spoken to him on the phone.
The documents also include new photos of Parnas palling around with Trump and his son, Don Jr.
Read the documents below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-18--Ex-Rep. Chris Collins Sentenced To Over 2 Years In Prison For Insider Trading

U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick sentenced former Rep. Chris Collins ( R-NY ) to 26 months in prison for insider @ @ @ @ @ You had a duty to meet and you betrayed that duty , ” Broderick told @ @ @ @ @ handed Collins the sentence on his two federal charges of insider trading and lying to @ @ @ @ @ stand here today a disgraced former congressman , ” the Republican said during the hearing @ @ @ @ @ face my constituents.
” Collins , who was one of President Donald Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ initially pleaded not guilty after he was arrested in August 2018 .
Despite the indictment @ @ @ @ @ drop out of the 2018 midterm race and was reelected .
He then walked back @ @ @ @ @ resigned on September 30 , 2019 , one day before he switched his plea to @ @

U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick sentenced former Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) to 26 months in prison for insider trading on Friday.
“You had a duty to meet and you betrayed that duty,” Broderick told the ex-congressman.
The judge handed Collins the sentence on his two federal charges of insider trading and lying to the FBI.
“I stand here today a disgraced former congressman,” the Republican said during the hearing. “I cannot face my constituents.”
Collins, who was one of President Donald Trump’s earliest supporters in Congress, initially pleaded not guilty after he was arrested in August 2018. Despite the indictment, he chose not to drop out of the 2018 midterm race and was reelected.
He then walked back his claims of innocence and resigned on September 30, 2019, one day before he switched his plea to guilty.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-18--National Archives Agency Apologizes For Blurring Anti-Trump Signs In Protest Photo

The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration ( NARA ) apologized on Saturday for altering the photo seen above of the 2017 Women ’ s March to blur signs protesting against President Donald Trump .
“ We made a mistake , ” the federal agency said in a press release .
“ As the National Archives of the United States , we are and have always been completely committed to preserving our archival holdings , without alteration.
” NARA promised to remove the photo from the agency ’ s “ Rightfully Hers : American Women and the Vote ” exhibit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the entrance , and replace it with the unaltered version .
The agency also clarified that the edited photo was used merely as a “ promotional graphic ” and “ is not an archival record held by the National Archives.
” “ We apologize , and will immediately start a thorough review of our exhibit policies and procedures so that this does not happen again , ” the agency said .
The altered image , first reported by the Washington Post , blurs out the word “ Trump ” and also words referencing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ pussy , ” on the protest signs .
For example , a close-up of the edited photo shows that a sign that reads “ GOD HATES TRUMP ” was altered to read “ GOD HATES ” instead .
Prior to NARA ’ s apology , the agency had said in a statement on Friday that “ as a non-partisan , non-political federal agency , we blurred references to the President ’ s name on some posters , so as not to engage in current political controversy.
” And mentions of women ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considers its museum to be “ family-friendly , ” the agency said , and the words “ could be perceived by some museum visitors as inappropriate.
” The edited photo “ was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records ” and was “ part of a promotional display , not an artifact , ” according to NARA .
“ We do not alter images or documents that are displayed as artifacts in exhibitions , ” the agency said .

The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) apologized on Saturday for altering the photo seen above of the 2017 Women’s March to blur signs protesting against President Donald Trump.
“We made a mistake,” the federal agency said in a press release. “As the National Archives of the United States, we are and have always been completely committed to preserving our archival holdings, without alteration.”
NARA promised to remove the photo from the agency’s “Rightfully Hers: American Women and the Vote” exhibit, where the photo was displayed at the entrance, and replace it with the unaltered version. The agency also clarified that the edited photo was used merely as a “promotional graphic” and “is not an archival record held by the National Archives.”
“We apologize, and will immediately start a thorough review of our exhibit policies and procedures so that this does not happen again,” the agency said.
The altered image, first reported by the Washington Post, blurs out the word “Trump” and also words referencing women’s genitalia, such as “pussy,” on the protest signs. For example, a close-up of the edited photo shows that a sign that reads “GOD HATES TRUMP” was altered to read “GOD HATES” instead.
Prior to NARA’s apology, the agency had said in a statement on Friday that “as a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy.”
And mentions of women’s genitals were edited out because NARA considers its museum to be “family-friendly,” the agency said, and the words “could be perceived by some museum visitors as inappropriate.”
The edited photo “was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records” and was “part of a promotional display, not an artifact,” according to NARA.
“We do not alter images or documents that are displayed as artifacts in exhibitions,” the agency said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Cornyn Says Giuliani ‘Not Relevant’ To Senate Trial, Calls Parnas A ‘Grifter’

Despite how President Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani played a central role in the Ukraine pressure campaign , Sen. John Cornyn ( R-TX ) said he believes he ’ s “ not relevant ” to the Senate impeachment trial during an interview on CBS ’ “ Face the Nation ” Sunday morning .
On Friday , the House Intelligence Committee released text messages that show an aide to Rep. Devin Nunes ( R-CA ) — the top Republican on the committee — in frequent contact with now-indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas , which further exposes Nunes ’ ties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to dig up false allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden .
“ That ’ s a relationship that causes many of us to sort of scratch our heads , ” Cornyn said , when asked whether he has any questions for Giuliani in light of the Nunes-Parnas text messages .
“ I ’ d say [ Giuliani is ] not relevant to the articles and what the Senate is going to be asked to do , impeaching a president for the third time in American history for a non-crime over events that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interview about the text messages between Nunes ’ aide and Parnas , Cornyn appeared to characterize the indicted Giuliani associate — who claimed last week that Trump “ knew exactly what was going on ” — as a “ grifter.
” “ There is no question that there have been a series of grifters and other hangers-on that have associated themselves with the President ’ s campaign or claim to have special relationships with the President , but this is not the issue that the Senate is going to be deciding , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate will “ take the issue of evidence as it comes.
” “ If the impeachment managers want to rest their case on the credibility of someone who is under indictment in the Southern District of New York with extensive ties to Russian oligarchs and organized crime … then that ’ s their choice , ” Cornyn said .

Despite how President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani played a central role in the Ukraine pressure campaign, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said he believes he’s “not relevant” to the Senate impeachment trial during an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday morning.
On Friday, the House Intelligence Committee released text messages that show an aide to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) — the top Republican on the committee — in frequent contact with now-indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, which further exposes Nunes’ ties to Trump’s Ukraine pressure campaign to dig up false allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden.
“That’s a relationship that causes many of us to sort of scratch our heads,” Cornyn said, when asked whether he has any questions for Giuliani in light of the Nunes-Parnas text messages. “I’d say [Giuliani is] not relevant to the articles and what the Senate is going to be asked to do, impeaching a president for the third time in American history for a non-crime over events that never occurred.”
When asked earlier in the interview about the text messages between Nunes’ aide and Parnas, Cornyn appeared to characterize the indicted Giuliani associate — who claimed last week that Trump “knew exactly what was going on” — as a “grifter.”
“There is no question that there have been a series of grifters and other hangers-on that have associated themselves with the President’s campaign or claim to have special relationships with the President, but this is not the issue that the Senate is going to be deciding,” Cornyn said.
Cornyn added that the Senate will “take the issue of evidence as it comes.”
“If the impeachment managers want to rest their case on the credibility of someone who is under indictment in the Southern District of New York with extensive ties to Russian oligarchs and organized crime … then that’s their choice,” Cornyn said.
Watch Cornyn’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--GOP Senator Brushes Off Trump Soliciting Foreign Interference: ‘Things Happen’

Sen. Richard Shelby ( R-AL ) doesn ’ t find President Trump ’ s attempt to dig up false allegations against political rivals to be a big deal .
In response to the Senate summons , Trump ’ s legal team argued Saturday evening that said that the first impeachment article , abuse of power , “ alleges no crime at all , let alone ‘ high crimes and misdemeanors ’ as required by the Constitution , ” During an interview on ABC News with George Stephanopoulos Sunday morning , Shelby was asked whether he thinks “ it was proper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in the 2020 election .
“ Well , I don ’ t know that has been actually proven , ” Shelby said .
“ You know , that ’ s all in dispute , of what happened , whether the Russians were involved in it , whether Ukrainians involved in it , who was involved in it , and to what extent .
But I ’ ve never seen anything that — where Trump actually was involved in.
” When Stephanopoulos pressed him again on whether it was OK to solicit foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign and Trump urging the Chinese government to get involved as well , Shelby said “ those are just statements , political ” and “ they make them all the time.
” Shelby then said that he “ didn ’ t say it was OK , ” but that “ people do things ” and “ things happen.
” As soon as Stephanopoulos pointed out that “ well , this is the president of the United States , ” Shelby shot back that “ well , still the president of the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s going to make mistakes of judgment and everything else , ” Shelby said .
“ They have historically , both parties , both from the beginning of our republic.
” When Stephanopoulos asked if he views Trump ’ s foreign interference as a “ mistake , but no necessarily impeachable , ” Shelby sided with Alan Dershowitz who said he doesn ’ t believe “ it rises to the standard of an impeachable offense.
” “ Well , I ’ d say I don ’ t believe — like Professor Dershowitz at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the standard of an impeachable offense , ” Shelby said .
“ But I still think we should wait and see what comes out in the trial itself .
”

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) doesn’t find President Trump’s attempt to dig up false allegations against political rivals to be a big deal.
In response to the Senate summons, Trump’s legal team argued Saturday evening that said that the first impeachment article, abuse of power, “alleges no crime at all, let alone ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ as required by the Constitution,”
During an interview on ABC News with George Stephanopoulos Sunday morning, Shelby was asked whether he thinks “it was proper for the President to solicit foreign interference” in the 2020 election.
“Well, I don’t know that has been actually proven,” Shelby said. “You know, that’s all in dispute, of what happened, whether the Russians were involved in it, whether Ukrainians involved in it, who was involved in it, and to what extent. But I’ve never seen anything that — where Trump actually was involved in.”
When Stephanopoulos pressed him again on whether it was OK to solicit foreign interference in light of the Ukraine pressure campaign and Trump urging the Chinese government to get involved as well, Shelby said “those are just statements, political” and “they make them all the time.”
Shelby then said that he “didn’t say it was OK,” but that “people do things” and “things happen.”
As soon as Stephanopoulos pointed out that “well, this is the president of the United States,” Shelby shot back that “well, still the president of the United States is human.”
“And he’s going to make mistakes of judgment and everything else,” Shelby said. “They have historically, both parties, both from the beginning of our republic.”
When Stephanopoulos asked if he views Trump’s foreign interference as a “mistake, but no necessarily impeachable,” Shelby sided with Alan Dershowitz who said he doesn’t believe “it rises to the standard of an impeachable offense.”
“Well, I’d say I don’t believe — like Professor Dershowitz at this point — that it rises to the standard of an impeachable offense,” Shelby said. “But I still think we should wait and see what comes out in the trial itself.”
Watch Shelby’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Dershowitz Offers Baffling Descriptions Of His Role In Trump’s Defense Team

Alan Dershowitz appears to have only muddied the waters in describing his role on President Trump ’ s legal team for the Senate impeachment trial during his appearances on Sunday morning cable news programs .
Despite Trump listing Dershowitz ’ s name in a press release announcing his Senate trial counsel Friday , Dershowitz has insisted that he ’ s not a full-fledged member of the President ’ s legal team .
When CNN ’ s Brianna Keilar asked him to clarify his role , Dershowitz responded that he ’ s “ both ” part of the legal team and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — I am a member of the legal team .
I am making what could be the most important argument on the floor of the Senate , ” Dershowitz said .
“ Namely , that even if everything that is alleged by the House managers is proven or taken as true , they would not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
” After Keilar asked how he could be both , followed by CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin pointing out to Dershowitz that he is “ trying to elevate [ himself ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a neutral expert ” despite his actual role of being “ a lawyer representing a client , ” Dershowitz shot back that he is “ just a lawyer ” who is “ not involved in the day-to-day issues.
” “ I am just a lawyer and I have done this a dozen times .
I ’ ve been of counsel in many cases solely on the Constitutional issue , ” Dershowitz said .
“ I am not involved in the day-to-day issues.
” Keilar then asked Dershowitz who hired him , which he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President ’ s defense team to become of counsel on the specific issue of the criteria – the Constitutional criteria – for impeachment , ” before adding that his role is how he is going advocate against impeachment .
“ That ’ s a very important issue , and I will be making that argument as an advocate , not an expert witness , ” Dershowitz said .
“ I am advocating against impeachment of this President based on the Constitutional criteria.
” Dershowitz made another appearance later Sunday morning on ABC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s “ here as a constitutional lawyer , ” but claimed that as a lawyer in this case , it is not his job to “ present my personal views on what I think.
” When asked by ABC News ’ George Stephanopoulos if he thinks it ’ s OK for a president to solicit foreign interference in our election , Dershowitz responded that “ if the allegations are not impeachable , then this trial should result in an acquittal , regardless of whether the conduct is regarded as OK by you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After Stephanopoulos asked Dershowitz again for his thoughts — to which he insisted that “ as a lawyer in the case , I ’ m not going to present my personal views on what I think ” but that he believes “ that conduct does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense ” — Stephanopoulos pointed out that contradicts a quote his recent book on impeachment where he writes : “ An American should not collude with a foreign power in an effort to enhance his candidacy.
” Dershowitz then pivoted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ not here for a political discussion ” and that he ’ s a “ liberal Democrat who voted against President Trump and who voted for Hillary Clinton.
” “ I ’ m here to present a constitutional argument the way I did in the Clinton impeachment and the way I argued when I was on the national board of the ACLU in the Nixon administration , ” Dershowitz said .
When pressed by Stephanopoulos about whether he ’ s willing to endorse the statement that Trump ’ s legal team made Saturday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which argued that the President did nothing wrong , Dershowitz said that he “ did not read that brief or sign that brief ” and reiterated this his “ mandate is to present the constitutional argument.
” “ That ’ s not part of my mandate .
My mandate is to present the constitutional argument , ” Dershowitz said .
“ And if the constitutional argument succeeds , we don ’ t reach that issue , because you can ’ t charge a President with impeachable conduct if it doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

Alan Dershowitz appears to have only muddied the waters in describing his role on President Trump’s legal team for the Senate impeachment trial during his appearances on Sunday morning cable news programs.
Despite Trump listing Dershowitz’s name in a press release announcing his Senate trial counsel Friday, Dershowitz has insisted that he’s not a full-fledged member of the President’s legal team. When CNN’s Brianna Keilar asked him to clarify his role, Dershowitz responded that he’s “both” part of the legal team and an advocate against impeachment.
“Both — I am a member of the legal team. I am making what could be the most important argument on the floor of the Senate,” Dershowitz said. “Namely, that even if everything that is alleged by the House managers is proven or taken as true, they would not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.”
After Keilar asked how he could be both, followed by CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin pointing out to Dershowitz that he is “trying to elevate [himself] beyond being a lawyer as sort of a neutral expert” despite his actual role of being “a lawyer representing a client,” Dershowitz shot back that he is “just a lawyer” who is “not involved in the day-to-day issues.”
“I am just a lawyer and I have done this a dozen times. I’ve been of counsel in many cases solely on the Constitutional issue,” Dershowitz said. “I am not involved in the day-to-day issues.”
Keilar then asked Dershowitz who hired him, which he responded that he was “asked by the President’s defense team to become of counsel on the specific issue of the criteria – the Constitutional criteria – for impeachment,” before adding that his role is how he is going advocate against impeachment.
“That’s a very important issue, and I will be making that argument as an advocate, not an expert witness,” Dershowitz said. “I am advocating against impeachment of this President based on the Constitutional criteria.”
Watch Dershowitz’s remarks on CNN below:
Dershowitz says he's “both” a member of Trump's legal team and an advocate against impeachment pic.twitter.com/g279iNYS3K — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) January 19, 2020
Dershowitz made another appearance later Sunday morning on ABC News where he would reiterate that he’s “here as a constitutional lawyer,” but claimed that as a lawyer in this case, it is not his job to “present my personal views on what I think.”
When asked by ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos if he thinks it’s OK for a president to solicit foreign interference in our election, Dershowitz responded that “if the allegations are not impeachable, then this trial should result in an acquittal, regardless of whether the conduct is regarded as OK by you or by me or by voters.”
After Stephanopoulos asked Dershowitz again for his thoughts — to which he insisted that “as a lawyer in the case, I’m not going to present my personal views on what I think” but that he believes “that conduct does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense” — Stephanopoulos pointed out that contradicts a quote his recent book on impeachment where he writes: “An American should not collude with a foreign power in an effort to enhance his candidacy.”
Dershowitz then pivoted back to saying that he’s “not here for a political discussion” and that he’s a “liberal Democrat who voted against President Trump and who voted for Hillary Clinton.”
“I’m here to present a constitutional argument the way I did in the Clinton impeachment and the way I argued when I was on the national board of the ACLU in the Nixon administration,” Dershowitz said.
When pressed by Stephanopoulos about whether he’s willing to endorse the statement that Trump’s legal team made Saturday evening in response to the Senate summons, which argued that the President did nothing wrong, Dershowitz said that he “did not read that brief or sign that brief” and reiterated this his “mandate is to present the constitutional argument.”
“That’s not part of my mandate. My mandate is to present the constitutional argument,” Dershowitz said. “And if the constitutional argument succeeds, we don’t reach that issue, because you can’t charge a President with impeachable conduct if it doesn’t fit within the criteria for the Constitution.”
Watch Dershowitz’s remarks on ABC below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Nadler Hits Back At WH Response To Senate Summons: ‘Errant Nonsense’

House Judiciary Committee chair Jerry Nadler ( D-NY ) didn ’ t hold back when asked about his thoughts on the formal response to the Senate summons that President Trump ’ s legal team issued Saturday evening .
In its response , Trump ’ s legal team said that the President “ categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment.
” During an interview on CBS ’ “ Face the Nation ” Sunday morning , Nadler said the White House ’ s response to both articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Both of those statements are errant nonsense , ” Nadler said .
“ There is ample evidence , overwhelming evidence .
Any jury would convict in three minutes flat that the president betrayed his country by breaking the law.
” Nadler then cited the Government Accountability Office ’ s report last week that said the White House Office of Management and Budget unlawfully withheld military aid to Ukraine .
“ The reason he did that was in order to extort a foreign government to smear his political opponent for his personal benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 election as he worked with the Russians to try to rig the 2016 election .
Same pattern , ” Nadler said .
“ There ’ s no question that working with a foreign power , trying to extort a foreign power to interfere in our election , is about as bad as you can imagine.
” Nadler added that the framers of the Constitution put in the impeachment clause because “ they were afraid of foreign interference our domestic affairs ” and the White House ’ s argument in its formal response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broke no law is absurd.
” Later in the interview , said that Trump is engaging “ in a concerted attempt to deny all evidence.
” “ Everyone who testified defied the President testifying .
I mean , Mike Pompeo ought to testify .
John Bolton ought to testify .
What is the president hiding ?
” Nadler said .
“ The President says don ’ t let these people testify .
If they were — if they had exculpatory evidence , he ’ d be saying let them testify .
”

House Judiciary Committee chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY) didn’t hold back when asked about his thoughts on the formal response to the Senate summons that President Trump’s legal team issued Saturday evening.
In its response, Trump’s legal team said that the President “categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment.”
During an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday morning, Nadler said the White House’s response to both articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — are “arrant nonsense.”
“There is ample evidence, overwhelming evidence,” Nadler said. “Any jury would convict in three minutes flat that the president betrayed his country by breaking the law.”
Nadler then cited the Government Accountability Office’s report last week that said the White House Office of Management and Budget unlawfully withheld military aid to Ukraine.
“The reason he did that was in order to extort a foreign government to smear his political opponent for his personal benefit and to help try to rig the 2020 election as he worked with the Russians to try to rig the 2016 election. Same pattern,” Nadler said. “There’s no question that working with a foreign power, trying to extort a foreign power to interfere in our election, is about as bad as you can imagine.”
Nadler added that the framers of the Constitution put in the impeachment clause because “they were afraid of foreign interference our domestic affairs” and the White House’s argument in its formal response to the Senate summons “that he broke no law is absurd.”
Later in the interview, said that Trump is engaging “in a concerted attempt to deny all evidence.”
“Everyone who testified defied the President testifying. I mean, Mike Pompeo ought to testify. John Bolton ought to testify. What is the president hiding?” Nadler said. “The President says don’t let these people testify. If they were — if they had exculpatory evidence, he’d be saying let them testify.”
Watch Nadler’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Graham Admits His Idea Of Pre-Senate Trial Dismissal Is ‘Dead For Practical Purposes’

With just two days left to go before the Senate impeachment trial kicks off , Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) isn ’ t optimistic about his initial plan for a pre-Senate trial dismissal .
During an interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace , Graham appeared to shoot down his own idea that the GOP-led Senate could immediately vote to dismiss the impeachment case without hearing any arguments due to lack of votes .
“ Yeah , that ’ s dead for practical purposes , ” Graham said .
“ There are a lot of senators who I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that believe that we need to hear the house ’ s case , the President ’ s case , answer to the House ’ s case and ask questions and then that ’ s when the witness requests will be .
So the idea of dismissing the case early on is not going to happen .
We don ’ t have the votes for that.
” After saying that the Senate will “ play it out along the Clinton model , ” Wallace pressed Graham on why he had no opposition to witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how he ’ s now pushing for the trial to began and end as quickly as possible .
Graham responded that “ all these witnesses ” — which include Secretary of the State Mike Pompeo and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney — “ were available to the House ” and argued that the House restricted Trump from exercising his executive privilege .
“ The President has said he would claim executive privilege , ” Graham said .
“ Here ’ s what ’ s happened : In the House , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never allowed the President to exercise executive privilege and when he suggested he might , they impeached him for obstructing Congress.
” The night before Graham ’ s interview , Trump ’ s legal team characterized the impeachment articles as “ constitutionally invalid ” in its formal response to the Senate summons .

With just two days left to go before the Senate impeachment trial kicks off, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) isn’t optimistic about his initial plan for a pre-Senate trial dismissal.
During an interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Graham appeared to shoot down his own idea that the GOP-led Senate could immediately vote to dismiss the impeachment case without hearing any arguments due to lack of votes.
“Yeah, that’s dead for practical purposes,” Graham said. “There are a lot of senators who I think will wind up acquitting the President that believe that we need to hear the house’s case, the President’s case, answer to the House’s case and ask questions and then that’s when the witness requests will be. So the idea of dismissing the case early on is not going to happen. We don’t have the votes for that.”
After saying that the Senate will “play it out along the Clinton model,” Wallace pressed Graham on why he had no opposition to witnesses during the 1999 Clinton impeachment trial unlike how he’s now pushing for the trial to began and end as quickly as possible.
Graham responded that “all these witnesses” — which include Secretary of the State Mike Pompeo and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney — “were available to the House” and argued that the House restricted Trump from exercising his executive privilege.
“The President has said he would claim executive privilege,” Graham said. “Here’s what’s happened: In the House, they did this in 48 days. They never allowed the President to exercise executive privilege and when he suggested he might, they impeached him for obstructing Congress.”
The night before Graham’s interview, Trump’s legal team characterized the impeachment articles as “constitutionally invalid” in its formal response to the Senate summons.
Watch Graham’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Schiff: Intel Community Withholding Docs Relevant To Senate Trial Is ‘Deeply Concerning’

House Intelligence chair Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) expressed his concerns with the intelligence community withholding documents that could be relevant to the upcoming Senate trial during an interview on ABC News Sunday morning .
When ABC News ’ George Stephanopoulos asked Schiff on his thoughts of Politico ’ s report that the intelligence community is resisting coming forward in a public hearing due to fear of angering President Trump , Schiff responded that “ those reports are all too accurate ” and that they ’ re “ worried about angering the President.
” “ Unfortunately , I think those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schiff said .
“ The intelligence community is reluctant to have an open hearing , something that we had done every year prior to the Trump administration , because they ’ re worried about angering the President.
” Schiff then said that he ’ s worried that the intelligence community is “ succumbing to the pressure of the administration ” by withholding documents from Congress that could be relevant to the Ukraine pressure campaign .
“ And I ’ ll say something even more concerning to me , and that is the intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress on the issue of Ukraine .
They appear to be succumbing to pressure from the administration , ” Schiff said .
“ The NSA in particular is withholding what are potentially relevant documents to our oversight responsibilities on Ukraine , but also withholding documents potentially relevant that the senators might want to see during the trial.
” After adding that he finds the intelligence community ’ s withholding of documents “ deeply concerning , ” Schiff said that the NSA isn ’ t the only intelligence agency “ on the same tragic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CIA may be on the same tragic course , ” Schiff said .
“ We are counting on the intelligence community not only to speak truth to power , but to resist pressure from the administration to withhold information from Congress because the administration fears that they incriminate them.
” Schiff ’ s remarks come a day after the House Democrats argued in a 111-page trial brief that the Senate should remove Trump from office in the upcoming impeachment trial due to the national security threat he poses .

House Intelligence chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) expressed his concerns with the intelligence community withholding documents that could be relevant to the upcoming Senate trial during an interview on ABC News Sunday morning.
When ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos asked Schiff on his thoughts of Politico’s report that the intelligence community is resisting coming forward in a public hearing due to fear of angering President Trump, Schiff responded that “those reports are all too accurate” and that they’re “worried about angering the President.”
“Unfortunately, I think those reports are all too accurate,” Schiff said. “The intelligence community is reluctant to have an open hearing, something that we had done every year prior to the Trump administration, because they’re worried about angering the President.”
Schiff then said that he’s worried that the intelligence community is “succumbing to the pressure of the administration” by withholding documents from Congress that could be relevant to the Ukraine pressure campaign.
“And I’ll say something even more concerning to me, and that is the intelligence community is beginning to withhold documents from Congress on the issue of Ukraine. They appear to be succumbing to pressure from the administration,” Schiff said. “The NSA in particular is withholding what are potentially relevant documents to our oversight responsibilities on Ukraine, but also withholding documents potentially relevant that the senators might want to see during the trial.”
After adding that he finds the intelligence community’s withholding of documents “deeply concerning,” Schiff said that the NSA isn’t the only intelligence agency “on the same tragic course.”
“There are signs that the CIA may be on the same tragic course,” Schiff said. “We are counting on the intelligence community not only to speak truth to power, but to resist pressure from the administration to withhold information from Congress because the administration fears that they incriminate them.”
Schiff’s remarks come a day after the House Democrats argued in a 111-page trial brief that the Senate should remove Trump from office in the upcoming impeachment trial due to the national security threat he poses.
Watch Schiff’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--READ: House Dems Urge Senate To Remove Trump From Office Through Trial

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) announces impeachment managers for the articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill January 15 , 2020 , in Washington , DC , next to Judiciary Committ ... Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) announces impeachment managers for the articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill January 15 , 2020 , in Washington , DC , next to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler ( L ) D-NY and Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) , the House Democrat who led the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is expected to transmit articles of impeachment against Donald Trump to the Senate January 15 , 2020 , setting the stage for a trial next week that will decide whether the 45th US president is forced from office .
After a weeks-long standoff over rules and witnesses , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Tuesday that what will be only the third presidential impeachment trial was now ready to move forward .
Pelosi is expected to sign the articles of impeachment at around 5:00 pm ( 2200 GMT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the House and travel through the US capitol 's main hallways before being delivered to the Secretary of the Senate .
( Photo by JIM WATSON / AFP ) ( Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images )

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announces impeachment managers for the articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill January 15, 2020, in Washington, DC, next to Judiciary Committ...
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announces impeachment managers for the articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill January 15, 2020, in Washington, DC, next to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler(L)D-NY and Adam Schiff(D-CA), the House Democrat who led the Trump investigation. - The House of Representatives is expected to transmit articles of impeachment against Donald Trump to the Senate January 15, 2020, setting the stage for a trial next week that will decide whether the 45th US president is forced from office. After a weeks-long standoff over rules and witnesses, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Tuesday that what will be only the third presidential impeachment trial was now ready to move forward. Pelosi is expected to sign the articles of impeachment at around 5:00 pm (2200 GMT) before they are then ceremoniously transferred from the House and travel through the US capitol's main hallways before being delivered to the Secretary of the Senate. (Photo by JIM WATSON / AFP) (Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)
MORE
LESS


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--READ: Trump Legal Team Calls Articles ‘Constitutionally Invalid’ In Senate Summons Response

President Trump ’ s legal team made the White House ’ s resistance to cooperating with the impeachment inquiry clear in its formal response to the Senate summons Saturday evening .
In its response , Trump ’ s legal team — headed by Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow and White House counsel Pat Cipollone — characterizes the impeachment articles as “ constitutionally invalid ” and accuses House Democrats of staging a “ dangerous attack ” with a “ brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election.
” The response also rails @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying that Trump “ categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment.
” When arguing against the first article , abuse of power , Trump ’ s legal team responded that it “ alleges no crime at all , let alone ‘ high crimes and misdemeanors ’ as required by the Constitution , ” citing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ’ s denials that he was pressured by the President during the now-infamous July phone call that was an effort to dig up false allegations against Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President ’ s release of transcripts of both the July call and another in April show that the conversations were “ perfectly legal , completely appropriate and taken in furtherance of our national interest.
” In response to the second article , obstruction of Congress , Trump ’ s legal team said the administration “ replied appropriately to these subpoenas and identified their constitutional defects .
”

President Trump’s legal team made the White House’s resistance to cooperating with the impeachment inquiry clear in its formal response to the Senate summons Saturday evening.
In its response, Trump’s legal team — headed by Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow and White House counsel Pat Cipollone — characterizes the impeachment articles as “constitutionally invalid” and accuses House Democrats of staging a “dangerous attack” with a “brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election.”
The response also rails against charges in the impeachment articles, saying that Trump “categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment.”
When arguing against the first article, abuse of power, Trump’s legal team responded that it “alleges no crime at all, let alone ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ as required by the Constitution,” citing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s denials that he was pressured by the President during the now-infamous July phone call that was an effort to dig up false allegations against Trump’s political rivals.
The response argued that the President’s release of transcripts of both the July call and another in April show that the conversations were “perfectly legal, completely appropriate and taken in furtherance of our national interest.”
In response to the second article, obstruction of Congress, Trump’s legal team said the administration “replied appropriately to these subpoenas and identified their constitutional defects.”
Read the response below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-19--Nadler Hits Back At WH Response To Senate Summons: ‘Arrant Nonsense’

House Judiciary Committee chair Jerry Nadler ( D-NY ) didn ’ t hold back when asked about his thoughts on the formal response to the Senate summons that President Trump ’ s legal team issued Saturday evening .
In its response , Trump ’ s legal team said that the President “ categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment.
” During an interview on CBS ’ “ Face the Nation ” Sunday morning , Nadler said the White House ’ s response to both articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There is ample evidence , overwhelming evidence , ” Nadler said .
“ Any jury would convict in three minutes flat that the president betrayed his country by breaking the law.
” Nadler then cited the Government Accountability Office ’ s report last week that said the White House Office of Management and Budget unlawfully withheld military aid to Ukraine .
“ The reason he did that was in order to extort a foreign government to smear his political opponent for his personal benefit and to help try to rig the 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to try to rig the 2016 election .
Same pattern , ” Nadler said .
“ There ’ s no question that working with a foreign power , trying to extort a foreign power to interfere in our election , is about as bad as you can imagine.
” Nadler added that the framers of the Constitution put in the impeachment clause because “ they were afraid of foreign interference our domestic affairs ” and the White House ’ s argument in its formal response to the Senate summons “ that he broke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interview , said that Trump is engaging “ in a concerted attempt to deny all evidence.
” “ Everyone who testified defied the President testifying .
I mean , Mike Pompeo ought to testify .
John Bolton ought to testify .
What is the president hiding ?
” Nadler said .
“ The President says don ’ t let these people testify .
If they were — if they had exculpatory evidence , he ’ d be saying let them testify .
”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-20--Durbin: Just Before Trial, Still Lack ‘Most Basic’ Info About Proceedings

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin ( D-IL ) said Sunday , just two days before President Donald Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ start , that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has withheld even “ @ @ @ @ @ exchange of information.
” McConnell has yet to share his memo about the rules governing @ @ @ @ @ has said he has the votes to approve .
Durbin predicted that the earliest motions @ @ @ @ @ aisle will be pertaining to witnesses and evidence that Democrats want as part of proceedings @ @ @ @ @ trial , and will be able to ensure that it happens unless four of his @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The bottom line is , is there going to be a fair trial @ @ @ @ @ have evidence , documents and witnesses ?
To this point , Senator McConnell has said @ @ @ @ @ ’ He ’ s made up his mind long ago , ” Durbin said .
@ @ @ @ @ American people expect a real trial to have real witnesses and evidence .
”

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) said Sunday, just two days before President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial is set to start, that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has withheld even “the most basic negotiation or exchange of information.”
McConnell has yet to share his memo about the rules governing the trial, which he has said he has the votes to approve.
Durbin predicted that the earliest motions from his side of the aisle will be pertaining to witnesses and evidence that Democrats want as part of proceedings. McConnell wants a witness-free trial, and will be able to ensure that it happens unless four of his members defect to the Democrats.
“The bottom line is, is there going to be a fair trial? Are we going to have evidence, documents and witnesses? To this point, Senator McConnell has said ‘no, not necessary.’ He’s made up his mind long ago,” Durbin said. “But I think the American people expect a real trial to have real witnesses and evidence.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-20--Conway: Getting ‘Dragged’ Through Impeachment Wasn’t MLK Jr.’s ‘Vision’

On the eve of the Senate impeachment trial , White House counselor Kellyanne Conway somehow found a way to argue against impeachment by invoking Martin Luther King Jr. ’ s name on his namesake holiday .
When asked during an interview on MSNBC Monday how President Trump plans to observe Martin Luther King Jr. Day , Conway said that he ’ s gearing up for Davos and “ agrees with many of the things that Dr. Martin Luther King stood for ” in one breath .
“ The President is preparing for Davos and agrees with many of the things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and agreed with for many years , including unity and equality , ” Conway said .
Conway then elaborated on her Trump-King comparison by launching into a rant about how the President is “ not the one trying to tear the country apart through an impeachment process , ” much like how it was not “ within Dr. King ’ s vision to have Americans dragged ” through impeachment .
“ I ’ ve held my opinion on it for a very long time , but when you see the articles of impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t think it was within Dr. King ’ s vision to have Americans dragged through a process where the President is not going to be removed from office , is not being charged with bribery , extortion , high crimes or misdemeanors , ” Conway said .
Conway added that she thinks that “ anybody who cares about ‘ and justice for all ’ today or any day of the year will appreciate the fact that now the President now will have a full-throttle defense on the facts , and everybody should have @ @ @

On the eve of the Senate impeachment trial, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway somehow found a way to argue against impeachment by invoking Martin Luther King Jr.’s name on his namesake holiday.
When asked during an interview on MSNBC Monday how President Trump plans to observe Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Conway said that he’s gearing up for Davos and “agrees with many of the things that Dr. Martin Luther King stood for” in one breath.
“The President is preparing for Davos and agrees with many of the things that Dr. Martin Luther King stood for and agreed with for many years, including unity and equality,” Conway said.
Conway then elaborated on her Trump-King comparison by launching into a rant about how the President is “not the one trying to tear the country apart through an impeachment process,” much like how it was not “within Dr. King’s vision to have Americans dragged” through impeachment.
“I’ve held my opinion on it for a very long time, but when you see the articles of impeachment they came out, I don’t think it was within Dr. King’s vision to have Americans dragged through a process where the President is not going to be removed from office, is not being charged with bribery, extortion, high crimes or misdemeanors,” Conway said.
Conway added that she thinks that “anybody who cares about ‘and justice for all’ today or any day of the year will appreciate the fact that now the President now will have a full-throttle defense on the facts, and everybody should have that.”
Watch Conway’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-20--READ: House Dems Say Trump Made ‘Chilling Assertion’ In Senate Summons Response

In response to the White House arguing in a filing Saturday that the impeachment articles are “ constitutionally invalid , ” House impeachment managers wrote in a formal response Monday that President Trump made a “ chilling assertion ” by arguing that the Senate can not remove him from office even if the House validates the articles of impeachment .
The nine-page response released Monday reiterates the House Democrats ’ argument in a trial brief sent Saturday evening that Trump “ jeopardized our national security and our democratic self-governance ” and “ used his Presidential powers to orchestrate a cover-up.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate can not remove him even if the House proves every claim in the Articles of impeachment .
That is a chilling assertion .
It is also dead wrong , ” the impeachment managers wrote .
“ The Framers deliberately drafted a Constitution that allows the Senate to remove Presidents who , like President Trump , abuse their power to cheat in elections , betray our national security , and ignore checks and balances .
That President Trump believes otherwise , and insists he is free to engage in such conduct again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Nation if allowed to remain in office .
” The response also took issue with Trump ’ s “ stonewalling of the impeachment inquiry ” and argued that “ the Senate should require the President to turn over the documents he is hiding.
” “ It should hear from witnesses , as it has done in every impeachment trial in American history ; it especially should hear from witnesses the President blocked from testifying in the House , ” the impeachment managers wrote .
The House Democrats ’ response came shortly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate to “ swiftly and roundly condemn ” the articles of impeachment that it characterized as “ flimsy ” in a brief filed to the Senate Monday .

In response to the White House arguing in a filing Saturday that the impeachment articles are “constitutionally invalid,” House impeachment managers wrote in a formal response Monday that President Trump made a “chilling assertion” by arguing that the Senate cannot remove him from office even if the House validates the articles of impeachment.
The nine-page response released Monday reiterates the House Democrats’ argument in a trial brief sent Saturday evening that Trump “jeopardized our national security and our democratic self-governance” and “used his Presidential powers to orchestrate a cover-up.”
“President Trump maintains that the Senate cannot remove him even if the House proves every claim in the Articles of impeachment. That is a chilling assertion. It is also dead wrong,” the impeachment managers wrote. “The Framers deliberately drafted a Constitution that allows the Senate to remove Presidents who, like President Trump, abuse their power to cheat in elections, betray our national security, and ignore checks and balances. That President Trump believes otherwise, and insists he is free to engage in such conduct again, only highlights the continuing threat he poses to the Nation if allowed to remain in office. ”
The response also took issue with Trump’s “stonewalling of the impeachment inquiry” and argued that “the Senate should require the President to turn over the documents he is hiding.”
“It should hear from witnesses, as it has done in every impeachment trial in American history; it especially should hear from witnesses the President blocked from testifying in the House,” the impeachment managers wrote.
The House Democrats’ response came shortly after Trump’s legal team urged the Senate to “swiftly and roundly condemn” the articles of impeachment that it characterized as “flimsy” in a brief filed to the Senate Monday.
Read the House Democrats’ response below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-20--READ: Trump Legal Team Rails Against ‘Flimsy’ Impeachment Case On Eve Of Trial

A day before the Senate impeachment trial kicks off , President Trump ’ s legal team urged the Senate to “ swiftly and roundly condemn ” the articles of impeachment that it characterized as “ flimsy ” in a brief filed to the Senate Monday .
The brief , which argues that Trump “ absolutely nothing wrong ” and that the impeachment case is “ a dangerous perversion of the Constitution , ” provided a rebuttal to the House Democrats ’ 111-page trial brief filed to the Senate by impeachment managers Saturday evening , which urged the Senate to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to America ’ s national security ” and summarized their argument for why the House charged Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
Trump lawyers wrote in the 171-page filing Monday that the impeachment case is a “ constitutional travesty ” and argued that the two articles of impeachment brought against Trump — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — are not impeachable offenses .
Echoing its formal response to the Senate summons Saturday evening , Trump lawyers accused House Democrats again of using the impeachment case as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election.
” “ Instead , House Democrats were determined from the outset to find some way — any way — to corrupt the extraordinary power of impeachment for use as a political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election , ” Trump ’ s legal team wrote in the brief .
“ All of that is a dangerous perversion of the Constitution that the Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.
” Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ request to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden in the brief , saying that it “ would have been legitimate to mention the Biden-Burisma affair .
”

A day before the Senate impeachment trial kicks off, President Trump’s legal team urged the Senate to “swiftly and roundly condemn” the articles of impeachment that it characterized as “flimsy” in a brief filed to the Senate Monday.
The brief, which argues that Trump “absolutely nothing wrong” and that the impeachment case is “a dangerous perversion of the Constitution,” provided a rebuttal to the House Democrats’ 111-page trial brief filed to the Senate by impeachment managers Saturday evening, which urged the Senate to “eliminate the threat that the President poses to America’s national security” and summarized their argument for why the House charged Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Trump lawyers wrote in the 171-page filing Monday that the impeachment case is a “constitutional travesty” and argued that the two articles of impeachment brought against Trump — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — are not impeachable offenses.
Echoing its formal response to the Senate summons Saturday evening, Trump lawyers accused House Democrats again of using the impeachment case as a “political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election.”
“Instead, House Democrats were determined from the outset to find some way — any way — to corrupt the extraordinary power of impeachment for use as a political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election,” Trump’s legal team wrote in the brief. “All of that is a dangerous perversion of the Constitution that the Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.”
Trump’s lawyers also defended the President’s request to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden in the brief, saying that it “would have been legitimate to mention the Biden-Burisma affair.”
Read the brief below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-20--Trump’s Russia Adviser Left Post Amid Security Probe

Andrew Peek , a White House adviser on Russia and Europe , was escorted out of the White House Friday @ @ @ @ @ According to Bloomberg , Peek was put on leave and has now left the National @ @ @ @ @ both Fiona Hill and Tim Morrison , both of whom testified during the House impeachment @ @ @ @ @ the third time the position has been vacant in less than a year .
He @ @ @ @ @ secretary of state for Iraq and Iran .
Per the Hill , he was supposed @ @ @ @ @ to the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland next week .
The reason for @ @ @ @ @ the related investigation is unclear , as the NSC has maintained that it “ does @ @ @ @ @ ”

Andrew Peek, a White House adviser on Russia and Europe, was escorted out of the White House Friday amid a security-related investigation.
According to Bloomberg, Peek was put on leave and has now left the National Security Council position vacated by both Fiona Hill and Tim Morrison, both of whom testified during the House impeachment inquiry. His departure marks the third time the position has been vacant in less than a year.
He formerly served as deputy assistant secretary of state for Iraq and Iran.
Per the Hill, he was supposed to accompany President Donald Trump to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland next week.
The reason for Peek’s departure and the related investigation is unclear, as the NSC has maintained that it “does not discuss personnel matters.”