talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Bloomberg Hammered From All Sides At Debate, Offering Little To Defend Himself

Money can ’ t buy a good debate performance , as multibillionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg learned Wednesday .
Bloomberg came into Wednesday ’ s Democratic presidential primary debate with a target on his back .
After skipping the early part of the primary race and then dumping nine-figures into a wave of nationwide television advertising , Bloomberg ’ s campaign released a memo Wednesday morning that portrayed four other candidates on stage as , essentially , political dead weight .
Bloomberg ’ s campaign urged them to get out of the way and clear the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bloomberg ’ s opponents were peeved at their new competition .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) set the tone early Wednesday night in Las Vegas .
“ I ’ d like to talk about who we ’ re running against : A billionaire who calls women ‘ fat broads ’ and ‘ horse-faced lesbians , ” and no I ’ m not talking about Donald Trump , I ’ m talking about Mayor Bloomberg , ” she said , to an audible reaction from the crowd .
After Sen. Amy Klobuchar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ memo — “ I don ’ t think you look at Donald Trump and say , ‘ We need someone richer in the White House , ' ” she quipped — the former mayor answered his colleagues with a tepid response .
“ I think we have two questions to face tonight .
One is , who can beat Donald Trump ?
And number two , who can do the job if they get into the White House ?
” Bloomberg said .
Michael Bloomberg fits the bill , Michael Bloomberg said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stage and focusing directly on the President .
Later , attacked on the “ stop-and-frisks ” carried out by police in New York — the use of the maneuver increased massively during Bloomberg ’ s tenure — the mayor used passive voice , messily dodging one of the most predictable questions of the night .
“ Well , if I go back and look at my time in office , the one thing that I ’ m really worried about , embarrassed about , was how it turned out with stop-and-frisk , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said of the policy : “ What happened , however , was it got out of control.
” One answer from the former New York mayor even solicited a loud groan from the audience in attendance in Las Vegas , regarding the tax returns he has not yet released .
“ It just takes us a long time , ” he said , adding : “ I can ’ t go to TurboTax.
” That was just the beginning .
Warren , who needled Bloomberg all night , nearly buried him in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his have signed , and which prevent them from discussing potential allegations of sexual misconduct or harassment at Bloomberg ’ s eponymous financial data and media company .
Asked about former employees ’ claims that he created a hostile workplace for women , Bloomberg responded by listing female employment statistics at his company adding , “ I am very proud of the fact that about two weeks ago , we were awarded the best place to work — second-best place in America.
” “ I hope you heard what his defense was , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some women , ' ” Warren jabbed back , before pressing Bloomberg to release his former employees from their NDAs , “ so we can hear their side of the story.
” “ We have a very few non-disclosure agreements– ” he began responding .
“ None of them accuse me of dong anything other than maybe they didn ’ t like a joke I told.
” More groans from the audience .
The agreements were to “ keep it quiet , ” he said .
Warren didn ’ t quit .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And when you say they signed them , if they wish now to speak out and tell their side of the story about what it is they alleged , that ’ s now okay with you ?
You ’ re releasing them on television tonight ?
Is that right ?
” No , Bloomberg said .
Warren smelled blood .
“ The question is , are the women bound by being muzzled by you ?
You could release them from that immediately.
” Even former Vice President Joe Biden , who has faced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ All the mayor has to do is say ‘ You are released from the non-disclosure agreement.
” Bloomberg did not bend , leading the crowd to openly boo him when he delivered his final line on the matter : “ I said we ’ re not going to end these agreements because they were made consensually.
” It was a sign of the debate ’ s tenor that , when Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) only briefly mentioned the former mayor ’ s support for George W. Bush and opposition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be getting off easy .
“ Everyone came to destroy Mike tonight , ” Bloomberg ’ s campaign manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement after the debate .
“ It didn ’ t happen.
” Sheekey added of his boss , “ He was just warming up tonight .
”

Money can’t buy a good debate performance, as multibillionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg learned Wednesday.
Bloomberg came into Wednesday’s Democratic presidential primary debate with a target on his back.
After skipping the early part of the primary race and then dumping nine-figures into a wave of nationwide television advertising, Bloomberg’s campaign released a memo Wednesday morning that portrayed four other candidates on stage as, essentially, political dead weight. Bloomberg’s campaign urged them to get out of the way and clear the path for a Bloomberg-Sanders primary.
Clearly, Bloomberg’s opponents were peeved at their new competition. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) set the tone early Wednesday night in Las Vegas.
“I’d like to talk about who we’re running against: A billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,” and no I’m not talking about Donald Trump, I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg,” she said, to an audible reaction from the crowd.
Elizabeth Warren comes out swinging at Michael Bloomberg in #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/Lwv6NaCGaa — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 20, 2020
After Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) hammered Bloomberg’s memo — “I don’t think you look at Donald Trump and say, ‘We need someone richer in the White House,'” she quipped — the former mayor answered his colleagues with a tepid response.
“I think we have two questions to face tonight. One is, who can beat Donald Trump? And number two, who can do the job if they get into the White House?” Bloomberg said.
Michael Bloomberg fits the bill, Michael Bloomberg said, ignoring the withering criticisms of him on stage and focusing directly on the President.
Later, attacked on the “stop-and-frisks” carried out by police in New York — the use of the maneuver increased massively during Bloomberg’s tenure — the mayor used passive voice, messily dodging one of the most predictable questions of the night.
“Well, if I go back and look at my time in office, the one thing that I’m really worried about, embarrassed about, was how it turned out with stop-and-frisk,” he said, haltingly. Later, he said of the policy: “What happened, however, was it got out of control.”
One answer from the former New York mayor even solicited a loud groan from the audience in attendance in Las Vegas, regarding the tax returns he has not yet released.
“It just takes us a long time,” he said, adding: “I can’t go to TurboTax.”
That was just the beginning.
Warren, who needled Bloomberg all night, nearly buried him in questions about non-disclosure agreements former employees of his have signed, and which prevent them from discussing potential allegations of sexual misconduct or harassment at Bloomberg’s eponymous financial data and media company.
Asked about former employees’ claims that he created a hostile workplace for women, Bloomberg responded by listing female employment statistics at his company adding, “I am very proud of the fact that about two weeks ago, we were awarded the best place to work — second-best place in America.”
“I hope you heard what his defense was, ‘I’ve been nice to some women,'” Warren jabbed back, before pressing Bloomberg to release his former employees from their NDAs, “so we can hear their side of the story.”
“We have a very few non-disclosure agreements–” he began responding.
“How many is that?” Warren asked.
“None of them accuse me of dong anything other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told.” More groans from the audience.
The agreements were to “keep it quiet,” he said.
Warren didn’t quit. “‘Some’ is how many? And when you say they signed them, if they wish now to speak out and tell their side of the story about what it is they alleged, that’s now okay with you? You’re releasing them on television tonight? Is that right?”
No, Bloomberg said. Warren smelled blood. “The question is, are the women bound by being muzzled by you? You could release them from that immediately.”
Even former Vice President Joe Biden, who has faced criticism for unwanted touching, weighed in: “All the mayor has to do is say ‘You are released from the non-disclosure agreement.”
Bloomberg did not bend, leading the crowd to openly boo him when he delivered his final line on the matter: “I said we’re not going to end these agreements because they were made consensually.”
Warren goes after Bloomberg over NDAs concerning alleged sexual harassment at his company pic.twitter.com/ugqlkdqYH3 — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 20, 2020
It was a sign of the debate’s tenor that, when Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) only briefly mentioned the former mayor’s support for George W. Bush and opposition to the minimum wage, Bloomberg seemed to be getting off easy.
“Everyone came to destroy Mike tonight,” Bloomberg’s campaign manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement after the debate. “It didn’t happen.”
Sheekey added of his boss, “He was just warming up tonight.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--How The Candidates Fared In A Bruising Nevada Debate

This Nevada Democratic debate came at a crucial time in the primary — and it showed .
In perhaps the most striking departure from previous debate night strategies , Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) came out of the gate swinging and eager to engage the other candidates in fights over policy or past records .
She trained much of her fire on former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg , especially on reports that he encouraged and contributed to a sexually hostile work environment .
She pushed him to release his female former employees from their nondisclosure agreements right there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t her only target .
On health care , she called former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg ’ s plan a “ PowerPoint ” written by “ consultants , ” Sen. Amy Klobuchar ’ s ( D-MN ) plan a “ Post-it ” and Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ ( I-VT ) a “ good start.
” Warren was candid about her disappointment in her performance at the New Hampshire debate two weeks ago , telling the panel afterward that she didn ’ t “ fight hard enough ” to show people how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feeling , and the fact that she spoke more only than Tom Steyer and Andrew Yang at that debate , clearly fueled a tactical shift tonight .
Former Vice President Joe Biden also kept up a higher-than-usual energy presentation , if less pugnacious than Warren ’ s .
He did cite Bloomberg every time he name-checked the billionaire class , and went after the progressives on health care .
Most notably , Biden served up more specifics and statistics in his answers Wednesday night , perhaps responding to criticism that he tends to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night by touting a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showing him leading the pack in head-to-head matchups against President Donald Trump .
One of those moments came when Buttigieg unrelentingly pressed her on forgetting the name of Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador .
Klobuchar delivered some fire in her response , incredulously asking if he was calling her “ dumb ” and launching a blistering attack on Buttigieg ’ s lack of experience .
“ You ’ ve memorized a lot of talking points , ” she quipped at one point .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Klobuchar , in return .
At one point , he specifically attacked her record on her votes for Trump ’ s judges .
She parried with criticisms about his limited experience .
Buttigieg also tied Sanders and Bloomberg together about their lack of transparency : the former for his refusal to release his full medical records , and the latter for his NDAs .
Sanders largely stayed out of the infighting , content to stay to the background of many of the most contentious exchanges .
As the current frontrunner , Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the debates unscathed , so as not to dent his momentum .
Bloomberg undeniably took the most heat of the evening in his first debate appearance — and seemed somewhat unprepared .
He largely fell back on prepared answers and kept a scowl on his face for most of the night .
He showed some real passion during the climate change section , a cause to which he ’ s donated millions of his personal wealth .
However , his response on the NDAs and settlements involving former female employees , downplaying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have made , actually garnered some boos from the debate audience .

This Nevada Democratic debate came at a crucial time in the primary — and it showed.
In perhaps the most striking departure from previous debate night strategies, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) came out of the gate swinging and eager to engage the other candidates in fights over policy or past records.
She trained much of her fire on former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, especially on reports that he encouraged and contributed to a sexually hostile work environment. She pushed him to release his female former employees from their nondisclosure agreements right there on the stage.
But Bloomberg wasn’t her only target. On health care, she called former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s plan a “PowerPoint” written by “consultants,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s (D-MN) plan a “Post-it” and Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) a “good start.”
Warren was candid about her disappointment in her performance at the New Hampshire debate two weeks ago, telling the panel afterward that she didn’t “fight hard enough” to show people how badly she wants the presidency. That feeling, and the fact that she spoke more only than Tom Steyer and Andrew Yang at that debate, clearly fueled a tactical shift tonight.
Former Vice President Joe Biden also kept up a higher-than-usual energy presentation, if less pugnacious than Warren’s. He did cite Bloomberg every time he name-checked the billionaire class, and went after the progressives on health care.
Most notably, Biden served up more specifics and statistics in his answers Wednesday night, perhaps responding to criticism that he tends to resort to generalities. He started the night by touting a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showing him leading the pack in head-to-head matchups against President Donald Trump.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), always a strong debater, sparred ferociously with fellow moderate Buttigieg.
One of those moments came when Buttigieg unrelentingly pressed her on forgetting the name of Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Klobuchar delivered some fire in her response, incredulously asking if he was calling her “dumb” and launching a blistering attack on Buttigieg’s lack of experience.
“You’ve memorized a lot of talking points,” she quipped at one point.
Buttigieg seemed to have special knives out for Klobuchar, in return.
At one point, he specifically attacked her record on her votes for Trump’s judges. She parried with criticisms about his limited experience.
Buttigieg also tied Sanders and Bloomberg together about their lack of transparency: the former for his refusal to release his full medical records, and the latter for his NDAs.
Sanders largely stayed out of the infighting, content to stay to the background of many of the most contentious exchanges. As the current frontrunner, Sanders has good reason to try to get through the debates unscathed, so as not to dent his momentum.
Bloomberg undeniably took the most heat of the evening in his first debate appearance — and seemed somewhat unprepared. He largely fell back on prepared answers and kept a scowl on his face for most of the night.
He showed some real passion during the climate change section, a cause to which he’s donated millions of his personal wealth. However, his response on the NDAs and settlements involving former female employees, downplaying a few “jokes” he may have made, actually garnered some boos from the debate audience.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Warren Goes Hard After Bloomberg And Rest Of Dem Field At Debate

Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) came out swinging during Wednesday ’ s Democratic primary debate , delivering a barrage of zingers at several of her competitors on stage , most notably former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg .
Here are a few lines from the Massachusetts senator : I ’ d like to talk about who we ’ re running against : A billionaire who calls women ‘ fat broads ’ and ‘ horse-faced lesbians , ” and no I ’ m not talking about Donald Trump , I ’ m talking about Mayor Bloomberg .
Democrats are not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns , of harassing women , and of supporting racist policies like red-lining and stop-and-frisk .. Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another .
This country has worked for the rich for a long time .
And left everyone else in the dirt .
It is time to have a president who will be on the side of working families and be willing to get out there and fight for them .
That is why I am @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how I will beat Donald Trump .
Mayor Buttigieg really has a slogan that was thought up by his consultants to paper over a thin version of a plan that would leave millions of people unable to afford their health care .
It ’ s not a plan , it ’ s a Powerpoint .
On Bloomberg , again , needling him on non-disclosure agreements he had former employees sign : I have .
I hope you heard what his defense was : I ’ ve been nice to some women .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The mayor has to stand on his record .
And what we need to know is exactly what ’ s lurking out there .
He has gotten some number of women — dozens , who knows — to sign nondisclosure agreements for sexual harassment and gender discrimination in the workplace .
So Mr. Mayor , are you willing to release all of those women from those nondisclosure agreements ?
So we can hear their side of the story ?
[ … ] I ’ m sorry , no , the question is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by you ?
And you could release them from that immediately .
On Buttigieg , Klobuchar , and former Vice President Joe Biden : Amy and Joe ’ s hearts are in the right place , but we can ’ t be so eager to be liked by Mitch McConnell that we forget how to fight the Republicans .
Mayor Buttigieg has been taking money from big donors and changing his positions .

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) came out swinging during Wednesday’s Democratic primary debate, delivering a barrage of zingers at several of her competitors on stage, most notably former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Here are a few lines from the Massachusetts senator:
On Bloomberg:
I’d like to talk about who we’re running against: A billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,” and no I’m not talking about Donald Trump, I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg. Democrats are not going to win if we have a nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns, of harassing women, and of supporting racist policies like red-lining and stop-and-frisk .. Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another. This country has worked for the rich for a long time. And left everyone else in the dirt. It is time to have a president who will be on the side of working families and be willing to get out there and fight for them. That is why I am in this race. And that is how I will beat Donald Trump.
Elizabeth Warren comes out swinging at Michael Bloomberg in #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/Lwv6NaCGaa — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 20, 2020
On former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg:
Mayor Buttigieg really has a slogan that was thought up by his consultants to paper over a thin version of a plan that would leave millions of people unable to afford their health care. It’s not a plan, it’s a Powerpoint.
On Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN):
And Amy’s plan is even less. It’s like a post-it note, insert plan here.
On Bloomberg, again, needling him on non-disclosure agreements he had former employees sign:
I have. I hope you heard what his defense was: I’ve been nice to some women. That just doesn’t cut it. The mayor has to stand on his record. And what we need to know is exactly what’s lurking out there. He has gotten some number of women — dozens, who knows — to sign nondisclosure agreements for sexual harassment and gender discrimination in the workplace. So Mr. Mayor, are you willing to release all of those women from those nondisclosure agreements? So we can hear their side of the story? […] I’m sorry, no, the question is, are the women bound by being muzzled by you? And you could release them from that immediately.
On Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and former Vice President Joe Biden:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--E. Jean Carroll Blames Trump For Elle Magazine Firing Her After Accusation

Elle magazine advice columnist E. Jean Carroll , who accused President Trump of sexually assaulting her in the mid-1990s , told the New York Times Wednesday that Trump ’ s onslaught of insults led to the publication ’ s decision to fire her .
The “ Ask E. Jean ” columnist announced that she was fired from the magazine in a Tuesday tweet , blaming Trump for ridiculing her after she accused him last year of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room prior to his presidency .
Carroll made the accusation in a book excerpt published in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has denied Carroll ’ s accusation several times , which included saying in June that Carroll is “ not my type.
” Last November , Carroll sued Trump for defamation in New York State Court after he repeatedly attacked her on Twitter , most notably insulting Carroll ’ s physical appearance and suggesting she made up the allegations to increase book sales .
Carroll argued in the lawsuit that Trump ’ s attacks hurt her reputation and prompted the loss of readers of her advice column .
In a court filing obtained by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyer Roberta Kaplan included an email dated Dec. 11 between Carroll and Elle executive managing editor Erin Hobday that confirmed Carroll ’ s termination .
The email also confirmed that Elle Magazine would pay Carroll for the remaining five columns in her contract .
“ We and your readers so appreciate your many years of work for the magazine , and the wonderful columns you contributed to our publication , ” Hobday wrote in the court filing , according to the Times .
“ We will miss you tremendously .
”

Elle magazine advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who accused President Trump of sexually assaulting her in the mid-1990s, told the New York Times Wednesday that Trump’s onslaught of insults led to the publication’s decision to fire her.
The “Ask E. Jean” columnist announced that she was fired from the magazine in a Tuesday tweet, blaming Trump for ridiculing her after she accused him last year of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room prior to his presidency. Carroll made the accusation in a book excerpt published in New York magazine in June.
Because Trump ridiculed my reputation, laughed at my looks, & dragged me through the mud, after 26 years, ELLE fired me. I don't blame Elle. It was the great honor of my life writing "Ask E. Jean." I blame @realdonaldtrump.https://t.co/vYIVL6yDIp — E. Jean Carroll (@ejeancarroll) February 18, 2020
Trump has denied Carroll’s accusation several times, which included saying in June that Carroll is “not my type.”
Last November, Carroll sued Trump for defamation in New York State Court after he repeatedly attacked her on Twitter, most notably insulting Carroll’s physical appearance and suggesting she made up the allegations to increase book sales. Carroll argued in the lawsuit that Trump’s attacks hurt her reputation and prompted the loss of readers of her advice column.
In a court filing obtained by the Times Tuesday, Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan included an email dated Dec. 11 between Carroll and Elle executive managing editor Erin Hobday that confirmed Carroll’s termination. The email also confirmed that Elle Magazine would pay Carroll for the remaining five columns in her contract.
“We and your readers so appreciate your many years of work for the magazine, and the wonderful columns you contributed to our publication,” Hobday wrote in the court filing, according to the Times. “We will miss you tremendously.”
Kaplan told TPM in a statement Wednesday that Carroll filed the defamation lawsuit to “prove that Donald Trump lied about sexually assaulting her and to restore her credibility and reputation.”
“From the very beginning, Trump has tried every tactic lawyers can think of to halt this case in its tracks and keep the truth from coming out,” Kaplan said in the statement. “His latest effort — a motion to stay our client’s case until the New York Court of Appeals decides the Summer Zervos case likely after November 2020 — is yet another obvious delay tactic that is not grounded in the law and, like his previous attempts to stall this case, will be rejected by the court.”
Read the Times’ report here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--NYT: Trump To Name Richard Grenell Acting DNI

President Trump intends to name Ambassador to Germany and right-wing political operative Richard Grenell to the position of acting Director of National Intelligence , the New York Times reports .
The job will give Grenell — a staunch Trump loyalist — an oversight role within the country ’ s intelligence community , after President Trump has spent years claiming to be the victim of the country ’ s intelligence services .
Grenell is a longtime GOP political operative and former aide to Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-UT ) who made a habit of enraging the German government as ambassador in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ empower ” the right in the country .
The move has yet to be officially announced .
The Times wrote that Trump has “ a history of changing his mind on personnel decisions after they were revealed in the news media.
” A former Bush administration communications official , Grenell has scant experience with the intelligence community .
He does , however , bring extensive experience in attempting to enact Trump ’ s foreign policy vision .
Apart from his stated support for Germany ’ s right , Grenell has used his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stalwart U.S. ally , for a range of issues ranging from insufficient NATO spending to insufficient hostility towards Iran .
The Trump loyalist will replace Joseph Maguire , the current acting DNI .
Maguire took over from Dan Coats , who departed the position in July 2019 .
Grenell had also been floated as a potential UN ambassador under Trump .
His career prior to being named ambassador ran from the absurd to the sinister .
Grenell , for instance , once called on Americans to stop describing the death of actor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a 2014 Fox News appearance , saying “ we could see this coming ” and that the media should not “ glamorize ” Hoffman ’ s passing .
Grenell is also reportedly a text buddy of Don Jr. , the President ’ s son .
The Atlantic reported that Grenell is in a group chat with Don Jr. , conservative activist Charlie Kirk , a Breitbart editor , and other GOP activists where they coordinate responses to damaging news stories about the President .
The White House did not immediately return a @ @ @ @

President Trump intends to name Ambassador to Germany and right-wing political operative Richard Grenell to the position of acting Director of National Intelligence, the New York Times reports.
The job will give Grenell — a staunch Trump loyalist — an oversight role within the country’s intelligence community, after President Trump has spent years claiming to be the victim of the country’s intelligence services.
Grenell is a longtime GOP political operative and former aide to Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) who made a habit of enraging the German government as ambassador in part due to his stated desire to “empower” the right in the country.
The move has yet to be officially announced. The Times wrote that Trump has “a history of changing his mind on personnel decisions after they were revealed in the news media.”
A former Bush administration communications official, Grenell has scant experience with the intelligence community.
He does, however, bring extensive experience in attempting to enact Trump’s foreign policy vision. Apart from his stated support for Germany’s right, Grenell has used his position as ambassador to attack Germany, a stalwart U.S. ally, for a range of issues ranging from insufficient NATO spending to insufficient hostility towards Iran.
The Trump loyalist will replace Joseph Maguire, the current acting DNI. Maguire took over from Dan Coats, who departed the position in July 2019.
Grenell had also been floated as a potential UN ambassador under Trump.
His career prior to being named ambassador ran from the absurd to the sinister.
Grenell, for instance, once called on Americans to stop describing the death of actor Philip Seymour Hoffman a “tragedy” in a 2014 Fox News appearance, saying “we could see this coming” and that the media should not “glamorize” Hoffman’s passing.
Grenell is also reportedly a text buddy of Don Jr., the President’s son. The Atlantic reported that Grenell is in a group chat with Don Jr., conservative activist Charlie Kirk, a Breitbart editor, and other GOP activists where they coordinate responses to damaging news stories about the President.
The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.
Matt Shuham contributed to this article.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--READ: FSB Allegedly Coopted Mexican Researcher Into Spying On Government Informant

A member of a Russian government intelligence service coopted a Mexican researcher into spying on a confidential FBI source in Miami , according to a criminal complaint filed Tuesday evening in South Florida federal court .
Hector Alejandro Cabrera Fuentes , a biotech researcher residing in Singapore , was charged with failing to register as a foreign agent in a scheme that allegedly saw the Mexican national attempt to surveil a confidential source who had “ previously provided information ” to the U.S. government about Russian intelligence activities “ implicating national security interests.
” Fuentes allegedly tailgated another car into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday , making it past an automated gate , according to an affidavit filed with the complaint .
A security guard noticed what Fuentes had done and approached his car .
But , as the guard walked over , Fuentes ’ s wife got out of the car and took a picture of the informant ’ s vehicle and license plate .
Border Patrol agents purportedly intercepted Fuentes and his wife the next day , as they attempted to leave the U.S. for Mexico out of Miami International Airport .
Border Patrol found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ car in the “ recently deleted ” folder of Fuentes ’ s wife ’ s phone , as well as an extensive WhatsApp conversation between Fuentes and an unnamed Russian official .
The complaint goes on to allege that , months earlier , the Russian official extorted Fuentes into becoming a spy .
Fuentes , the document says , believed that the official was a member of the FSB — Russia ’ s successor agency to the Soviet KGB , responsible for security .
Fuentes allegedly has a second family with a Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 2019 , the complaint reads , Fuentes ’ s second family took a trip to Russia .
But as they tried to leave to return to Germany , prosecutors say , “ Russian customs officials would not allow the family to depart Russia.
” Fuentes , whose LinkedIn profile says that he received a Master ’ s degree in molecular biology in 2004 from Russia ’ s Kazan State University , then traveled to Moscow in May 2019 .
While on the trip , the unnamed Russian official contacted Fuentes , allegedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ met “ through professional meetings and exchanges.
” The complaint says that Fuentes recognized the official .
The two began to meet in private , and the official told Fuentes that he was aware that his family was stuck in Russia .
The official also allegedly gave Fuentes “ a hardcopy printout ” of Fuentes ’ Gmail account , showing correspondence between Fuentes and a Miami realtor from 2015 .
The official then asked Fuentes to rent an apartment in Miami , purportedly directing him to the condo where the informant lived .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the complaint quotes the official as saying .
Fuentes rented an apartment at the residence under the name of an unidentified “ associate.
” The Mexican national then took another , final trip to Moscow in February 2020 , where the Russian official gave Fuentes “ a physical description ” of the informant ’ s car .
Fuentes ’ s alleged Russian handler purportedly told him not to take a picture of car , and simply to note the vehicle ’ s license plate information and location .
But Fuentes appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Patrol officers something to find before he left the country .
It ’ s not clear whether Fuentes was targeted by government agents after his interaction with the condominium guard , or whether he was identified by chance .

A member of a Russian government intelligence service coopted a Mexican researcher into spying on a confidential FBI source in Miami, according to a criminal complaint filed Tuesday evening in South Florida federal court.
Hector Alejandro Cabrera Fuentes, a biotech researcher residing in Singapore, was charged with failing to register as a foreign agent in a scheme that allegedly saw the Mexican national attempt to surveil a confidential source who had “previously provided information” to the U.S. government about Russian intelligence activities “implicating national security interests.”
Fuentes allegedly tailgated another car into the condo where the informant lived on Sunday, making it past an automated gate, according to an affidavit filed with the complaint.
A security guard noticed what Fuentes had done and approached his car. But, as the guard walked over, Fuentes’s wife got out of the car and took a picture of the informant’s vehicle and license plate.
Border Patrol agents purportedly intercepted Fuentes and his wife the next day, as they attempted to leave the U.S. for Mexico out of Miami International Airport. Border Patrol found an image of the informant’s car in the “recently deleted” folder of Fuentes’s wife’s phone, as well as an extensive WhatsApp conversation between Fuentes and an unnamed Russian official.
The complaint goes on to allege that, months earlier, the Russian official extorted Fuentes into becoming a spy. Fuentes, the document says, believed that the official was a member of the FSB — Russia’s successor agency to the Soviet KGB, responsible for security.
Fuentes allegedly has a second family with a Russian wife, located in Germany.
In March 2019, the complaint reads, Fuentes’s second family took a trip to Russia. But as they tried to leave to return to Germany, prosecutors say, “Russian customs officials would not allow the family to depart Russia.”
Fuentes, whose LinkedIn profile says that he received a Master’s degree in molecular biology in 2004 from Russia’s Kazan State University, then traveled to Moscow in May 2019.
While on the trip, the unnamed Russian official contacted Fuentes, allegedly telling him that the pair had already met “through professional meetings and exchanges.”
The complaint says that Fuentes recognized the official. The two began to meet in private, and the official told Fuentes that he was aware that his family was stuck in Russia. The official also allegedly gave Fuentes “a hardcopy printout” of Fuentes’ Gmail account, showing correspondence between Fuentes and a Miami realtor from 2015.
The official then asked Fuentes to rent an apartment in Miami, purportedly directing him to the condo where the informant lived.
“We can help each other,” the complaint quotes the official as saying.
Fuentes rented an apartment at the residence under the name of an unidentified “associate.” The Mexican national then took another, final trip to Moscow in February 2020, where the Russian official gave Fuentes “a physical description” of the informant’s car.
Fuentes’s alleged Russian handler purportedly told him not to take a picture of car, and simply to note the vehicle’s license plate information and location. But Fuentes appears to have disobeyed that order, giving Border Patrol officers something to find before he left the country.
It’s not clear whether Fuentes was targeted by government agents after his interaction with the condominium guard, or whether he was identified by chance.
Read the complaint here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--Bloomberg Takes The Debate Stage With A Target On His Back

Thanks to a Democratic National Committee rule change , the ninth Democratic presidential primary debate Wednesday will see the entrance of a new candidate to the stage : former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg .
Bloomberg has been lurking in the background of the first few contests with his name absent from the ballot , but being beamed into the households of voters in Super Tuesday states almost constantly .
His virtually bottomless pockets have enabled him to blanket the cluster of states in reminders that he has the money — and chutzpah — to take on President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the national polls , other candidates have taken notice and their knives out .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) bemoaned that Bloomberg was able to “ buy ” his way into the debate , but took solace in the fact that she ’ d be able to take on the “ egomaniac billionaire ” over policy .
Former Vice President Joe Biden said that Bloomberg had “ basically been a Republican his whole life ” and that he planned to go after his “ record.
” Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ ( I-VT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s about the candidates ’ respective health , with Bloomberg calling for Sanders to release his full medical records and Sanders ’ surrogate falsely asserting that Bloomberg had suffered heart attacks .
Thus , Bloomberg will take the stage with a giant target on his back .
And as evidenced by news reports that have already surfaced , Bloomberg ’ s opponents have a buffet of controversies to target : surveillance of Muslim Americans in New York , stop and frisk , a history of transphobic comments ( some recent ) and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harassment that some say he encouraged .
Warren , in particular , may use Bloomberg ’ s presence at the debate to take a more aggressive tack .
After the New Hampshire debate , when she got more speaking time only than billionaire Tom Steyer and entrepreneur Andrew Yang ( who has now dropped out ) , she was candid about her performance .
“ I just didn ’ t say enough , didn ’ t fight hard enough , didn ’ t tell you how bad I want this , and how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just come together , ” she said to an ABC News panel .
Since then , she ’ s been a leading Bloomberg antagonist , seeming to set the stage for a head-for-head on Wednesday .
She ’ s spent much of her campaign criticizing money in politics and swearing off super PACs , and is looking to paint Bloomberg as the embodiment of the pernicious power the wealthy have on elections .
The juxtaposition works for Sanders too , who rails against billionaires in general and has specifically accused Bloomberg of trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , may have less to prove than Warren on the debate stage , as the solid frontrunner heading into this weekend ’ s caucuses .
Biden is enjoying less of a cushion .
After disappointing finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire , he will likely try to light a spark under his sputtering campaign heading into Nevada and South Carolina , where he hopes for more of a shift in momentum .
Though debating has never been Biden ’ s specialty , he is sure to direct some fire at Bloomberg , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been running ads highlighting former President Barack Obama ’ s praise of him — a lane that the former Vice President has sought to dominate .
Former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg has largely stayed away from the Bloomberg attacks , though he did predict on Fox News that Bloomberg will be forced to answer to the sexist culture at his business .
Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-MN ) has called for Bloomberg ’ s participation in the debate and said she doesn ’ t think the “ biggest bank account ” is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the best president .
On Wednesday though , she will likely focus her energy on trying to capitalize on the small surge of her surprise third-place finish in New Hampshire .
The debate will be carried by NBC and MSNBC , and will air from 9 PM E.T .
to 11 pm E.T .

Thanks to a Democratic National Committee rule change, the ninth Democratic presidential primary debate Wednesday will see the entrance of a new candidate to the stage: former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Bloomberg has been lurking in the background of the first few contests with his name absent from the ballot, but being beamed into the households of voters in Super Tuesday states almost constantly. His virtually bottomless pockets have enabled him to blanket the cluster of states in reminders that he has the money — and chutzpah — to take on President Donald Trump.
As his name has climbed in the national polls, other candidates have taken notice and their knives out.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) bemoaned that Bloomberg was able to “buy” his way into the debate, but took solace in the fact that she’d be able to take on the “egomaniac billionaire” over policy.
Former Vice President Joe Biden said that Bloomberg had “basically been a Republican his whole life” and that he planned to go after his “record.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) campaign has been sparring with Bloomberg’s about the candidates’ respective health, with Bloomberg calling for Sanders to release his full medical records and Sanders’ surrogate falsely asserting that Bloomberg had suffered heart attacks.
Thus, Bloomberg will take the stage with a giant target on his back. And as evidenced by news reports that have already surfaced, Bloomberg’s opponents have a buffet of controversies to target: surveillance of Muslim Americans in New York, stop and frisk, a history of transphobic comments (some recent) and a workplace environment allegedly rife with sexual harassment that some say he encouraged.
Warren, in particular, may use Bloomberg’s presence at the debate to take a more aggressive tack.
After the New Hampshire debate, when she got more speaking time only than billionaire Tom Steyer and entrepreneur Andrew Yang (who has now dropped out), she was candid about her performance.
“I just didn’t say enough, didn’t fight hard enough, didn’t tell you how bad I want this, and how good we can make it if we just come together,” she said to an ABC News panel.
Since then, she’s been a leading Bloomberg antagonist, seeming to set the stage for a head-for-head on Wednesday. She’s spent much of her campaign criticizing money in politics and swearing off super PACs, and is looking to paint Bloomberg as the embodiment of the pernicious power the wealthy have on elections.
The juxtaposition works for Sanders too, who rails against billionaires in general and has specifically accused Bloomberg of trying to buy the presidency. Sanders, however, may have less to prove than Warren on the debate stage, as the solid frontrunner heading into this weekend’s caucuses.
Biden is enjoying less of a cushion. After disappointing finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire, he will likely try to light a spark under his sputtering campaign heading into Nevada and South Carolina, where he hopes for more of a shift in momentum.
Though debating has never been Biden’s specialty, he is sure to direct some fire at Bloomberg, not least because the former mayor has been running ads highlighting former President Barack Obama’s praise of him — a lane that the former Vice President has sought to dominate.
Former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg has largely stayed away from the Bloomberg attacks, though he did predict on Fox News that Bloomberg will be forced to answer to the sexist culture at his business.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) has called for Bloomberg’s participation in the debate and said she doesn’t think the “biggest bank account” is the mark of who would make for the best president. On Wednesday though, she will likely focus her energy on trying to capitalize on the small surge of her surprise third-place finish in New Hampshire.
The debate will be carried by NBC and MSNBC, and will air from 9 PM E.T. to 11 pm E.T.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--Assange Claims Rohrabacher Offered Him A Doozy Of A Pardon Quid Pro Quo

It ’ s one of the few areas where the President has nearly unchecked power .
President Trump issued a raft of pardons this week , but news out of London on Wednesday raises questions about whether the tool has been a bargaining chip since the early months of Trump ’ s presidency .
The question comes in the case of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange , currently fighting extradition to the U.S. from London .
In a court hearing on Wednesday , a lawyer for Assange reportedly told a British judge a bizarre story involving Rep. Dana Rohrabacher ( R-CA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roger Stone wannabe Chuck Johnson .
The Assange lawyer outlined a potential deal for Assange in 2017 that was allegedly offered roughly two years before he was eventually indicted in the U.S .
Per the alleged deal , supposedly conveyed by Rohrabacher on behalf of President Trump , Assange would announce that Russia had nothing to do with the emails and documents that Wikileaks released during the 2016 election .
In return , Assange would get something very simple : a pardon .
The alleged deal raises a host of questions about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counter the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller .
Assange reportedly was asked not only to issue a statement disavowing any ties to Russia , but also to supply a hard drive that , Rohrabacher claimed , would “ exonerate Russia.
” President Trump was impeached last year over his attempt to engage Ukraine in a similar quid pro quo , in part as part of a bid to pressure Kyiv into undermining the prosecution of Paul Manafort .
The comments in court could suggest that Rohrabacher tried to cut a similar deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the Wikileaks founder in exchange for his help in undermining an allegation at the heart of both the Mueller probe and the brouhaha over Russian interference in the 2016 election : that Moscow did , in fact , interfere by dumping stolen emails from the DNC and Clinton campaign into the public domain via Wikileaks .
At the time of the supposed offer to Assange , the Wikileaks founder was stranded in the Ecuadorian embassy in London , but not because of any U.S. arrest warrant .
Rather , he was there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed in Sweden .
In court on Wednesday , Edward Fitzgerald , a lawyer for Assange , said that another attorney of the Wikileaks founder ’ s had a statement showing , “ Mr .
Rohrabacher going to see Mr. Assange and saying , on instructions from the President , he was offering a pardon or some other way out , if Mr. Assange … said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC leaks.
” Whether Trump ’ s involvement in Rohrabacher ’ s trip was real or a matter of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unclear .
Rohrabacher did not return a request for comment from TPM .
The White House denied the allegation in a statement , saying that Trump “ barely knows Dana Rohrabacher other than he ’ s an ex-congressman .
He ’ s never spoken to him on this subject or almost any subject .
It is a complete fabrication and a total lie.
” The notoriously unreliable politician did issue a statement about his contacts with Assange in August 2017 , after meeting with the Wikileaks founder at the Ecuadorian embassy in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday that Chuck Johnson , the conservative activist who briefly owned a website called Gotnews , was also in attendance .
It was not immediately clear what Johnson , a noted Holocaust denier who invites mockery , was doing there .
Titled , “ Rohrabacher : Assange Says Russia Not Behind DNC Email Leak , ” Rohrabacher ’ s August 2017 statement claims that the congressman , known for his puzzling ties and affinity for Russia , “ spent some three hours with the Australian-born fugitive.
” “ The conversation ranged over many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ status of Wikileaks , which Assange maintains is vital to keeping Americans informed on matters hidden by their traditional media , ” the statements reads .
“ The congressman plans to divulge more of what he found directly to President Trump.
” Trump and Rohrabacher met in April 2017 in the Oval Office .
A Rohrabacher spokesman said at the time that the meeting took place “ at the President ’ s invitation.
” But it ’ s not clear what contacts the pair had after that April meeting .
One month after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Assange , the Wall Street Journal reported that Rohrabacher had proposed the pardon-for-Russia denial “ deal ” to then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly .
The Journal reported that Kelly rebuffed Rohrabacher , directing him instead “ to the intelligence community .
”

It’s one of the few areas where the President has nearly unchecked power.
President Trump issued a raft of pardons this week, but news out of London on Wednesday raises questions about whether the tool has been a bargaining chip since the early months of Trump’s presidency.
The question comes in the case of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, currently fighting extradition to the U.S. from London.
In a court hearing on Wednesday, a lawyer for Assange reportedly told a British judge a bizarre story involving Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), a potential pardon, and Roger Stone wannabe Chuck Johnson.
The Assange lawyer outlined a potential deal for Assange in 2017 that was allegedly offered roughly two years before he was eventually indicted in the U.S. Per the alleged deal, supposedly conveyed by Rohrabacher on behalf of President Trump, Assange would announce that Russia had nothing to do with the emails and documents that Wikileaks released during the 2016 election.
In return, Assange would get something very simple: a pardon.
The alleged deal raises a host of questions about what may have been an early effort to counter the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Assange reportedly was asked not only to issue a statement disavowing any ties to Russia, but also to supply a hard drive that, Rohrabacher claimed, would “exonerate Russia.”
President Trump was impeached last year over his attempt to engage Ukraine in a similar quid pro quo, in part as part of a bid to pressure Kyiv into undermining the prosecution of Paul Manafort.
The comments in court could suggest that Rohrabacher tried to cut a similar deal with Assange, instead dangling a pardon before the Wikileaks founder in exchange for his help in undermining an allegation at the heart of both the Mueller probe and the brouhaha over Russian interference in the 2016 election: that Moscow did, in fact, interfere by dumping stolen emails from the DNC and Clinton campaign into the public domain via Wikileaks.
At the time of the supposed offer to Assange, the Wikileaks founder was stranded in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, but not because of any U.S. arrest warrant. Rather, he was there to hide out on sexual assault charges filed in Sweden.
In court on Wednesday, Edward Fitzgerald, a lawyer for Assange, said that another attorney of the Wikileaks founder’s had a statement showing, “Mr. Rohrabacher going to see Mr. Assange and saying, on instructions from the President, he was offering a pardon or some other way out, if Mr. Assange … said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC leaks.”
Whether Trump’s involvement in Rohrabacher’s trip was real or a matter of the longtime marijuana legalization supporter’s puffery is unclear.
Rohrabacher did not return a request for comment from TPM. The White House denied the allegation in a statement, saying that Trump “barely knows Dana Rohrabacher other than he’s an ex-congressman. He’s never spoken to him on this subject or almost any subject. It is a complete fabrication and a total lie.”
The notoriously unreliable politician did issue a statement about his contacts with Assange in August 2017, after meeting with the Wikileaks founder at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that Chuck Johnson, the conservative activist who briefly owned a website called Gotnews, was also in attendance.
It was not immediately clear what Johnson, a noted Holocaust denier who invites mockery, was doing there.
Titled, “Rohrabacher: Assange Says Russia Not Behind DNC Email Leak,” Rohrabacher’s August 2017 statement claims that the congressman, known for his puzzling ties and affinity for Russia, “spent some three hours with the Australian-born fugitive.”
“The conversation ranged over many topics, said Rohrabacher, including the status of Wikileaks, which Assange maintains is vital to keeping Americans informed on matters hidden by their traditional media,” the statements reads. “The congressman plans to divulge more of what he found directly to President Trump.”
Trump and Rohrabacher met in April 2017 in the Oval Office. A Rohrabacher spokesman said at the time that the meeting took place “at the President’s invitation.”
But it’s not clear what contacts the pair had after that April meeting.
One month after Rohrabacher’s August 2017 meeting with Assange, the Wall Street Journal reported that Rohrabacher had proposed the pardon-for-Russia denial “deal” to then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly.
The Journal reported that Kelly rebuffed Rohrabacher, directing him instead “to the intelligence community.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-19--Trump Drags Comey Into His Griping About Blagojevich’s Prison Sentence

As he was defending his commutation of former Illinois Gov .
Rod Blagojevich ’ s ( D ) prison sentence on Wednesday , President Donald Trump dragged one of his favorite punching bags onto the scene .
Arguing that the disgraced ex-governor “ did not sell ” Barack Obama ’ s vacant Senate seat ( he was arrested before he could do so ) , Trump lamented Blagojevich ’ s eight years in prison .
It was the second time Trump blamed former FBI Director James Comey for Blagojevich ’ s sentence , even though the former FBI director wasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice when Blagojevich was arrested in 2008 and tried in 2010 .
The lead prosecutor in the case was U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald , who joined Comey ’ s personal legal team in 2017 , as TPM first reported at the time .
“ It was a prosecution by the same people , Comey , Fitzpatrick .
The same group , ” Trump claimed on Tuesday , referring to Fitzgerald by the wrong name .
Except Fitzgerald had Blagojevich arrested for conspiracy and attempted extortion in 2008 , three years after Comey had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for defense contractor Lockheed Martin .
By the time Comey returned to the government as Obama ’ s director of the FBI in 2013 , Blagojevich ’ s prison stint had already begun after he was sentenced to 14 years in 2011 .
Trump commuted the ex-governor ’ s “ ridiculous ” sentence on Tuesday , echoing the complaints he ’ d made about Roger Stone ’ s criminal case .
Blagojevich , who appeared on Trump ’ s “ Celebrity Apprentice ” reality TV show shortly before his trial in 2010 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” after his commutation .
Ed note : This post has been updated with additional information about the prosecutor in Blagojevich ’ s case , and his relationship to Comey .

As he was defending his commutation of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s (D) prison sentence on Wednesday, President Donald Trump dragged one of his favorite punching bags onto the scene.
Arguing that the disgraced ex-governor “did not sell” Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat (he was arrested before he could do so), Trump lamented Blagojevich’s eight years in prison.
“He paid a big price,” Trump tweeted. “Another Comey and gang deal!”
It was the second time Trump blamed former FBI Director James Comey for Blagojevich’s sentence, even though the former FBI director wasn’t working at the Department of Justice when Blagojevich was arrested in 2008 and tried in 2010. The lead prosecutor in the case was U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who joined Comey’s personal legal team in 2017, as TPM first reported at the time.
“It was a prosecution by the same people, Comey, Fitzpatrick. The same group,” Trump claimed on Tuesday, referring to Fitzgerald by the wrong name.
Except Fitzgerald had Blagojevich arrested for conspiracy and attempted extortion in 2008, three years after Comey had departed from the Justice Department to work for defense contractor Lockheed Martin. By the time Comey returned to the government as Obama’s director of the FBI in 2013, Blagojevich’s prison stint had already begun after he was sentenced to 14 years in 2011.
Trump commuted the ex-governor’s “ridiculous” sentence on Tuesday, echoing the complaints he’d made about Roger Stone’s criminal case.
Blagojevich, who appeared on Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” reality TV show shortly before his trial in 2010, gratefully declared he was a “Trumpocrat” after his commutation.
Ed note: This post has been updated with additional information about the prosecutor in Blagojevich’s case, and his relationship to Comey.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Bloomberg Company Data Disputes His Pay Equity Claim At Debate

Data from Michael Bloomberg ’ s media empire appears to debunk his claim during the Democratic presidential debate Wednesday night that women at his company “ get paid exactly the same as men.
” “ Let me tell you what I do at my company and my foundation and in city government when I was there , ” Bloomberg said during the debate .
“ In my foundation , the person that runs it ’ s a woman , 70 percent of the people there are women .
In my company , lots and lots of women have big responsibilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as men .
And in my City Hall , the top person , my deputy mayor , was a woman , and 40 percent of our commissioners were women.
” According to The Daily Beast Thursday , unionized staffers at Bloomberg BNA conducted a pay survey last year of non-management employees that found that although 52.7 percent of BNA ’ s workforce comprised of women , female staffers earned 93 percent of the pay of their male counterparts .
Bloomberg BNA ’ s union wrote in an April 2019 tweet that “ women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gaps.
” Bloomberg BNA ’ s union also shared the study on Thursday in a tweet showing that white men earn almost $ 5,500 more than their female counterparts .
The study showed more obvious differences among black and Latinx staffers .
HuffPost also reported on pay inequity within the Bloomberg media empire Thursday by citing a gender pay gap report filed by financial software giant Bloomberg LP in the United Kingdom in April 2018 .
According to HuffPost , women employed by Bloomberg LP in the United Kingdom earn 21.9 percent less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hourly wage .
HuffPost also found that women make up only 20 percent of the top quarter of the highest-paying jobs and that the representation of women is most prominent in the bottom quarter of jobs .
In a statement shared with TPM Thursday , a Bloomberg LP spokesperson disputed HuffPost ’ s report , saying that it contains several inaccuracies that the company has highlighted to the reporter .
The spokesperson told TPM that the inaccuracies include misreporting the UK gender pay disclosure data and confusing gender pay data with equal pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been against the law in the UK since the Equal Pay Act was introduced in 1970 and in the US since the 1960s .
“ Bloomberg LP pays employees equally for equal work .
Bloomberg employees ’ compensation is determined based on their job ( function , role and responsibilities ) and their performance , regardless of any classification , ” the Bloomberg LP spokesperson told TPM in a statement Thursday .
“ We regularly review the compensation of our employees to ensure there is no unfair treatment in how they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make compensation decisions that reward performance.
” TPM also reached out to Bloomberg ’ s campaign for comment and we will update this post if we hear back .
Read The Daily Beast ’ s report here and HuffPost ’ s report here .

Data from Michael Bloomberg’s media empire appears to debunk his claim during the Democratic presidential debate Wednesday night that women at his company “get paid exactly the same as men.”
“Let me tell you what I do at my company and my foundation and in city government when I was there,” Bloomberg said during the debate. “In my foundation, the person that runs it’s a woman, 70 percent of the people there are women. In my company, lots and lots of women have big responsibilities. They get paid exactly the same as men. And in my City Hall, the top person, my deputy mayor, was a woman, and 40 percent of our commissioners were women.”
According to The Daily Beast Thursday, unionized staffers at Bloomberg BNA conducted a pay survey last year of non-management employees that found that although 52.7 percent of BNA’s workforce comprised of women, female staffers earned 93 percent of the pay of their male counterparts. Bloomberg BNA’s union wrote in an April 2019 tweet that “women and people of color face the biggest gaps.”
Bloomberg BNA’s union also shared the study on Thursday in a tweet showing that white men earn almost $5,500 more than their female counterparts. The study showed more obvious differences among black and Latinx staffers.
HuffPost also reported on pay inequity within the Bloomberg media empire Thursday by citing a gender pay gap report filed by financial software giant Bloomberg LP in the United Kingdom in April 2018.
According to HuffPost, women employed by Bloomberg LP in the United Kingdom earn 21.9 percent less than men when it comes to median hourly wage. HuffPost also found that women make up only 20 percent of the top quarter of the highest-paying jobs and that the representation of women is most prominent in the bottom quarter of jobs.
In a statement shared with TPM Thursday, a Bloomberg LP spokesperson disputed HuffPost’s report, saying that it contains several inaccuracies that the company has highlighted to the reporter. The spokesperson told TPM that the inaccuracies include misreporting the UK gender pay disclosure data and confusing gender pay data with equal pay. The spokesperson added that unequal pay has been against the law in the UK since the Equal Pay Act was introduced in 1970 and in the US since the 1960s.
“Bloomberg LP pays employees equally for equal work. Bloomberg employees’ compensation is determined based on their job (function, role and responsibilities) and their performance, regardless of any classification,” the Bloomberg LP spokesperson told TPM in a statement Thursday. “We regularly review the compensation of our employees to ensure there is no unfair treatment in how they are paid and use tools to help managers make compensation decisions that reward performance.”
TPM also reached out to Bloomberg’s campaign for comment and we will update this post if we hear back.
Read The Daily Beast’s report here and HuffPost’s report here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Trump Soured On Maguire After Staff Told Congress Russia Is Interfering On His Behalf

Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire was still considered a frontrunner to take the post in a permanent capacity @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump found out that Maguire ’ s staff had briefed House lawmakers that @ @ @ @ @ 2020 election on Trump ’ s behalf .
According to reporting from the New York @ @ @ @ @ Trump was furious in particular that Maguire aide Shelby Pierson conveyed the information to Adam @ @ @ @ @ House Intelligence Committee .
Trump reportedly fretted that the Democrats would use it against him @ @ @ @ @ on the committee were in attendance at the briefing a week ago , and Trump @ @ @ @ @ the conclusions Pierson presented , insisting that Trump has gotten tougher on Russia .
The @ @ @ @ @ the briefing , which reportedly led to his shift in favor to name U.S .
@ @ @ @ @ Grenell , the acting DNI .
Grenell is an avid Trump supporter who has downplayed @ @ @ @ @ U.S. elections .

Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire was still considered a frontrunner to take the post in a permanent capacity until last week — when President Donald Trump found out that Maguire’s staff had briefed House lawmakers that Russia is interfering in the 2020 election on Trump’s behalf.
According to reporting from the New York Times and Washington Post, Trump was furious in particular that Maguire aide Shelby Pierson conveyed the information to Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Trump reportedly fretted that the Democrats would use it against him.
Members of both parties on the committee were in attendance at the briefing a week ago, and Trump’s allies argued with the conclusions Pierson presented, insisting that Trump has gotten tougher on Russia.
The President dressed down Maguire after the briefing, which reportedly led to his shift in favor to name U.S. Ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, the acting DNI. Grenell is an avid Trump supporter who has downplayed the threat Russia poses to U.S. elections.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Trump Says Stone Has ‘Very Good Chance Of Exoneration In My Opinion’

President Trump teased the possibility of exonerating Roger Stone within hours of the longtime GOP operative being sentenced to 40 months in prison Thursday for lying to Congress in the Russia probe .
While delivering a commencement speech to graduates of a prison reentry program in Las Vegas , Trump addressed Stone ’ s sentencing , which he said he has been following “ very closely , ” before suggesting that an exoneration is imminent .
“ I want to see it play out to its fullest because Roger has a very good chance of exoneration , in my opinion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stone for being “ a character ” and someone who “ everybody sort of knows.
” “ Most people like him — some people probably don ’ t .
But I do and I always have , ” Trump said .
“ He is a smart guy .
He is a little different .
But those are sometimes the most interesting .
But he is a good person .
His family is fantastic.
” Trump asserted that Stone wasn ’ t involved in his 2016 presidential campaign despite how he “ knows a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics , ” before he went on to repeat his attacks against the forewoman of the federal jury in the Stone case .
Last week , Trump tweeted that the jury foreperson — who identified herself in a Facebook post the day before Trump ’ s tweet — had “ significant bias.
” “ It is my strong opinion that the forewoman of the jury , the woman who was in charge of the jury , is totally tainted when you take a look , ” Trump said .
“ How can you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was an anti-Trump activist — can you imagine this ?
” After he continued griping about how there was a “ bad jury ” in the Stone case and that the jury foreperson had “ a horrible social media account , ” Trump doubled down on his argument that the jury was “ tainted.
” “ When Roger was determined by the same jury to be guilty before the judge issued a sentence , and he was determined to be guilty , [ the jury foreperson ] started going a little wild , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very happy and she started saying things that people said — that is strange .
That is strange .
And then they started looking in .
How can you have a jury poll tainted so badly ?
It is not fair.
” Trump ’ s latest remarks come after he told reporters Tuesday that he hadn ’ t given a Stone pardon any thought .

President Trump teased the possibility of exonerating Roger Stone within hours of the longtime GOP operative being sentenced to 40 months in prison Thursday for lying to Congress in the Russia probe.
While delivering a commencement speech to graduates of a prison reentry program in Las Vegas, Trump addressed Stone’s sentencing, which he said he has been following “very closely,” before suggesting that an exoneration is imminent.
“I want to see it play out to its fullest because Roger has a very good chance of exoneration, in my opinion,” Trump said, before praising Stone for being “a character” and someone who “everybody sort of knows.”
“Most people like him — some people probably don’t. But I do and I always have,” Trump said. “He is a smart guy. He is a little different. But those are sometimes the most interesting. But he is a good person. His family is fantastic.”
Trump asserted that Stone wasn’t involved in his 2016 presidential campaign despite how he “knows a lot of people having to do with politics,” before he went on to repeat his attacks against the forewoman of the federal jury in the Stone case. Last week, Trump tweeted that the jury foreperson — who identified herself in a Facebook post the day before Trump’s tweet — had “significant bias.”
“It is my strong opinion that the forewoman of the jury, the woman who was in charge of the jury, is totally tainted when you take a look,” Trump said. “How can you have a person like this? She was an anti-Trump activist — can you imagine this?”
After he continued griping about how there was a “bad jury” in the Stone case and that the jury foreperson had “a horrible social media account,” Trump doubled down on his argument that the jury was “tainted.”
(Trump, per usual, ignored that Stone’s legal team had a chance to vet jurors and have any juror removed from the case at the start of the trial.)
“When Roger was determined by the same jury to be guilty before the judge issued a sentence, and he was determined to be guilty, [the jury foreperson] started going a little wild,” Trump said. “She was very happy and she started saying things that people said — that is strange. That is strange. And then they started looking in. How can you have a jury poll tainted so badly? It is not fair.”
Trump’s latest remarks come after he told reporters Tuesday that he hadn’t given a Stone pardon any thought.
Watch Trump’s remarks below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Why Richard Grenell Is Such A ‘Dangerous’ Pick For Acting DNI

President Trump ’ s decision to name Richard Grenell to lead the country ’ s intelligence community raises a staggering array of questions , ranging from the staunch Trump loyalist ’ s preparedness for the job to his oversight of whistleblowers past and future .
Grenell , a vocal Trump loyalist who is currently the ambassador to Germany , brings to the job of acting Director of National Intelligence years of experience aggravating the German government coupled with a background in strategic communications .
The political operative ’ s appointment has raised questions of his fitness for the job .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will oversee the 17 constituent agencies of the country ’ s intelligence community , managing the flow of information gathered by the country ’ s spies to President Trump .
“ It ’ s difficult to contemplate managing 17 different organizations without having any experience with the intelligence process overall , ” Jeffrey Edmonds , a former director for Russia on the National Security Council and a former CIA intelligence analyst , told TPM .
“ I just think it ’ s quite dangerous in the sense that the right information might not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DNI Dan Coats stepped down from the position in August 2019 , the government has lacked a Senate-confirmed official in the job .
But that hasn ’ t stopped it from playing a key role in politics .
The Ukraine scandal that led to Trump ’ s impeachment first blew open after the DNI blocked a whistleblower complaint from being forwarded onwards to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees .
In that case , outgoing acting DNI Joseph Maguire interceded with the intelligence community inspector general to label the now-famous whistleblower complaint as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in part because it focused on the actions of someone who was arguably not a member of the intelligence community : President Trump .
“ The DNI , and in particular his inspector general , is the center of all whistleblower protection in the intelligence community , ” Daniel P. Meyer , at attorney at Tully Rinckey who used to run the intelligence community inspector general ’ s whistleblower program , told TPM .
Grenell will have control over any new whistleblower complaints that come forward .
But , more crucially , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employed the Ukraine whistleblower , a target of criticism from the President and his allies .
“ Grenell , when he comes in , will be responsible for the tone and tenor of how whistleblowers are treated in the intelligence community , ” Meyer added.
” That includes if he meets with [ CIA Director ] Gina Haskell and talks about the protection of the whistleblower who went to the Hill in the case of the impeachment trial – that ’ s part of his duties.
” The longtime Trump loyalist ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whistleblowers , however , and more towards briefing President Trump on information collected by the intelligence community .
That ’ s a big task .
Even with a staff mostly composed of career officials to process the information , Grenell will be trusted with delivering Trump information that he needs to know in his role as commander-in-chief , not data provided through political filters .
“ He has the ability to stop things from being seen by the President , ” Edmonds , the former NSC official , told TPM .
“ And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the President believes.
” Grenell , a longtime GOP communications official , could prove to be suited for the task in a different way .
With the mass of information supplied by the intelligence community coursing through him and onwards into the Oval Office , it ’ s a perfect opportunity for spin .
But what could make him different from other , past episodes in which politics have infected the collection , analysis , and delivery of intelligence is the proximity Grenell will have to the intelligence community itself .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with intelligence , but as a member of the intelligence community , you can ’ t politicize the intelligence , ” Edmonds said .

President Trump’s decision to name Richard Grenell to lead the country’s intelligence community raises a staggering array of questions, ranging from the staunch Trump loyalist’s preparedness for the job to his oversight of whistleblowers past and future.
Grenell, a vocal Trump loyalist who is currently the ambassador to Germany, brings to the job of acting Director of National Intelligence years of experience aggravating the German government coupled with a background in strategic communications.
The political operative’s appointment has raised questions of his fitness for the job. As director of national intelligence, Grenell will oversee the 17 constituent agencies of the country’s intelligence community, managing the flow of information gathered by the country’s spies to President Trump.
“It’s difficult to contemplate managing 17 different organizations without having any experience with the intelligence process overall,” Jeffrey Edmonds, a former director for Russia on the National Security Council and a former CIA intelligence analyst, told TPM. “I just think it’s quite dangerous in the sense that the right information might not get to the right people.”
Since DNI Dan Coats stepped down from the position in August 2019, the government has lacked a Senate-confirmed official in the job.
But that hasn’t stopped it from playing a key role in politics. The Ukraine scandal that led to Trump’s impeachment first blew open after the DNI blocked a whistleblower complaint from being forwarded onwards to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.
In that case, outgoing acting DNI Joseph Maguire interceded with the intelligence community inspector general to label the now-famous whistleblower complaint as not of “urgent concern,” in part because it focused on the actions of someone who was arguably not a member of the intelligence community: President Trump.
“The DNI, and in particular his inspector general, is the center of all whistleblower protection in the intelligence community,” Daniel P. Meyer, at attorney at Tully Rinckey who used to run the intelligence community inspector general’s whistleblower program, told TPM.
Grenell will have control over any new whistleblower complaints that come forward. But, more crucially, he will also be overseeing the agency that employed the Ukraine whistleblower, a target of criticism from the President and his allies.
“Grenell, when he comes in, will be responsible for the tone and tenor of how whistleblowers are treated in the intelligence community,” Meyer added.”That includes if he meets with [CIA Director] Gina Haskell and talks about the protection of the whistleblower who went to the Hill in the case of the impeachment trial – that’s part of his duties.”
The longtime Trump loyalist’s main responsibility will go less to handling whistleblowers, however, and more towards briefing President Trump on information collected by the intelligence community.
That’s a big task. Even with a staff mostly composed of career officials to process the information, Grenell will be trusted with delivering Trump information that he needs to know in his role as commander-in-chief, not data provided through political filters.
“He has the ability to stop things from being seen by the President,” Edmonds, the former NSC official, told TPM. “And he can cherrypick things or fortify things that the President believes.”
Grenell, a longtime GOP communications official, could prove to be suited for the task in a different way. With the mass of information supplied by the intelligence community coursing through him and onwards into the Oval Office, it’s a perfect opportunity for spin.
But what could make him different from other, past episodes in which politics have infected the collection, analysis, and delivery of intelligence is the proximity Grenell will have to the intelligence community itself.
“The President can do whatever he wants with intelligence, but as a member of the intelligence community, you can’t politicize the intelligence,” Edmonds said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--DOJ Attorney Walks Back Bill Barr’s Walk Back Of Stone Sentencing Memo

What the Justice Department said inside the courtroom Thursday at Stone ’ s sentencing hearing was in stark contrast with the chaos that ’ s swirled around the case outside the courthouse — chaos that ’ s been egged on by both President Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr .
John Crabb — the deputy chief of the D.C. U.S. Attorney ’ s office criminal division who jumped into the case after the trial team abruptly resigned last week — essentially backed the original sentencing proposal filed by the trial prosecutors that had been publicly overruled by Attorney General Barr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecution and Judge Amy Berman Jackson , who have both been targets of Trump attacks on Twitter .
The trial team resigned from the case after the Justice Department , on Barr ’ s orders , watered down their initial sentencing recommendation for Stone .
The reversal came just after Trump bashed the sentencing recommendation on Twitter and the President has continued to call the prosecution of Stone unfair .
But on Thursday , Crabb said the prosecution was “ righteous ” and stressed that even through the sentencing memo debacle , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faith.
” After the prosecutors filed their initial recommendation last week , the Justice Department told reporters the next day it was too harsh and that it was being clawed back .
The trial team resigned from the case just as the Justice Department was filing a supplemental memo , with notably watered down language .
Berman Jackson made some pointed remarks about the whole situation , questioning Crabb on why he was the one handling the sentencing hearing Thursday , given that he knew less about the case than most of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jackson that the trial team had gotten the appropriate sign off from U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea of Washington , D.C. , and that the brouhaha was the result of a “ miscommunication ” between Shea and Barr .
Crabb stressed the confusion was not the fault of the trial prosecutors .
That assertion was jarring considering that top DOJ officials had previously thrown the prosecutors under the bus for their original memo .
Barr himself had complained that the “ most junior level ” people at the DOJ typically got to make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentencing .
Crabb wouldn ’ t say whether he wrote the supplemental Justice Department memo nor would he tell the judge whether he had been directed by someone else to write it .
He told Berman Jackson that he was not “ at liberty ” to discuss those preparations .
But earlier in the hearing Crabb more or less walked back much of that second memo , by explicitly confirming that the DOJ was sticking with the major points made in the original memo .
The first part of the sentencing hearing was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge would apply in determining what the sentencing guidelines should be in Stone ’ s case .
Enhancements are the aggravating factors that can increase the sentencing guidelines for a defendant .
Berman Jackson specifically brought up a line from the supplemental memo that said that enhancements proposed in the original memo were “ perhaps technically applicable ” but that they “ disproportionately escalate the defendant ’ s sentencing exposure.
” She signaled she needed some clarification on that claim , and proceeded to discuss the individual enhancements .
On several occasions she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was sticking to what it originally proposed .
Crabb never once said that the Justice Department no longer believed the original enhancement proposals applied .
This included the most controversial of the original DOJ-proposed enhancements , which was for the violent language that Stone used to threaten a potential witness in the House ’ s investigation .
The initial DOJ memo argued this enhancement applied , but the supplemental memo noted that if the judge did not apply it , it would lead to a sentence more in “ line with the typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplemental memo said that “ it would be reasonable for the court to conclude that the guidelines range as calculated is unduly high on the facts of this case.
” On Thursday , when asked by Jackson , Crabb said , “ Our position is that this enhancement applies.
” The judge also went over the enhancement the DOJ recommended for Stone ’ s post indictment behavior , which included posting to Instagram an image of the judge with a crosshairs above her shoulder as well as other violations of her gag order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the conduct actually prejudiced the jury , and the judge also brought up its language about there being an overlap with other proposed enhancements .
“ I am not sure that I understand that assertion , ” she told Crabb .
Crabb clarified that the DOJ still believed the enhancement applied .
When he made his final remarks , Crabb had another opportunity to assert that the Justice Department was now recommending a lesser sentence than what was proposed in the first memo , but stopped short of explicitly doing so .
Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in whatever the judge decided .
“ Most importantly the court will rely on its own sound judgment and experience , ” he said .

What the Justice Department said inside the courtroom Thursday at Stone’s sentencing hearing was in stark contrast with the chaos that’s swirled around the case outside the courthouse — chaos that’s been egged on by both President Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr.
John Crabb — the deputy chief of the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s office criminal division who jumped into the case after the trial team abruptly resigned last week — essentially backed the original sentencing proposal filed by the trial prosecutors that had been publicly overruled by Attorney General Barr. Crabb also vigorously praised both the prosecution and Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who have both been targets of Trump attacks on Twitter.
The trial team resigned from the case after the Justice Department, on Barr’s orders, watered down their initial sentencing recommendation for Stone. The reversal came just after Trump bashed the sentencing recommendation on Twitter and the President has continued to call the prosecution of Stone unfair.
But on Thursday, Crabb said the prosecution was “righteous” and stressed that even through the sentencing memo debacle, the prosecutors had acted only in “good faith.”
After the prosecutors filed their initial recommendation last week, the Justice Department told reporters the next day it was too harsh and that it was being clawed back. The trial team resigned from the case just as the Justice Department was filing a supplemental memo, with notably watered down language.
Berman Jackson made some pointed remarks about the whole situation, questioning Crabb on why he was the one handling the sentencing hearing Thursday, given that he knew less about the case than most of the people in the courtroom.
Crabb told Jackson that the trial team had gotten the appropriate sign off from U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea of Washington, D.C., and that the brouhaha was the result of a “miscommunication” between Shea and Barr. Crabb stressed the confusion was not the fault of the trial prosecutors.
That assertion was jarring considering that top DOJ officials had previously thrown the prosecutors under the bus for their original memo. Barr himself had complained that the “most junior level” people at the DOJ typically got to make the “life or death decisions” of sentencing.
Crabb wouldn’t say whether he wrote the supplemental Justice Department memo nor would he tell the judge whether he had been directed by someone else to write it. He told Berman Jackson that he was not “at liberty” to discuss those preparations.
But earlier in the hearing Crabb more or less walked back much of that second memo, by explicitly confirming that the DOJ was sticking with the major points made in the original memo.
The first part of the sentencing hearing was about the various “enhancements” the judge would apply in determining what the sentencing guidelines should be in Stone’s case. Enhancements are the aggravating factors that can increase the sentencing guidelines for a defendant.
(Once the guidelines are calculated, judges aren’t required to stick with them for their ultimate sentence, and Berman Jackson noted on Thursday that many judges and defense lawyers have long argued the U.S. Sentencing Commission guidelines are too harsh.)
Berman Jackson specifically brought up a line from the supplemental memo that said that enhancements proposed in the original memo were “perhaps technically applicable” but that they “disproportionately escalate the defendant’s sentencing exposure.”
She signaled she needed some clarification on that claim, and proceeded to discuss the individual enhancements. On several occasions she asked Crabb to confirm the Justice Department was sticking to what it originally proposed. Crabb never once said that the Justice Department no longer believed the original enhancement proposals applied.
This included the most controversial of the original DOJ-proposed enhancements, which was for the violent language that Stone used to threaten a potential witness in the House’s investigation.
The initial DOJ memo argued this enhancement applied, but the supplemental memo noted that if the judge did not apply it, it would lead to a sentence more in “line with the typical sentences imposed in obstruction cases.” The supplemental memo said that “it would be reasonable for the court to conclude that the guidelines range as calculated is unduly high on the facts of this case.”
On Thursday, when asked by Jackson, Crabb said, “Our position is that this enhancement applies.”
The judge also went over the enhancement the DOJ recommended for Stone’s post indictment behavior, which included posting to Instagram an image of the judge with a crosshairs above her shoulder as well as other violations of her gag order.
The supplemental memo cast doubt that the conduct actually prejudiced the jury, and the judge also brought up its language about there being an overlap with other proposed enhancements.
“I am not sure that I understand that assertion,” she told Crabb. Crabb clarified that the DOJ still believed the enhancement applied.
When he made his final remarks, Crabb had another opportunity to assert that the Justice Department was now recommending a lesser sentence than what was proposed in the first memo, but stopped short of explicitly doing so. Instead, Crabb expressed his “utmost confidence” in whatever the judge decided.
“Most importantly the court will rely on its own sound judgment and experience,” he said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Warren Trolls Sheldon Adelson With Ad In His Newspaper Criticizing His Wealth

Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) is taking aim at another billionaire a day after torching Michael Bloomberg on the debate stage in Las Vegas Wednesday night .
On Thursday , Warren ’ s campaign released a full-page ad in the Las Vegas Review-Journal detailing how much Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson would pay in taxes in the first year of the Massachusetts senator ’ s presidency .
Jon Ralston of The Nevada Independent first noted the ad in a tweet .
The ad , which comes days before the Nevada caucuses , says that Adelson would pay $ 2.3 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first year , which amounts to less than 6 percent of Adelson ’ s net worth of $ 39.6 billion .
The ad also claims that with the “ small wealth tax , ” more money would go toward Nevada families when it comes to issues such as student debt and child care .
TPM reached out to Warren ’ s campaign for comment and will update this post if we hear back .
This isn ’ t the first time Warren has gone after Adelson .
Prior to announcing her presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Las Vegas Sands for donating $ 20 million to President Trump ’ s 2016 election campaign in an Oct. 2018 tweet .

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is taking aim at another billionaire a day after torching Michael Bloomberg on the debate stage in Las Vegas Wednesday night.
On Thursday, Warren’s campaign released a full-page ad in the Las Vegas Review-Journal detailing how much Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson would pay in taxes in the first year of the Massachusetts senator’s presidency.
Jon Ralston of The Nevada Independent first noted the ad in a tweet.
The day after the debate, Elizabeth Warren bought a full page ad in Sheldon Adelson’s newspaper saying Sheldon Adelson will pay $2.3 billion the first year of her wealth tax. I think that’s called chutzpah. pic.twitter.com/dV7O3G8MJu — Jon Ralston (@RalstonReports) February 20, 2020
The ad, which comes days before the Nevada caucuses, says that Adelson would pay $2.3 billion under Warren’s wealth tax in the first year, which amounts to less than 6 percent of Adelson’s net worth of $39.6 billion.
The ad also claims that with the “small wealth tax,” more money would go toward Nevada families when it comes to issues such as student debt and child care.
TPM reached out to Warren’s campaign for comment and will update this post if we hear back.
This isn’t the first time Warren has gone after Adelson. Prior to announcing her presidential candidacy, Warren called out the CEO of Las Vegas Sands for donating $20 million to President Trump’s 2016 election campaign in an Oct. 2018 tweet.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-20--Rohrabacher Confirms He Floated Pardon With Assange — But Trump Wasn’t Involved

A key followup to the tantalizing breaking news on Wednesday about Julian Assange , Wikileaks , and a Trump pardon .
Russia-friendly ex-Rep. Dana Rohrabacher ( R-CA ) reportedly dangled a presidential pardon to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange in 2017 , Assange ’ s lawyer claimed in court .
The catch : Assange had to prove Russia had not been the source of stolen Democratic emails Wikileaks published the year before .
Rohrabacher has now responded to the Assange claims , and the picture he paints , in true Rohrabacher fashion , is quite a bit muddier .
Was President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all , Rohrabacher said in a new interview published Friday .
As Rohrabacher told Yahoo News , it ’ s not clear Trump even knew about his talk with Assange .
That admission seems to take some of the wind out of the sails of the story .
Both Assange ’ s lawyer and Rohrabacher seem to agree on some details of what happened : The pair met in August 2017 where Assange had lived for years by that time , at the Ecuadorian embassy in London .
They spoke for hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Russians had hacked during the 2016 presidential race , and which Wikileaks eventually published to Trump ’ s benefit .
Trump has raged for years at the perception that Russian hackers helped him win the White House .
Rohrabacher told Yahoo News he sought proof , during the conversation , to support the baseless conspiracy theory that the real source of the hacked emails Wikileaks published was the murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich .
According to Assange ’ s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald , Rohrabacher said that “ on instructions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pardon or some other way out , if Mr. Assange … said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC leaks.
” But Rohrabacher has denied that Trump knew anything about a pardon offer .
“ I spoke to Julian Assange and told him if he would provide evidence about who gave WikiLeaks the emails I would petition the president to give him a pardon , ” he told Yahoo News .
“ He knew I could get to the president.
” Only after that conversation , Rohrabacher said , did he speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kelly about the matter .
Kelly was “ courteous , ” Rohrabacher said , but did not commit to even telling Trump about the congressman ’ s meeting .
The Yahoo Interview roughly matches what Rohrabacher posted on his personal website shortly after the Assange news went public Wednesday : “ At no time did I talk to President Trump about Julian Assange , ” he wrote .
“ Likewise , I was not directed by Trump or anyone else connected with him to meet with Julian Assange.
” “ At no time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President because I had not spoken with the President about this issue at all , ” he added .
“ However , when speaking with Julian Assange , I told him that if he could provide me information and evidence about who actually gave him the DNC emails , I would then call on President Trump to pardon him.
” That matches the White House ’ s own outright denial of the story , which it called “ a complete fabrication and a total lie.
” Assange is fighting extradition to the @ @ @ @ @ @

A key followup to the tantalizing breaking news on Wednesday about Julian Assange, Wikileaks, and a Trump pardon.
Russia-friendly ex-Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) reportedly dangled a presidential pardon to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange in 2017, Assange’s lawyer claimed in court.
The catch: Assange had to prove Russia had not been the source of stolen Democratic emails Wikileaks published the year before.
Rohrabacher has now responded to the Assange claims, and the picture he paints, in true Rohrabacher fashion, is quite a bit muddier.
Was President Donald Trump behind the offer? Not at all, Rohrabacher said in a new interview published Friday. As Rohrabacher told Yahoo News, it’s not clear Trump even knew about his talk with Assange.
That admission seems to take some of the wind out of the sails of the story.
Both Assange’s lawyer and Rohrabacher seem to agree on some details of what happened: The pair met in August 2017 where Assange had lived for years by that time, at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
They spoke for hours, including about the stolen Democratic emails that Russians had hacked during the 2016 presidential race, and which Wikileaks eventually published to Trump’s benefit. Trump has raged for years at the perception that Russian hackers helped him win the White House.
Rohrabacher told Yahoo News he sought proof, during the conversation, to support the baseless conspiracy theory that the real source of the hacked emails Wikileaks published was the murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich.
According to Assange’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald, Rohrabacher said that “on instructions from the President, he was offering a pardon or some other way out, if Mr. Assange … said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC leaks.”
But Rohrabacher has denied that Trump knew anything about a pardon offer.
“I spoke to Julian Assange and told him if he would provide evidence about who gave WikiLeaks the emails I would petition the president to give him a pardon,” he told Yahoo News. “He knew I could get to the president.”
Only after that conversation, Rohrabacher said, did he speak to then-White House chief of staff John Kelly about the matter. Kelly was “courteous,” Rohrabacher said, but did not commit to even telling Trump about the congressman’s meeting.
The Yahoo Interview roughly matches what Rohrabacher posted on his personal website shortly after the Assange news went public Wednesday: “At no time did I talk to President Trump about Julian Assange,” he wrote. “Likewise, I was not directed by Trump or anyone else connected with him to meet with Julian Assange.”
“At no time did I offer Julian Assange anything from the President because I had not spoken with the President about this issue at all,” he added. “However, when speaking with Julian Assange, I told him that if he could provide me information and evidence about who actually gave him the DNC emails, I would then call on President Trump to pardon him.”
That matches the White House’s own outright denial of the story, which it called “a complete fabrication and a total lie.”
Assange is fighting extradition to the United States on espionage charges.