Wednesday, March 28, 2018
The Stormy Daniels Interview Gave ’60 Minutes’ Its Highest Ratings in Years - TIME
The Stormy Daniels Interview Gave ’60 Minutes’ Its Highest Ratings in Years
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 08:55 AM PDT
Stormy Daniels’ highly anticipated interview on 60 Minutes delivered CBS the highest ratings for the show in years, with early numbers indicating that more viewers tuned in than have in about a decade.
Preliminary numbers from Nielsen show that ratings nearly doubled when compared to the week before, Deadline reports, with more than 20 million people watching. And it appears to be the highest-rated 60 Minutes episode since Barack Obama and Michelle Obama appeared on the program after his historic win in the 2008 presidential race. Ratings set to be released later on Monday will paint a fuller picture.
Viewers tuned in to get details of the porn actress’ claim that she had an affair with Trump years ago and later accepted a $130,000 payment in the days before the 2016 election to stay silent. During the interview, Daniels said she was threatened to keep quiet about the affair by an anonymous stranger.
“A guy walked up on me and said to me, ‘Leave Trump alone. Forget the story,’” Daniels told Anderson Cooper. “And then he leaned around and looked at my daughter and said, ‘That’s a beautiful little girl. It’d be a shame if something happened to her mom.’ And then he was gone.”
The interview came on the heels of an overtime NCAA tournament game, which likely bolstered viewership further.
Facebook’s Stock Is Taking Another Big Plunge Today. Here’s Why - TIMe Business
Facebook’s Stock Is Taking Another Big Plunge Today. Here’s Why
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 08:11 AM PDT
(NEW YORK) — The Federal Trade Commission is investigating Facebook’s privacy practices following a week of privacy scandals including allegations a Trump-affiliated political consulting firm got data inappropriately from millions of Facebook users.
Facebook’s stock, which already took a big hit last week, plunged as a result.
Tom Pahl, acting director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said the probe would include whether the company engaged in “unfair acts” that cause “substantial injury” to consumers.
Facebook’s privacy practices have come under fire after revelations that Cambridge Analytica got data on Facebook users, including information on friends of people who had downloaded a psychological quiz app, even though those friends hadn’t given explicit consent to sharing. Facebook is also facing questions over reports that it collected had years of contact names, telephone numbers, call lengths and information about text messages from Android users.
Facebook said in a statement on Monday that the company remains “strongly committed” to protecting people’s information and that it welcomes the opportunity to answer the FTC’s questions. News outlets reported on the FTC investigation last week, but the FTC hadn’t confirmed it until Monday. Facebook reached a settlement with the FTC in 2011 offering privacy assurances.
Facebook said Sunday that this information is uploaded to secure servers and comes only from people who gave explicit consent to allow it. Officials say the data is not sold or shared with users’ friends or outside apps. They say the data is used “to improve people’s experience across Facebook” by helping to connect with others. But the company did not spell out exactly what it used the data for or why it needed it.
Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, believes Facebook was in violation of the 2011 settlement in letting Cambridge Analytica harvest data on friends of Facebook users.
“This is what Facebook was doing 10 years ago that people objected to, what the FTC should have stopped in 2011,” Rotenberg said. “It makes zero sense that when a person downloads their apps, they have the ability to transfer the data of their friends.”
Although Zuckerberg talked about changes in 2014 that would have prevented this, Rotenberg said it should have been banned already under the 2011 consent decree. He said the FTC had dropped the ball in failing to enforce that.
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 08:11 AM PDT
(NEW YORK) — The Federal Trade Commission is investigating Facebook’s privacy practices following a week of privacy scandals including allegations a Trump-affiliated political consulting firm got data inappropriately from millions of Facebook users.
Facebook’s stock, which already took a big hit last week, plunged as a result.
Tom Pahl, acting director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said the probe would include whether the company engaged in “unfair acts” that cause “substantial injury” to consumers.
Facebook’s privacy practices have come under fire after revelations that Cambridge Analytica got data on Facebook users, including information on friends of people who had downloaded a psychological quiz app, even though those friends hadn’t given explicit consent to sharing. Facebook is also facing questions over reports that it collected had years of contact names, telephone numbers, call lengths and information about text messages from Android users.
Facebook said in a statement on Monday that the company remains “strongly committed” to protecting people’s information and that it welcomes the opportunity to answer the FTC’s questions. News outlets reported on the FTC investigation last week, but the FTC hadn’t confirmed it until Monday. Facebook reached a settlement with the FTC in 2011 offering privacy assurances.
Facebook said Sunday that this information is uploaded to secure servers and comes only from people who gave explicit consent to allow it. Officials say the data is not sold or shared with users’ friends or outside apps. They say the data is used “to improve people’s experience across Facebook” by helping to connect with others. But the company did not spell out exactly what it used the data for or why it needed it.
Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, believes Facebook was in violation of the 2011 settlement in letting Cambridge Analytica harvest data on friends of Facebook users.
“This is what Facebook was doing 10 years ago that people objected to, what the FTC should have stopped in 2011,” Rotenberg said. “It makes zero sense that when a person downloads their apps, they have the ability to transfer the data of their friends.”
Although Zuckerberg talked about changes in 2014 that would have prevented this, Rotenberg said it should have been banned already under the 2011 consent decree. He said the FTC had dropped the ball in failing to enforce that.
Russia to judge hostility levels of West before acting on diplomatic expulsions - Reuters
MARCH 28, 2018 / 7:24 PM / UPDATED AN HOUR AGO
Russia to judge hostility levels of West before acting on diplomatic expulsions: Ifax
Reuters Staff
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Wednesday that Moscow would assess the levels of hostility which Washington and London feel towards Russia before retaliating over the expulsion of Russian diplomats, the Interfax news agency reported.
FILE PHOTO: Finnish President Sauli Niinisto (not in picture) meets Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Sergei Ryabkov at the President's Official Residence Mantyniemi, Helsinki, Finland September 12, 2017. Lehtikuva/Martti Kainulainen/via REUTERS
In the most sweeping action of its kind against Moscow since the height of the Cold War, the United States and European Union member states plan to expel scores of Russian diplomats to punish the Kremlin for a nerve agent attack on a former double agent and his daughter in England.
Russia, which denies any part in the March 4 attack, says the West’s action is a “provocative gesture” and has said it will respond.
Russia angry at 'boorish' expulsion of diplomats
Reporting by Katya Golubkova; Editing by Andrew Osborn
Russia to judge hostility levels of West before acting on diplomatic expulsions: Ifax
Reuters Staff
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Wednesday that Moscow would assess the levels of hostility which Washington and London feel towards Russia before retaliating over the expulsion of Russian diplomats, the Interfax news agency reported.
FILE PHOTO: Finnish President Sauli Niinisto (not in picture) meets Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Sergei Ryabkov at the President's Official Residence Mantyniemi, Helsinki, Finland September 12, 2017. Lehtikuva/Martti Kainulainen/via REUTERS
In the most sweeping action of its kind against Moscow since the height of the Cold War, the United States and European Union member states plan to expel scores of Russian diplomats to punish the Kremlin for a nerve agent attack on a former double agent and his daughter in England.
Russia, which denies any part in the March 4 attack, says the West’s action is a “provocative gesture” and has said it will respond.
Russia angry at 'boorish' expulsion of diplomats
Reporting by Katya Golubkova; Editing by Andrew Osborn
Apple's Folding iPhone Is Bad News For Samsung - Forbes
MAR 26, 2018 @ 08:55 AM 106,154 The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
Apple's Folding iPhone Is Bad News For Samsung
Jay McGregor , CONTRIBUTOR
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
TechConfigurations
Concept art of the Galaxy X by YouTube channel TechConfigurations.
Samsung’s habitually delayed folding smartphone, the Galaxy X, won’t get a head start on a folding iPhone because the technology isn’t ready yet, which is bad news for Android.
My colleague David Phelan recently reported that Apple is working on a folding iPhone, which is likely to appear by 2020 according to analyst Wamsi Mohan, an analyst at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
2020 seems both optimistically soon and quite far away. Samsung is supposedly on the cusp of launching its Galaxy X - in fact it’s been on the cusp for the last three years. With rumours, and Samsung executives, openly saying their revolutionary folding smartphone was right around the corner.
Except it’s not. A Qualcomm executive revealed to TechRadar last week that the display technology that allows OLEDs to repeatedly bend and move simply isn’t ready. Qualcomm’s Salman Saeed damningly said that phone manufacturers “haven’t really cracked the material science right now to produce electrodes that can repeatedly withstand bending and folding.”
It sounds like we’re still a scientific breakthrough away from folding displays being commercialised, which is bad news for Samsung. Mainly because Samsung - and to a larger extend Android phones in general - rely on being both cheaper and innovative alternatives to iPhones.
Now the latter isn’t always the case, of course. Apple - on occasion - out maneuvers the Android competition in some areas like Face ID, which Android phone makers won’t be able to copy for at least two years. But in general, advancements in screen technology have very much been Samsung’s bag.
But, unless Samsung has kept a major breakthrough underwraps, it looks like the Korean tech giant could lose that valuable head start. A headstart that’s needed to combat Apple’s advantages: a cult following for everything Apple and its relentless pursuit of perfection.
When it comes to the former, Apple will capture the headlines for foldable tech and - because of its rabid following and effective marketing - foldable tech could easily become synonymous with Apple. Stealing Samsung’s Next Big Thing from right under it.
For the latter, there’s a good chance Apple will simply do a better job of it, which is often the result of waiting a bit longer to adopt the latest technology.
There are also a number of screen ratio and form factor issues that need to be smartly addressed. Instantly changing the aspect ratio of the display will render some content - videos and games in particular - ugly, which might defeat the point of the concept entirely. How that’s handled will be key to success for not just each respective company, but for the concept. Smart money is on Apple coming up with some clever user experience design to crack that conundrum.
The race to be first - and by some distance - is incredibly important for foldable displays. With intelligent user experience design close behind it. If Samsung isn’t first to market, then I suspect bad news is on the horizon for the Galaxy maker.
More on Forbes
Samsung's Note 9 Gains One Big Advantage Over The Galaxy S9
Qualcomm Has Bad News About The Samsung Galaxy X
Google Slashes Pixel 2 XL Price To Fight Off iPhone X And Galaxy S9
5 Reasons To Buy Google's Pixel 2 Over The Samsung Galaxy S9
5 Reasons To Buy Samsung's Galaxy S9 Over The Google Pixel 2
Samsung's New Galaxy X Has Been Hiding In Plain Sight
5 Reasons To Buy Sansung's Galaxy S9 Over The Apple iPhone X
Jay McGregor is the editor-in-chief of a new documentary publication called Point. He also reports for The Guardian, TechRadar, BBC Radio and others. Follow on YouTube: youtube.com/pointreport
Apple's Folding iPhone Is Bad News For Samsung
Jay McGregor , CONTRIBUTOR
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
TechConfigurations
Concept art of the Galaxy X by YouTube channel TechConfigurations.
Samsung’s habitually delayed folding smartphone, the Galaxy X, won’t get a head start on a folding iPhone because the technology isn’t ready yet, which is bad news for Android.
My colleague David Phelan recently reported that Apple is working on a folding iPhone, which is likely to appear by 2020 according to analyst Wamsi Mohan, an analyst at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
2020 seems both optimistically soon and quite far away. Samsung is supposedly on the cusp of launching its Galaxy X - in fact it’s been on the cusp for the last three years. With rumours, and Samsung executives, openly saying their revolutionary folding smartphone was right around the corner.
Except it’s not. A Qualcomm executive revealed to TechRadar last week that the display technology that allows OLEDs to repeatedly bend and move simply isn’t ready. Qualcomm’s Salman Saeed damningly said that phone manufacturers “haven’t really cracked the material science right now to produce electrodes that can repeatedly withstand bending and folding.”
It sounds like we’re still a scientific breakthrough away from folding displays being commercialised, which is bad news for Samsung. Mainly because Samsung - and to a larger extend Android phones in general - rely on being both cheaper and innovative alternatives to iPhones.
Now the latter isn’t always the case, of course. Apple - on occasion - out maneuvers the Android competition in some areas like Face ID, which Android phone makers won’t be able to copy for at least two years. But in general, advancements in screen technology have very much been Samsung’s bag.
But, unless Samsung has kept a major breakthrough underwraps, it looks like the Korean tech giant could lose that valuable head start. A headstart that’s needed to combat Apple’s advantages: a cult following for everything Apple and its relentless pursuit of perfection.
When it comes to the former, Apple will capture the headlines for foldable tech and - because of its rabid following and effective marketing - foldable tech could easily become synonymous with Apple. Stealing Samsung’s Next Big Thing from right under it.
For the latter, there’s a good chance Apple will simply do a better job of it, which is often the result of waiting a bit longer to adopt the latest technology.
There are also a number of screen ratio and form factor issues that need to be smartly addressed. Instantly changing the aspect ratio of the display will render some content - videos and games in particular - ugly, which might defeat the point of the concept entirely. How that’s handled will be key to success for not just each respective company, but for the concept. Smart money is on Apple coming up with some clever user experience design to crack that conundrum.
The race to be first - and by some distance - is incredibly important for foldable displays. With intelligent user experience design close behind it. If Samsung isn’t first to market, then I suspect bad news is on the horizon for the Galaxy maker.
More on Forbes
Samsung's Note 9 Gains One Big Advantage Over The Galaxy S9
Qualcomm Has Bad News About The Samsung Galaxy X
Google Slashes Pixel 2 XL Price To Fight Off iPhone X And Galaxy S9
5 Reasons To Buy Google's Pixel 2 Over The Samsung Galaxy S9
5 Reasons To Buy Samsung's Galaxy S9 Over The Google Pixel 2
Samsung's New Galaxy X Has Been Hiding In Plain Sight
5 Reasons To Buy Sansung's Galaxy S9 Over The Apple iPhone X
Jay McGregor is the editor-in-chief of a new documentary publication called Point. He also reports for The Guardian, TechRadar, BBC Radio and others. Follow on YouTube: youtube.com/pointreport
Don't Blow Up The Iran Deal. Trump's Strategy Is Working. - Bloomberg
Don't Blow Up The Iran Deal. Trump's Strategy Is Working.
The U.S. can play hardball on renegotiating the agreement without alienating European allies.
By Eli Lake
March 28, 2018, 7:00 PM GMT+11
How did Kerry forget about these? Photographer: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images
It looks like the Iran nuclear deal will not survive past May 12. That is the next occasion President Donald Trump will have to certify Iranian compliance with the bargain. Unless European allies commit to fixing its main flaws -- the sunset provisions, lack of restrictions on Iran's missile tests and the hampered inspection process -- Trump will withdraw.
The president is already setting the stage. He replaced Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the most vocal proponent of the deal, with one of its toughest critics, former CIA director Mike Pompeo. Then there is the new national security adviser, John Bolton, who six months ago drafted strategy for getting the U.S. out of the agreement altogether.
There are strong arguments for following through on this course. As Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, likes to say, Iran gets to become a breakout nuclear power down the road by adhering to the agreement's terms for now. The limitations on low enriched uranium and prohibitions on-advanced centrifuges expire between 2026 and 2031.
What's more, the nuclear bargain -- with its secret understandings and complex structure -- is designed to spur a gold rush for America's allies to invest in the economy of the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. This would not only normalize Iran's opaque banking system and corrupt state-owned businesses, but would create a powerful constituency inside Europe to oppose sanctions later on that would threaten the investments the nuclear bargain is supposed to make kosher. As the Israel Project's Omri Ceren argues in Commentary this month, that risk alone merits blowing up the deal.
All of that said, to withdraw from the Iran deal now would be a mistake. The U.S. and its allies now enjoy the best of both worlds: Iranian compliance without the international investment Tehran had counted on.
European banks and businesses are wary of the Iranian market at this point. U.S. officials tell me Europe is asking for further clarifications from the Treasury Department on what kinds of investment will not violate existing sanctions. Deals that appeared to be done at the close of the Barack Obama administration -- like Boeing's multi-billion dollar aircraft sale to Iran -- are now in doubt. Iran's rial has been in free fall, losing a quarter of its value in the last six months.
There are many reasons why Iran's economy isn't attractive in 2018 to significant foreign investment. Its secret police keep arresting dual nationals on false charges; its proxies and revolutionary guard keep waging war in Syria and Yemen; and its banks won't stop laundering money for the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah. Add to this a new Saudi-led strategy to pressure businesses not to enter the Iranian market.
While discarding the Iran deal now would be a mistake, Trump does deserve credit for throwing its future into doubt. We all know the drill. Every few months Trump is required to certify Iran's compliance with the agreement. And every few months, he has hemmed, hawed and threatened not to do it. When Trump finally introduced his Iran strategy in the fall, he gave an ultimatum: Unless Congress and European allies commit to fixing the deal's flaws he will withdraw. This is why the May 12 deadline looms so large.
But before Trump follows through on his promise, he should take a moment to appreciate the implications of imposing the secondary sanctions the nuclear deal lifted. Kate Bauer, a former Treasury Department attaché in Abu Dhabi who worked on Iran sanctions, told me last week that the sanctions could in theory be snapped back in a matter of days. But in order for these measures to be effective, it would require a considerable amount of technical and diplomatic work.
"It would require time and resources on the technical side, such as reissuing executive orders and making decisions about licensing policy," Bauer, who is currently a scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told me. "But also on the diplomatic side if the objective is to rebuild pressure on Iran's economy to get them to change their behavior."
What are the chances European and Asian allies would want to work closely with the U.S. to re-impose sanctions at the very moment the U.S. is negotiating with Europe to strengthen the existing nuclear agreement? Not good. This says nothing of the diplomatic strain created by Trump's decision to impose tariffs on Chinese steel, or for that matter the preparations for a North Korea summit with its tyrant, Kim Jong Un.
Of course, U.S. secondary sanctions do not require a parallel diplomatic campaign; if a bank or company pursues investment in Iran it runs the risk of being shut out of the U.S. market. But enforcement does require some cooperation. If the secondary sanctions are flaunted and the U.S. does not penalize the offender, one of America's most valuable foreign policy tools -- its ability to use its economy to scare money away from rogues -- will be proved a paper tiger.
Mark Dubowitz, the chief executive of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and one of the architects of the strategy to pressure allies to fix the Iran deal, said there are technical ways Trump can claim to be withdrawing from the Iran deal without implementing the sanctions right away. He called this a period of "safe harbor," where there would be six months for any banks and corporations to unwind their business in Iran. "You then prolong uncertainty and give more time for the Europeans to agree to a real fix to the deal," he said.
Perhaps this sort of escalation will be necessary at a future date. For now it is not. Some critics might say that Trump has to follow through on his promise or he will lose credibility. But he can just as easily delay his decision, point to the European negotiations, and follow through on his own promised plan to ramp up non-nuclear sanctions on Iranian entities.
What's more, he can do all this and claim success, if not victory, for his strategy to fix the nuclear bargain he campaigned against.
The U.S. can play hardball on renegotiating the agreement without alienating European allies.
By Eli Lake
March 28, 2018, 7:00 PM GMT+11
How did Kerry forget about these? Photographer: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images
It looks like the Iran nuclear deal will not survive past May 12. That is the next occasion President Donald Trump will have to certify Iranian compliance with the bargain. Unless European allies commit to fixing its main flaws -- the sunset provisions, lack of restrictions on Iran's missile tests and the hampered inspection process -- Trump will withdraw.
The president is already setting the stage. He replaced Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the most vocal proponent of the deal, with one of its toughest critics, former CIA director Mike Pompeo. Then there is the new national security adviser, John Bolton, who six months ago drafted strategy for getting the U.S. out of the agreement altogether.
There are strong arguments for following through on this course. As Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, likes to say, Iran gets to become a breakout nuclear power down the road by adhering to the agreement's terms for now. The limitations on low enriched uranium and prohibitions on-advanced centrifuges expire between 2026 and 2031.
What's more, the nuclear bargain -- with its secret understandings and complex structure -- is designed to spur a gold rush for America's allies to invest in the economy of the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. This would not only normalize Iran's opaque banking system and corrupt state-owned businesses, but would create a powerful constituency inside Europe to oppose sanctions later on that would threaten the investments the nuclear bargain is supposed to make kosher. As the Israel Project's Omri Ceren argues in Commentary this month, that risk alone merits blowing up the deal.
All of that said, to withdraw from the Iran deal now would be a mistake. The U.S. and its allies now enjoy the best of both worlds: Iranian compliance without the international investment Tehran had counted on.
European banks and businesses are wary of the Iranian market at this point. U.S. officials tell me Europe is asking for further clarifications from the Treasury Department on what kinds of investment will not violate existing sanctions. Deals that appeared to be done at the close of the Barack Obama administration -- like Boeing's multi-billion dollar aircraft sale to Iran -- are now in doubt. Iran's rial has been in free fall, losing a quarter of its value in the last six months.
There are many reasons why Iran's economy isn't attractive in 2018 to significant foreign investment. Its secret police keep arresting dual nationals on false charges; its proxies and revolutionary guard keep waging war in Syria and Yemen; and its banks won't stop laundering money for the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah. Add to this a new Saudi-led strategy to pressure businesses not to enter the Iranian market.
While discarding the Iran deal now would be a mistake, Trump does deserve credit for throwing its future into doubt. We all know the drill. Every few months Trump is required to certify Iran's compliance with the agreement. And every few months, he has hemmed, hawed and threatened not to do it. When Trump finally introduced his Iran strategy in the fall, he gave an ultimatum: Unless Congress and European allies commit to fixing the deal's flaws he will withdraw. This is why the May 12 deadline looms so large.
But before Trump follows through on his promise, he should take a moment to appreciate the implications of imposing the secondary sanctions the nuclear deal lifted. Kate Bauer, a former Treasury Department attaché in Abu Dhabi who worked on Iran sanctions, told me last week that the sanctions could in theory be snapped back in a matter of days. But in order for these measures to be effective, it would require a considerable amount of technical and diplomatic work.
"It would require time and resources on the technical side, such as reissuing executive orders and making decisions about licensing policy," Bauer, who is currently a scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told me. "But also on the diplomatic side if the objective is to rebuild pressure on Iran's economy to get them to change their behavior."
What are the chances European and Asian allies would want to work closely with the U.S. to re-impose sanctions at the very moment the U.S. is negotiating with Europe to strengthen the existing nuclear agreement? Not good. This says nothing of the diplomatic strain created by Trump's decision to impose tariffs on Chinese steel, or for that matter the preparations for a North Korea summit with its tyrant, Kim Jong Un.
Of course, U.S. secondary sanctions do not require a parallel diplomatic campaign; if a bank or company pursues investment in Iran it runs the risk of being shut out of the U.S. market. But enforcement does require some cooperation. If the secondary sanctions are flaunted and the U.S. does not penalize the offender, one of America's most valuable foreign policy tools -- its ability to use its economy to scare money away from rogues -- will be proved a paper tiger.
Mark Dubowitz, the chief executive of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and one of the architects of the strategy to pressure allies to fix the Iran deal, said there are technical ways Trump can claim to be withdrawing from the Iran deal without implementing the sanctions right away. He called this a period of "safe harbor," where there would be six months for any banks and corporations to unwind their business in Iran. "You then prolong uncertainty and give more time for the Europeans to agree to a real fix to the deal," he said.
Perhaps this sort of escalation will be necessary at a future date. For now it is not. Some critics might say that Trump has to follow through on his promise or he will lose credibility. But he can just as easily delay his decision, point to the European negotiations, and follow through on his own promised plan to ramp up non-nuclear sanctions on Iranian entities.
What's more, he can do all this and claim success, if not victory, for his strategy to fix the nuclear bargain he campaigned against.
Barack Obama Hopes for a 'Million Young Obamas' to Lead 'Human Progress' - Fox News
27/3/2018
Barack Obama Hopes for a 'Million Young Obamas' to Lead 'Human Progress'
Mark Levin
Former President Barack Obama said Sunday that in order for society to progress effectively, it'd be beneficial to have at least a million people like him and his wife.
Obama noted how he wants to create an online platform where young leaders can discuss ideas together.
"If I could do that effectively, then - you know - I would create a hundred or a thousand or a million young Barack or Michelle Obamas. Or, the next generation of people who could take that baton in the relay race that is human progress," he said.
The discussion in Tokyo went over his most important post-presidential goals, specifically for the Obama Foundation.
According to The Washington Examiner, Obama said that his foundation is working to find ways to "bring people from different perspectives to start having a more civil debate and listen to each other more carefully."
He also said that most of today's problems are caused by "old men."
Barack Obama Hopes for a 'Million Young Obamas' to Lead 'Human Progress'
Mark Levin
Former President Barack Obama said Sunday that in order for society to progress effectively, it'd be beneficial to have at least a million people like him and his wife.
Obama noted how he wants to create an online platform where young leaders can discuss ideas together.
"If I could do that effectively, then - you know - I would create a hundred or a thousand or a million young Barack or Michelle Obamas. Or, the next generation of people who could take that baton in the relay race that is human progress," he said.
The discussion in Tokyo went over his most important post-presidential goals, specifically for the Obama Foundation.
According to The Washington Examiner, Obama said that his foundation is working to find ways to "bring people from different perspectives to start having a more civil debate and listen to each other more carefully."
He also said that most of today's problems are caused by "old men."
Myanmar Parliament Elects Suu Kyi Loyalist as New President- Bloomberg ( source : Associated Press )
Myanmar Parliament Elects Suu Kyi Loyalist as New President
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
March 28, 2018, 5:11 PM GMT+11 Updated on March 28, 2018, 6:11 PM GMT+11
Win Myint Photographer: Ye Aung Thu/AFP via Getty Images
Naypyitaw, Myanmar (AP) -- Myanmar's parliament on Wednesday elected Win Myint, a loyalist of Aung San Suu Kyi, as new president, while Suu Kyi retained her executive authority over the government.
The vote comes as Suu Kyi's civilian government has struggled to implement peace and national reconciliation, with the powerful military still embroiled in combat with ethnic rebels and under heavy international criticism for its brutal counterinsurgency campaign against the Muslim Rohingya minority.
Myanmar's military ruled the country for a half-century during which it was accused of widespread abuses before partially handing power to a civilian government in 2016. It remains in charge of security matters and still faces accusations of rights abuses.
Win Myint, the vice president selected as presidential candidate by the lower house and backed by Suu Kyi's ruling party, received 403 votes from the combined houses. Myint Swe, the vice president with the military's backing, had 211 votes and Henry Van Tio, the vice president selected by the upper house, had 18.
Like his predecessor, Htin Kyaw, who retired last week due to ill health, Win Myint, 66, is a longtime Suu Kyi loyalist and a stalwart member of her National League for Democracy, an affiliation that earned him a brief spell as a political prisoner more than two decades ago under the previous military government.
When Suu Kyi's government was installed in 2016, she explained that she would be "above the president," a situation amenable to both the president and the public.
The job of state counsellor was created especially for Suu Kyi because she is constitutionally banned from the presidency. A clause in the 2008 military-drafted constitution bars anyone with a foreign spouse or child from holding the job. It clearly targeted Suu Kyi, whose two sons are British, as was her late husband.
Myanmar's president is elected by a joint sitting of the two houses of parliament from among the country's three vice presidents, representing the lower house, the upper house and the military. Under the constitution, the military holds special privileges in the country's administration, including a 25 percent share of parliamentary seats and the three security portfolios in the Cabinet.
The National League for Democracy's landslide election victory in late 2015 gave it large majorities in both houses.
Having been both a member of the NLD's Central Executive Committee and speaker of the lower house for two years shows Win Myint holds the skills to be president, said Win Zaw, a lower house lawmaker from the party.
"We hope that he will do great work as the president, and I am sure he will use his power to do the best he can for the country," he said.
Win Myint, who resigned as speaker of the lower house last week, was a successful parliamentary candidate in the 1990 general election, which was invalidated by the military, denying him his seat. He was elected in 2012 and again in 2015.
Born in the Irrawaddy Delta in 1951, Win Myint won his degree in geology in Yangon, only to become a lawyer in the 1980s. His involvement with the NLD began when it was established during the failed anti-military uprising of 1988, which led to his brief stint in prison. In 2010, he became a member of the Central Executive Committee of Suu Kyi's party.
"Win Myint was educated as a lawyer and has been loyal to the party as well," said Aung Shin, a close friend and colleague. "More importantly, he has always worked together with Aung San Suu Kyi and they have mutual trust. I see him as a very reliable person who will be a great president for the country, and people are very optimistic about him."
Khin Zaw Win, director of the Tampadipa Institute, a policy advocacy group, questioned whether Win Myint's fealty to Suu Kyi was an asset.
"To those who are asking, he will be forever Aung San Suu Kyi's henchman," he said. "I don't expect much change in the presidency, unless Win Myint puts the country's interests before Aung San Suu Kyi's and that of the military."
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
March 28, 2018, 5:11 PM GMT+11 Updated on March 28, 2018, 6:11 PM GMT+11
Win Myint Photographer: Ye Aung Thu/AFP via Getty Images
Naypyitaw, Myanmar (AP) -- Myanmar's parliament on Wednesday elected Win Myint, a loyalist of Aung San Suu Kyi, as new president, while Suu Kyi retained her executive authority over the government.
The vote comes as Suu Kyi's civilian government has struggled to implement peace and national reconciliation, with the powerful military still embroiled in combat with ethnic rebels and under heavy international criticism for its brutal counterinsurgency campaign against the Muslim Rohingya minority.
Myanmar's military ruled the country for a half-century during which it was accused of widespread abuses before partially handing power to a civilian government in 2016. It remains in charge of security matters and still faces accusations of rights abuses.
Win Myint, the vice president selected as presidential candidate by the lower house and backed by Suu Kyi's ruling party, received 403 votes from the combined houses. Myint Swe, the vice president with the military's backing, had 211 votes and Henry Van Tio, the vice president selected by the upper house, had 18.
Like his predecessor, Htin Kyaw, who retired last week due to ill health, Win Myint, 66, is a longtime Suu Kyi loyalist and a stalwart member of her National League for Democracy, an affiliation that earned him a brief spell as a political prisoner more than two decades ago under the previous military government.
When Suu Kyi's government was installed in 2016, she explained that she would be "above the president," a situation amenable to both the president and the public.
The job of state counsellor was created especially for Suu Kyi because she is constitutionally banned from the presidency. A clause in the 2008 military-drafted constitution bars anyone with a foreign spouse or child from holding the job. It clearly targeted Suu Kyi, whose two sons are British, as was her late husband.
Myanmar's president is elected by a joint sitting of the two houses of parliament from among the country's three vice presidents, representing the lower house, the upper house and the military. Under the constitution, the military holds special privileges in the country's administration, including a 25 percent share of parliamentary seats and the three security portfolios in the Cabinet.
The National League for Democracy's landslide election victory in late 2015 gave it large majorities in both houses.
Having been both a member of the NLD's Central Executive Committee and speaker of the lower house for two years shows Win Myint holds the skills to be president, said Win Zaw, a lower house lawmaker from the party.
"We hope that he will do great work as the president, and I am sure he will use his power to do the best he can for the country," he said.
Win Myint, who resigned as speaker of the lower house last week, was a successful parliamentary candidate in the 1990 general election, which was invalidated by the military, denying him his seat. He was elected in 2012 and again in 2015.
Born in the Irrawaddy Delta in 1951, Win Myint won his degree in geology in Yangon, only to become a lawyer in the 1980s. His involvement with the NLD began when it was established during the failed anti-military uprising of 1988, which led to his brief stint in prison. In 2010, he became a member of the Central Executive Committee of Suu Kyi's party.
"Win Myint was educated as a lawyer and has been loyal to the party as well," said Aung Shin, a close friend and colleague. "More importantly, he has always worked together with Aung San Suu Kyi and they have mutual trust. I see him as a very reliable person who will be a great president for the country, and people are very optimistic about him."
Khin Zaw Win, director of the Tampadipa Institute, a policy advocacy group, questioned whether Win Myint's fealty to Suu Kyi was an asset.
"To those who are asking, he will be forever Aung San Suu Kyi's henchman," he said. "I don't expect much change in the presidency, unless Win Myint puts the country's interests before Aung San Suu Kyi's and that of the military."
An unheard-of problem: The President can't find a lawyer - CNN Politics
An unheard-of problem: The President can't find a lawyer
Anchor Muted Background
By Katelyn Polantz, CNN
Updated 0843 GMT (1643 HKT) March 28, 2018
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 23: Richard Gates arrives at the Prettyman Federal Courthouse for a hearing February 23, 2018 in Washington, DC. Gates is expected to plead guilty to a 12-charge indictment that includes money laundering and conspiracy.
(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Ex-Trump campaign aide Rick Gates pleads guilty
Paul Manafort, former campaign manager for Donald Trump, center, arrives at the U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2018. Manafort and Rick Gates, former deputy campaign manager for Donald Trump, were accused in an Oct. 27 indictment of failing to register as agents in the U.S. for political consulting they did for Ukraine and pro-Russian politicians. They were also accused of conspiring to launder millions of dollars and hiding offshore bank accounts. Both men have pleaded not guilty. Photographer: Zach Gibson/Bloomberg via Getty Images
New charges against Manafort in Mueller probe
Senior Advisor Jared Kushner listens as US President Donald
Sources: Mueller's interest in Kushner grows
phil mudd 021518
Mudd: One of the biggest losers is Devin Nunes
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, special counsel on the Russian investigation, leaves following a meeting with members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on June 21, 2017.
Mueller charges lawyer with lying about Gates interaction
LA Times: Ex-Trump aide to plead guilty
Clapper: More shoes will drop in Russia probe
Steve Bannon questioned by special counsel
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 22: U.S. President Donald Trump talks with journalists after signing tax reform legislation into law in the Oval Office December 22, 2017 in Washington, DC. Trump praised Republican leaders in Congress for all their work on the biggest tax overhaul in decades. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)NOW PLAYING
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
John Dowd, lead attorney for Raj Rajaratnam, co-founder of Galleon Group LLC, enters federal court in New York, U.S., on Thursday, May 5, 2011.
Why did Trump's lead lawyer drop out now?
Jeff Flake SOTU 01
Flake: Hope GOP lawmakers stand up for Mueller
The Mueller investigation: Who could be next?
NEW YORK, NY - AUGUST 08: Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), speaks at the International Conference on Cyber Security (ICCS) on August 8, 2013 in New York City.
Mueller subpoenas Trump Organization documents
House Benghazi Committee Chairman, Trey Gowdy (R-SC), participates in a news conference with fellow Committee Republicans after the release of the Committee's Benghazi report on Capitol Hill June 28, 2016 in Washington, DC.
Gowdy to Dowd: Act like Trump is innocent
Haberman: Mueller probe could go into summer
Sources: Mueller looks prior to Trump campaign
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
Ex-Trump campaign aide Rick Gates pleads guilty
Mudd: One of the biggest losers is Devin Nunes
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, special counsel on the Russian investigation, leaves following a meeting with members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on June 21, 2017.
Mueller charges lawyer with lying about Gates interaction
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 02: Richard Gates arrives at the Prettyman Federal Court Building for a hearing November 2, 2017 in Washington, DC. Gates and former business partner and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort both pleaded not guilty Monday to a 12-charge indictment that included money laundering and conspiracy. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
LA Times: Ex-Trump aide to plead guilty
Clapper: More shoes will drop in Russia probe
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
John Dowd, lead attorney for Raj Rajaratnam, co-founder of Galleon Group LLC, enters federal court in New York, U.S., on Thursday, May 5, 2011.
Why did Trump's lead lawyer drop out now?
Jeff Flake SOTU 01
Flake: Hope GOP lawmakers stand up for Mueller
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 21: Special counsel Robert Mueller (2nd L) leaves after a closed meeting with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee June 21, 2017 at the Capitol in Washington, DC. The committee meets with Mueller to discuss the firing of former FBI Director James Comey. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
The Mueller investigation: Who could be next?
NEW YORK, NY - AUGUST 08: Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), speaks at the International Conference on Cyber Security (ICCS) on August 8, 2013 in New York City.
Mueller subpoenas Trump Organization documents
House Benghazi Committee Chairman, Trey Gowdy (R-SC), participates in a news conference with fellow Committee Republicans after the release of the Committee's Benghazi report on Capitol Hill June 28, 2016 in Washington, DC.
Gowdy to Dowd: Act like Trump is innocent
Haberman: Mueller probe could go into summer
Sources: Mueller looks prior to Trump campaign
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
(CNN)Several top US law firms have left President Donald Trump with few places to turn for legal help in the Russia probe.
Five large law firms are passing on the opportunity to represent the President after a shakeup last week on his private defense team and as he anticipates giving possible testimony to special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
Well-known Washington lawyers cited several reasons for declining the President in recent weeks, according to multiple sources familiar with their decisions. Among them, Trump appears to be a difficult client and has rebuked some of his lawyers' advice. He's perceived as so politically unpopular he may damage reputations rather than boost them. Lawyers at large firms fear backlash from their corporate clients if they were to represent the President. And many want to steer clear of conflicts of interest that could complicate their other obligations.
Two more lawyers decline to join Trump legal team
Two more lawyers decline to join Trump legal team
"With a figure who is as polarizing as the President, it makes the decision about whether to represent him a more difficult one," said Philip West, chairman of large Washington law firm Steptoe & Johnson. The firm was among several to decline to represent Trump last year. "Any large law firm has clients that have very strong feelings."
Even in a city with such a sizable legal industry, so many top lawyers and large law offices with white-collar and national security specialists have already been hired by witnesses, subjects and companies involved in the Mueller probe. Thus, few in town can take new clients at the center of it.
Trump tweets 'many lawyers and top law firms' want to join his legal team
Trump tweets 'many lawyers and top law firms' want to join his legal team
The result is a previously unheard-of Washington problem: The President of the United States is struggling to build an experienced, large legal defense team as the special prosecutor digs in to his campaign and administration. His official legal defense team consists of two lawyers, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow, neither affiliated with a traditional law firm.
The latest to turn down the invitation, Dan Webb and Tom Buchanan of the law firm Winston & Strawn, said Tuesday they "were unable to take on the representation due to business conflicts." Webb and others at the firm represent the Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash in a criminal money laundering case in Chicago, where he continues to face possible extradition from Austria. Firtash was previously a business contact of indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, making the Ukrainian potentially connected to the Mueller probe.
The lawyer Trump wants to represent him has been dead for 32 years
The lawyer Trump wants to represent him has been dead for 32 years
"However they consider the opportunity to represent the President to be the highest honor and they sincerely regret that they cannot do so," Webb and Buchanan's statement said. "They wish the President the best and believe he has excellent representation in Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow."
While Sekulow, the leader of a non-profit religious advocacy legal group and a talk radio personality, is Trump's sole remaining private defense counsel, Cobb works within the White House as a special counsel overseeing the Russia probe response.
When asked who would lead Trump's legal defense team on Tuesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said that "the President has a highly qualified team." She referred further questions to Sekulow.
Other lawyers who received recent requests to help with the Russia include former US Solicitor General Ted Olson; Emmet Flood, who's worked for multiple presidents and still may join the White House counsel's office; Robert Bennett, Bill Clinton's attorney in the Paula Jones litigation; and Bob Giuffra, a New York litigator with the high-end firm Sullivan & Cromwell.
John Dowd's resignation tells you a lot about Donald Trump's mindset
John Dowd's resignation tells you a lot about Donald Trump's mindset
Olson, Bennett and Giuffra all said no shortly after they were asked. The invitations became public last week when John Dowd, Trump's private attorney for Mueller matters, quit. Dowd, who previously worked for a large firm and handled several high-profile trials, was central to determining Trump's legal strategy and negotiating with Mueller's office. Trump then failed last week to bring aboard a husband-and-wife replacement team to aid Sekulow, after announcing that Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing would join his team. Sekulow cited conflicts as the problem.
A source familiar with the White House said other lawyers in Washington and New York have reached out to help and could still join the team. The person would not name those lawyers, or explain the timeline.
Earlier this week, Bennett told Politico he hoped Cobb would leave the White House. "He's not helping himself or his reputation," Bennett said.
Trump says he still 'would like to' testify before Mueller
Trump says he still 'would like to' testify before Mueller
Olson said on MSNBC on Monday that Trump's White House is in "chaos" and "beyond normal." Olson declined to speculate on what kind of legal help Trump may still need.
Ted Boutrous, another top partner at Olson's firm, said Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher almost immediately declined to represent the President. Boutrous counsels Fusion GPS in court cases over the so-called dossier of Trump opposition research it funded. He wouldn't speak about his law firm's thinking in declining Trump, but pointed out how lawyers can't take on clients when other clients' interests might conflict. The firm also handled Facebook's response to Mueller in recent months.
Boutrous added the President is a "notoriously difficult client who disregards the advice of his lawyers and asks them to engage in questionable activities."
(Another personal attorney to Trump, Michael Cohen, is caught in a legal fight over a nondisclosure agreement made on Trump's behalf with the porn star Stormy Daniels.)
Among the lawyers Trump has considered on Russia issues, Flood still may be willing to work alongside the President. He is a candidate for a position in the Trump White House counsel's office, which handles official White House legal questions, such as the selection of judges and reviewing policy proposals.
This isn't the first time well-known attorneys declined to help Trump against Mueller. Several who were asked this year were also approach last year. Flood, Giuffra, Olson plus three others said no. Those lawyers were William Burck, who now counsels Reince Priebus, Steve Bannon and White House counsel Donald McGahn as Mueller witnesses; attorneys from the law firm Kirkland & Ellis; and trial lawyer Reid Weingarten of Steptoe & Johnson.
Dowd resigns as Trump's lawyer amid disagreements on strategy
Dowd resigns as Trump's lawyer amid disagreements on strategy
Even so, Trump continues to receive legal advice from several commentators and longtime confidants. Marc Kasowitz continues to speak with the President regularly, for instance. Kasowitz's law firm in New York, which advised Trump to push back against Mueller publicly early on, took a diminished role on the team months ago.
The President has also tweeted in support of the legal punditry of Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has criticized Mueller. Dershowitz said he's uninterested in officially joining the team.
Trump has a few other large law firms and well-known lawyers still in his orbit. They handle everything from lawsuits to his taxes. Aside from the White House counsel's office, those lawyers include Charles Harder, who is defending Trump in his Stormy Daniels litigation; the law firm Jones Day, which defends the Trump campaign in court; the Republican campaign finance expert and trial lawyer Bobby Burchfield, acting as an independent ethics adviser for the Trump family business interests; and the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, which set up a trust for Trump's business assets last year.
CNN's Pamela Brown contributed to this report.
Anchor Muted Background
By Katelyn Polantz, CNN
Updated 0843 GMT (1643 HKT) March 28, 2018
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 23: Richard Gates arrives at the Prettyman Federal Courthouse for a hearing February 23, 2018 in Washington, DC. Gates is expected to plead guilty to a 12-charge indictment that includes money laundering and conspiracy.
(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Ex-Trump campaign aide Rick Gates pleads guilty
Paul Manafort, former campaign manager for Donald Trump, center, arrives at the U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2018. Manafort and Rick Gates, former deputy campaign manager for Donald Trump, were accused in an Oct. 27 indictment of failing to register as agents in the U.S. for political consulting they did for Ukraine and pro-Russian politicians. They were also accused of conspiring to launder millions of dollars and hiding offshore bank accounts. Both men have pleaded not guilty. Photographer: Zach Gibson/Bloomberg via Getty Images
New charges against Manafort in Mueller probe
Senior Advisor Jared Kushner listens as US President Donald
Sources: Mueller's interest in Kushner grows
phil mudd 021518
Mudd: One of the biggest losers is Devin Nunes
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, special counsel on the Russian investigation, leaves following a meeting with members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on June 21, 2017.
Mueller charges lawyer with lying about Gates interaction
LA Times: Ex-Trump aide to plead guilty
Clapper: More shoes will drop in Russia probe
Steve Bannon questioned by special counsel
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 22: U.S. President Donald Trump talks with journalists after signing tax reform legislation into law in the Oval Office December 22, 2017 in Washington, DC. Trump praised Republican leaders in Congress for all their work on the biggest tax overhaul in decades. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)NOW PLAYING
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
John Dowd, lead attorney for Raj Rajaratnam, co-founder of Galleon Group LLC, enters federal court in New York, U.S., on Thursday, May 5, 2011.
Why did Trump's lead lawyer drop out now?
Jeff Flake SOTU 01
Flake: Hope GOP lawmakers stand up for Mueller
The Mueller investigation: Who could be next?
NEW YORK, NY - AUGUST 08: Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), speaks at the International Conference on Cyber Security (ICCS) on August 8, 2013 in New York City.
Mueller subpoenas Trump Organization documents
House Benghazi Committee Chairman, Trey Gowdy (R-SC), participates in a news conference with fellow Committee Republicans after the release of the Committee's Benghazi report on Capitol Hill June 28, 2016 in Washington, DC.
Gowdy to Dowd: Act like Trump is innocent
Haberman: Mueller probe could go into summer
Sources: Mueller looks prior to Trump campaign
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
Ex-Trump campaign aide Rick Gates pleads guilty
Mudd: One of the biggest losers is Devin Nunes
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, special counsel on the Russian investigation, leaves following a meeting with members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on June 21, 2017.
Mueller charges lawyer with lying about Gates interaction
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 02: Richard Gates arrives at the Prettyman Federal Court Building for a hearing November 2, 2017 in Washington, DC. Gates and former business partner and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort both pleaded not guilty Monday to a 12-charge indictment that included money laundering and conspiracy. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
LA Times: Ex-Trump aide to plead guilty
Clapper: More shoes will drop in Russia probe
Lawyers decline to join Trump's defense team
John Dowd, lead attorney for Raj Rajaratnam, co-founder of Galleon Group LLC, enters federal court in New York, U.S., on Thursday, May 5, 2011.
Why did Trump's lead lawyer drop out now?
Jeff Flake SOTU 01
Flake: Hope GOP lawmakers stand up for Mueller
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 21: Special counsel Robert Mueller (2nd L) leaves after a closed meeting with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee June 21, 2017 at the Capitol in Washington, DC. The committee meets with Mueller to discuss the firing of former FBI Director James Comey. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
The Mueller investigation: Who could be next?
NEW YORK, NY - AUGUST 08: Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), speaks at the International Conference on Cyber Security (ICCS) on August 8, 2013 in New York City.
Mueller subpoenas Trump Organization documents
House Benghazi Committee Chairman, Trey Gowdy (R-SC), participates in a news conference with fellow Committee Republicans after the release of the Committee's Benghazi report on Capitol Hill June 28, 2016 in Washington, DC.
Gowdy to Dowd: Act like Trump is innocent
Haberman: Mueller probe could go into summer
Sources: Mueller looks prior to Trump campaign
New charges filed against Manafort, Gates
(CNN)Several top US law firms have left President Donald Trump with few places to turn for legal help in the Russia probe.
Five large law firms are passing on the opportunity to represent the President after a shakeup last week on his private defense team and as he anticipates giving possible testimony to special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
Well-known Washington lawyers cited several reasons for declining the President in recent weeks, according to multiple sources familiar with their decisions. Among them, Trump appears to be a difficult client and has rebuked some of his lawyers' advice. He's perceived as so politically unpopular he may damage reputations rather than boost them. Lawyers at large firms fear backlash from their corporate clients if they were to represent the President. And many want to steer clear of conflicts of interest that could complicate their other obligations.
Two more lawyers decline to join Trump legal team
Two more lawyers decline to join Trump legal team
"With a figure who is as polarizing as the President, it makes the decision about whether to represent him a more difficult one," said Philip West, chairman of large Washington law firm Steptoe & Johnson. The firm was among several to decline to represent Trump last year. "Any large law firm has clients that have very strong feelings."
Even in a city with such a sizable legal industry, so many top lawyers and large law offices with white-collar and national security specialists have already been hired by witnesses, subjects and companies involved in the Mueller probe. Thus, few in town can take new clients at the center of it.
Trump tweets 'many lawyers and top law firms' want to join his legal team
Trump tweets 'many lawyers and top law firms' want to join his legal team
The result is a previously unheard-of Washington problem: The President of the United States is struggling to build an experienced, large legal defense team as the special prosecutor digs in to his campaign and administration. His official legal defense team consists of two lawyers, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow, neither affiliated with a traditional law firm.
The latest to turn down the invitation, Dan Webb and Tom Buchanan of the law firm Winston & Strawn, said Tuesday they "were unable to take on the representation due to business conflicts." Webb and others at the firm represent the Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash in a criminal money laundering case in Chicago, where he continues to face possible extradition from Austria. Firtash was previously a business contact of indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, making the Ukrainian potentially connected to the Mueller probe.
The lawyer Trump wants to represent him has been dead for 32 years
The lawyer Trump wants to represent him has been dead for 32 years
"However they consider the opportunity to represent the President to be the highest honor and they sincerely regret that they cannot do so," Webb and Buchanan's statement said. "They wish the President the best and believe he has excellent representation in Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow."
While Sekulow, the leader of a non-profit religious advocacy legal group and a talk radio personality, is Trump's sole remaining private defense counsel, Cobb works within the White House as a special counsel overseeing the Russia probe response.
When asked who would lead Trump's legal defense team on Tuesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said that "the President has a highly qualified team." She referred further questions to Sekulow.
Other lawyers who received recent requests to help with the Russia include former US Solicitor General Ted Olson; Emmet Flood, who's worked for multiple presidents and still may join the White House counsel's office; Robert Bennett, Bill Clinton's attorney in the Paula Jones litigation; and Bob Giuffra, a New York litigator with the high-end firm Sullivan & Cromwell.
John Dowd's resignation tells you a lot about Donald Trump's mindset
John Dowd's resignation tells you a lot about Donald Trump's mindset
Olson, Bennett and Giuffra all said no shortly after they were asked. The invitations became public last week when John Dowd, Trump's private attorney for Mueller matters, quit. Dowd, who previously worked for a large firm and handled several high-profile trials, was central to determining Trump's legal strategy and negotiating with Mueller's office. Trump then failed last week to bring aboard a husband-and-wife replacement team to aid Sekulow, after announcing that Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing would join his team. Sekulow cited conflicts as the problem.
A source familiar with the White House said other lawyers in Washington and New York have reached out to help and could still join the team. The person would not name those lawyers, or explain the timeline.
Earlier this week, Bennett told Politico he hoped Cobb would leave the White House. "He's not helping himself or his reputation," Bennett said.
Trump says he still 'would like to' testify before Mueller
Trump says he still 'would like to' testify before Mueller
Olson said on MSNBC on Monday that Trump's White House is in "chaos" and "beyond normal." Olson declined to speculate on what kind of legal help Trump may still need.
Ted Boutrous, another top partner at Olson's firm, said Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher almost immediately declined to represent the President. Boutrous counsels Fusion GPS in court cases over the so-called dossier of Trump opposition research it funded. He wouldn't speak about his law firm's thinking in declining Trump, but pointed out how lawyers can't take on clients when other clients' interests might conflict. The firm also handled Facebook's response to Mueller in recent months.
Boutrous added the President is a "notoriously difficult client who disregards the advice of his lawyers and asks them to engage in questionable activities."
(Another personal attorney to Trump, Michael Cohen, is caught in a legal fight over a nondisclosure agreement made on Trump's behalf with the porn star Stormy Daniels.)
Among the lawyers Trump has considered on Russia issues, Flood still may be willing to work alongside the President. He is a candidate for a position in the Trump White House counsel's office, which handles official White House legal questions, such as the selection of judges and reviewing policy proposals.
This isn't the first time well-known attorneys declined to help Trump against Mueller. Several who were asked this year were also approach last year. Flood, Giuffra, Olson plus three others said no. Those lawyers were William Burck, who now counsels Reince Priebus, Steve Bannon and White House counsel Donald McGahn as Mueller witnesses; attorneys from the law firm Kirkland & Ellis; and trial lawyer Reid Weingarten of Steptoe & Johnson.
Dowd resigns as Trump's lawyer amid disagreements on strategy
Dowd resigns as Trump's lawyer amid disagreements on strategy
Even so, Trump continues to receive legal advice from several commentators and longtime confidants. Marc Kasowitz continues to speak with the President regularly, for instance. Kasowitz's law firm in New York, which advised Trump to push back against Mueller publicly early on, took a diminished role on the team months ago.
The President has also tweeted in support of the legal punditry of Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has criticized Mueller. Dershowitz said he's uninterested in officially joining the team.
Trump has a few other large law firms and well-known lawyers still in his orbit. They handle everything from lawsuits to his taxes. Aside from the White House counsel's office, those lawyers include Charles Harder, who is defending Trump in his Stormy Daniels litigation; the law firm Jones Day, which defends the Trump campaign in court; the Republican campaign finance expert and trial lawyer Bobby Burchfield, acting as an independent ethics adviser for the Trump family business interests; and the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, which set up a trust for Trump's business assets last year.
CNN's Pamela Brown contributed to this report.
Kim Jong-un was in Beijing, China and NK confirm - BBC News
28/3/2018
Kim Jong-un was in Beijing, China and NK confirm
Chinese TV showed footage of the two leaders with their wives
After days of speculation, it has been confirmed that North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un did pay a visit to Beijing.
The visit, confirmed by China and North Korea, was Mr Kim's first known foreign trip since taking office in 2011.
He held "successful talks" with President Xi Jinping, China's Xinhua news agency reported.
China is North Korea's main economic ally and it was thought highly likely it would consult Beijing before planned summits with South Korea and the US.
Mr Kim is due to meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in in April, and US President Donald Trump in May.
The Beijing visit is considered a significant step in North Korea's preparation for the proposed talks.
What did the two leaders discuss?
Mr Kim arrived with his wife, Ri Sol-ju, by train on Sunday and left Beijing on Tuesday afternoon, according to reports.
During the visit, Mr Kim assured his Chinese counterpart he was committed to giving up his nuclear weapons, Xinhua reported, but with conditions.
"The issue of denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula can be resolved, if South Korea and the United States respond to our efforts with goodwill, create an atmosphere of peace and stability while taking progressive and synchronous measures for the realisation of peace," Mr Kim was reported saying.
Why Xi's the one Kim still needs to see
Reading the moves - what our correspondents make of the visit
The North's conditions include the removal of a US nuclear guarantee for South Korea, observers say.
North Korea's KCNA news agency called the visit "a milestone" in improving bilateral ties.
Mr Kim's arrival and departure were shrouded in secrecy. China said the visit was "unofficial" - so there was no announcement of it in advance, prompting speculation about who was on the train when it was spotted arriving.
Because of the unofficial status of the visit, some of the normal protocols for foreign visits were not observed. For example no North Korean country flags were hung around the Great Hall of the People on Tiananmen Square.
Why is Kim's visit so significant?
It's the latest in a flurry of diplomatic activity since the start of the year sparked by the Winter Olympics in South Korea.
North Korea crisis in 300 words
US-N Korea talks: What could happen now?
Profile: Kim Jong-un
Relations between North Korea and China, historically strong, had been deteriorating, with China backing US moves to tighten international sanctions in response to the North's growing nuclear threat.
But China, a military giant over the border, is still responsible for virtually all of North Korea's food and fuel aid.
It has largely been an observer of the recent diplomatic moves by Pyongyang towards the US and South Korea.
"It makes sense for North Korea to explain their positions and co-ordinate with China, their most important partner," Andray Abrahamian, research fellow at Pacific Forum CSIS, told the BBC.
"Relations have been extremely strained the last five years and China has been sidelined in the diplomacy of the last several months," he said.
"From Beijing's perspective, this is a visit that should have happened some time ago."
Japanese media first reported rumours of the visit earlier this week
To some extent, this is a "symbolic visit of courtesy" to China, Fyodor Tertitskiy of North Korea monitoring site NK News, said.
"They have two upcoming summits - one with Seoul and one with Washington - and they are probably interested in hearing the Chinese position as well."
KCNA also said Mr Xi had accepted an invitation to return the visit.
There's a 'bizarre logic' to the North's stance
Stephen McDonell, BBC News, Beijing
The comments China's media attributed to both leaders are pretty illuminating if true.
Mr Kim reportedly told Mr Xi that because "the situation is developing rapidly" he felt he should come to Beijing in person "out of comradeship and moral responsibility".
Given how tense relations have been recently, following China's imposition of tough economic sanctions, it's significant that Kim made Beijing his first foreign trip, before his planned meetings with Moon and Trump.
Crucially, Xi reportedly said China "sticks to the goal of denuclearisation of the peninsula" and Kim responded: "It is our consistent stand to be committed to denuclearisation."
This may sound bizarre, but there is logic there. They would argue that if they felt sufficiently secure there would be no need for such weapons.
The fact that Kim is on the record saying this in Beijing in front of Xi may show that the North Koreans are paving the way for a face-saving nuclear disarmament.
How does the US view the meeting?
China briefed the Trump administration on Tuesday on the visit, Washington confirmed.
Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump: From enemies to frenemies?
"We see this development as further evidence that our campaign of maximum pressure is creating the appropriate atmosphere for dialogue with North Korea," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.
Trump: N Korea talks could bring world's 'greatest deal'
The political gamble of the 21st Century
Last month, Mr Trump accepted an unprecedented invitation to meet Mr Kim, after months of hostility and North Korean missile tests.
If the summit goes ahead, Mr Trump would become the first sitting US president to meet a North Korean leader.
Kim Jong-un was in Beijing, China and NK confirm
Chinese TV showed footage of the two leaders with their wives
After days of speculation, it has been confirmed that North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un did pay a visit to Beijing.
The visit, confirmed by China and North Korea, was Mr Kim's first known foreign trip since taking office in 2011.
He held "successful talks" with President Xi Jinping, China's Xinhua news agency reported.
China is North Korea's main economic ally and it was thought highly likely it would consult Beijing before planned summits with South Korea and the US.
Mr Kim is due to meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in in April, and US President Donald Trump in May.
The Beijing visit is considered a significant step in North Korea's preparation for the proposed talks.
What did the two leaders discuss?
Mr Kim arrived with his wife, Ri Sol-ju, by train on Sunday and left Beijing on Tuesday afternoon, according to reports.
During the visit, Mr Kim assured his Chinese counterpart he was committed to giving up his nuclear weapons, Xinhua reported, but with conditions.
"The issue of denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula can be resolved, if South Korea and the United States respond to our efforts with goodwill, create an atmosphere of peace and stability while taking progressive and synchronous measures for the realisation of peace," Mr Kim was reported saying.
Why Xi's the one Kim still needs to see
Reading the moves - what our correspondents make of the visit
The North's conditions include the removal of a US nuclear guarantee for South Korea, observers say.
North Korea's KCNA news agency called the visit "a milestone" in improving bilateral ties.
Mr Kim's arrival and departure were shrouded in secrecy. China said the visit was "unofficial" - so there was no announcement of it in advance, prompting speculation about who was on the train when it was spotted arriving.
Because of the unofficial status of the visit, some of the normal protocols for foreign visits were not observed. For example no North Korean country flags were hung around the Great Hall of the People on Tiananmen Square.
Why is Kim's visit so significant?
It's the latest in a flurry of diplomatic activity since the start of the year sparked by the Winter Olympics in South Korea.
North Korea crisis in 300 words
US-N Korea talks: What could happen now?
Profile: Kim Jong-un
Relations between North Korea and China, historically strong, had been deteriorating, with China backing US moves to tighten international sanctions in response to the North's growing nuclear threat.
But China, a military giant over the border, is still responsible for virtually all of North Korea's food and fuel aid.
It has largely been an observer of the recent diplomatic moves by Pyongyang towards the US and South Korea.
"It makes sense for North Korea to explain their positions and co-ordinate with China, their most important partner," Andray Abrahamian, research fellow at Pacific Forum CSIS, told the BBC.
"Relations have been extremely strained the last five years and China has been sidelined in the diplomacy of the last several months," he said.
"From Beijing's perspective, this is a visit that should have happened some time ago."
Japanese media first reported rumours of the visit earlier this week
To some extent, this is a "symbolic visit of courtesy" to China, Fyodor Tertitskiy of North Korea monitoring site NK News, said.
"They have two upcoming summits - one with Seoul and one with Washington - and they are probably interested in hearing the Chinese position as well."
KCNA also said Mr Xi had accepted an invitation to return the visit.
There's a 'bizarre logic' to the North's stance
Stephen McDonell, BBC News, Beijing
The comments China's media attributed to both leaders are pretty illuminating if true.
Mr Kim reportedly told Mr Xi that because "the situation is developing rapidly" he felt he should come to Beijing in person "out of comradeship and moral responsibility".
Given how tense relations have been recently, following China's imposition of tough economic sanctions, it's significant that Kim made Beijing his first foreign trip, before his planned meetings with Moon and Trump.
Crucially, Xi reportedly said China "sticks to the goal of denuclearisation of the peninsula" and Kim responded: "It is our consistent stand to be committed to denuclearisation."
This may sound bizarre, but there is logic there. They would argue that if they felt sufficiently secure there would be no need for such weapons.
The fact that Kim is on the record saying this in Beijing in front of Xi may show that the North Koreans are paving the way for a face-saving nuclear disarmament.
How does the US view the meeting?
China briefed the Trump administration on Tuesday on the visit, Washington confirmed.
Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump: From enemies to frenemies?
"We see this development as further evidence that our campaign of maximum pressure is creating the appropriate atmosphere for dialogue with North Korea," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.
Trump: N Korea talks could bring world's 'greatest deal'
The political gamble of the 21st Century
Last month, Mr Trump accepted an unprecedented invitation to meet Mr Kim, after months of hostility and North Korean missile tests.
If the summit goes ahead, Mr Trump would become the first sitting US president to meet a North Korean leader.
Spy poisoning: Nato expels Russian diplomats - BBC News
Spy poisoning: Nato expels Russian diplomats
27 March 2018
Share this with Facebook Share this with Twitter Share this with Messenger Share this with Email Share
Related TopicsRussian spy poisoning
Media captionEurovision-style? The BBC's Steve Rosenberg on how the Russian media is reporting the score-settling
Nato is expelling seven Russian diplomats in response to a nerve agent attack in the UK.
The international security organisation's chief said the move would send a message to Russia that there are "costs and consequences" for its behaviour.
Twenty-six countries have expelled Russian envoys in the past two days, in solidarity with the UK.
They all believe Russia was behind the poisoning of two people in Salisbury.
Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned on 4 March in the southern English city, and investigators say a military-grade nerve agent was used.
Russian has denied involvement.
Speaking in Brussels, Nato chief Jens Stoltenberg said he would also deny pending accreditation for three Russian staff, and would reduce the size of Russia's mission from 30 to 20.
Nato made a similar move in 2015, in response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. Before that, there were 60 Russia personnel at its Belgium headquarters.
Russian media accuse West of 'crusade'
What the diplomat expulsions tell us
Earlier, Russia accused the US of pressuring other countries to join the mass expulsion of its diplomats.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Washington of "colossal blackmail" and said there were "few independent countries" left in modern Europe.
Mr Skripal and his daughter remain stable but critical in hospital.
What is Russia's response?
Mr Lavrov said it was inevitable that there would be a response to the mass expulsion. He singled out the US for blame.
"When one or two diplomats are being expelled from this or that country, all the while whispering apologies in our ear, we know for sure that this is a result of colossal pressure, colossal blackmail, which unfortunately is Washington's main tool now on the international area," he said.
"It is hard to escape a conclusion that we were right when we stressed several times that there remain few independent countries in the modern world, modern Europe."
Viktoria Skripal, the niece of the poisoned Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, told the BBC she hopes a miracle will happen.
Russia's foreign ministry is said to be drawing up a number of possible retaliatory measures for President Vladimir Putin to consider.
What next for Russia’s spy networks?
What was the Cold War?
One Russian senator, Vladimir Dzhabarov, was quoted as saying there would be a "tit-for-tat" response to the US decision to expel 48 envoys at the Russian embassy in Washington and 12 more at the UN in New York.
Mr Lavrov's deputy, Sergei Ryabkov, earlier said a tough response was needed but stressed Moscow would not abandon strategic stability talks with Washington.
Who is expelling diplomats?
A total of 27 nations have now announced the expulsion of more than 140 Russian diplomats.
Moldova, Ireland, Australia and Belgium are the latest countries to act, after the UK made the first move by expelling 23 envoys earlier this month.
Belgium said it would expel one diplomat, having previously indicated it might not take the step because it played host to the headquarters of the EU and Nato. Its announcement came after Nato made its statement.
The majority of the countries making the move are either members of Nato or the EU, or both.
Nato's Mr Stoltenberg said: "The practical implication of course is that Russia will have a reduced capability to do intelligence work."
President of the European Council Donald Tusk said he would not rule out further measures.
Has the Russian row given UK diplomacy new focus?
Ex-spy asked Putin if he could return
Inside UK lab that identified ex-spy nerve agent
UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has praised the "extraordinary international response" by the UK's allies. He said "the world has had enough" of Russia's behaviour but rejected suggestions a new Cold War was dawning.
Boris Johnson on widespread expulsions of Russian diplomats
Who is not expelling Russians?
EU countries that have said they have no intention of expelling diplomats include Austria, Greece and Portugal, although all have said they support the UK and condemn the poisoning.
Austria's Chancellor Sebastian Kurz tweeted that while he backed the EU, "as a neutral country we will not expel any diplomats", preferring to "act as a bridge-builder between East and West".
Skip Twitter post by @sebastiankurz
Sebastian Kurz
✔
@sebastiankurz
Ö steht hinter d klaren Erklärung d Europäischen Rates u d Entscheidung,d #EU-Botschafter aus #Moskau zurückzurufen.Als neutrales Land werden wir aber keine Diplomaten ausweisen. Vielmehr wollen wir Brückenbauer zwischen Ost u West sein&Gesprächskanäle nach #Russland offenhalten.
3:20 AM - Mar 27, 2018
Russian spy: The story so far
Full coverage of the Russia spy poisoning
New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said it did not have any undeclared Russian intelligence officers, but added: "If we did, we would expel them."
Is there a diplomatic boycott of the World Cup?
The World Cup starts in Russia in June and the UK said earlier this month it would not send ministers or members of the Royal Family.
On Monday, Iceland said its leaders will not attend the football tournament. Others have mooted the idea.
Australia's Foreign Minister Julie Bishop mooted the possibility of boycotting the World Cup altogether.
27 March 2018
Share this with Facebook Share this with Twitter Share this with Messenger Share this with Email Share
Related TopicsRussian spy poisoning
Media captionEurovision-style? The BBC's Steve Rosenberg on how the Russian media is reporting the score-settling
Nato is expelling seven Russian diplomats in response to a nerve agent attack in the UK.
The international security organisation's chief said the move would send a message to Russia that there are "costs and consequences" for its behaviour.
Twenty-six countries have expelled Russian envoys in the past two days, in solidarity with the UK.
They all believe Russia was behind the poisoning of two people in Salisbury.
Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned on 4 March in the southern English city, and investigators say a military-grade nerve agent was used.
Russian has denied involvement.
Speaking in Brussels, Nato chief Jens Stoltenberg said he would also deny pending accreditation for three Russian staff, and would reduce the size of Russia's mission from 30 to 20.
Nato made a similar move in 2015, in response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. Before that, there were 60 Russia personnel at its Belgium headquarters.
Russian media accuse West of 'crusade'
What the diplomat expulsions tell us
Earlier, Russia accused the US of pressuring other countries to join the mass expulsion of its diplomats.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Washington of "colossal blackmail" and said there were "few independent countries" left in modern Europe.
Mr Skripal and his daughter remain stable but critical in hospital.
What is Russia's response?
Mr Lavrov said it was inevitable that there would be a response to the mass expulsion. He singled out the US for blame.
"When one or two diplomats are being expelled from this or that country, all the while whispering apologies in our ear, we know for sure that this is a result of colossal pressure, colossal blackmail, which unfortunately is Washington's main tool now on the international area," he said.
"It is hard to escape a conclusion that we were right when we stressed several times that there remain few independent countries in the modern world, modern Europe."
Viktoria Skripal, the niece of the poisoned Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, told the BBC she hopes a miracle will happen.
Russia's foreign ministry is said to be drawing up a number of possible retaliatory measures for President Vladimir Putin to consider.
What next for Russia’s spy networks?
What was the Cold War?
One Russian senator, Vladimir Dzhabarov, was quoted as saying there would be a "tit-for-tat" response to the US decision to expel 48 envoys at the Russian embassy in Washington and 12 more at the UN in New York.
Mr Lavrov's deputy, Sergei Ryabkov, earlier said a tough response was needed but stressed Moscow would not abandon strategic stability talks with Washington.
Who is expelling diplomats?
A total of 27 nations have now announced the expulsion of more than 140 Russian diplomats.
Moldova, Ireland, Australia and Belgium are the latest countries to act, after the UK made the first move by expelling 23 envoys earlier this month.
Belgium said it would expel one diplomat, having previously indicated it might not take the step because it played host to the headquarters of the EU and Nato. Its announcement came after Nato made its statement.
The majority of the countries making the move are either members of Nato or the EU, or both.
Nato's Mr Stoltenberg said: "The practical implication of course is that Russia will have a reduced capability to do intelligence work."
President of the European Council Donald Tusk said he would not rule out further measures.
Has the Russian row given UK diplomacy new focus?
Ex-spy asked Putin if he could return
Inside UK lab that identified ex-spy nerve agent
UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has praised the "extraordinary international response" by the UK's allies. He said "the world has had enough" of Russia's behaviour but rejected suggestions a new Cold War was dawning.
Boris Johnson on widespread expulsions of Russian diplomats
Who is not expelling Russians?
EU countries that have said they have no intention of expelling diplomats include Austria, Greece and Portugal, although all have said they support the UK and condemn the poisoning.
Austria's Chancellor Sebastian Kurz tweeted that while he backed the EU, "as a neutral country we will not expel any diplomats", preferring to "act as a bridge-builder between East and West".
Skip Twitter post by @sebastiankurz
Sebastian Kurz
✔
@sebastiankurz
Ö steht hinter d klaren Erklärung d Europäischen Rates u d Entscheidung,d #EU-Botschafter aus #Moskau zurückzurufen.Als neutrales Land werden wir aber keine Diplomaten ausweisen. Vielmehr wollen wir Brückenbauer zwischen Ost u West sein&Gesprächskanäle nach #Russland offenhalten.
3:20 AM - Mar 27, 2018
Russian spy: The story so far
Full coverage of the Russia spy poisoning
New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said it did not have any undeclared Russian intelligence officers, but added: "If we did, we would expel them."
Is there a diplomatic boycott of the World Cup?
The World Cup starts in Russia in June and the UK said earlier this month it would not send ministers or members of the Royal Family.
On Monday, Iceland said its leaders will not attend the football tournament. Others have mooted the idea.
Australia's Foreign Minister Julie Bishop mooted the possibility of boycotting the World Cup altogether.
These Companies Have Cut Their Ties With Facebook Amid the Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal - TIME Business
These Companies Have Cut Their Ties With Facebook Amid the Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 04:56 PM PDT
In the wake of Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica data scandal, some high-profile companies have suspended ties with the social network amid the controversy.
Earlier this month, it was revealed that Facebook allowed a researcher from Cambridge Analytica — which worked on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign — to use data collected from 50 million users without their consent. A wave of backlash ensued, Facebook’s stock plummeted, and the Federal Trade Commission is now investigating the company. On top of this, companies are distancing themselves from Facebook despite CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s apologies and vows to safeguard users’ privacy.
Here’s a list of companies that have cut ties with Facebook in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
Mozilla
In a statement last week, the maker of the popular Firefox web browser said it is “pressing pause” on its advertising campaign on Facebook.
“We are encouraged that Mark Zuckerberg has promised to improve the privacy settings and make them more protective,” the company said. “When Facebook takes stronger action in how it shares customer data, specifically strengthening its default privacy settings for third party apps, we’ll consider returning.”
We champion platforms and technologies that are good for the web *and* for people. We stand up for transparency & user control because they make the web healthier for us all.
That’s why we’re taking a break from Facebook.
More here: https://t.co/ofeyIwO1FN
— Mozilla (@mozilla) March 22, 2018
Sonos
The consumer electronics company announced it was pulling ads from not only Facebook, but its subsidiary Instagram — as well as Google, YouTube and Twitter — but only for a week, starting Monday.
“We are concerned by the recent revelations about Facebook and the exploitation of its platform,” Sonos wrote in a blog post. “The Cambridge Analytica scandal, like many recent headlines coming out of Silicon Valley, raises questions about whether Big Tech is doing enough to balance its own interests with one of its biggest responsibilities: Safeguarding your privacy.”
Additionally, Sonos said it would go dark on its Facebook and Instagram accounts for a week “in solidarity with those seeking to build a healthier, more consumer-friendly tech ecosystem.”
Pep Boys
On Monday, auto parts and service retailer Pep Boys said it was halting its advertising on Facebook as a result of the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
“We are concerned about the issues surrounding Facebook and have decided to suspend all media on the platform until the facts are out and corrective actions have been taken,” Pep Boys chief marketing officer Danielle Porto Mohn told Reuters.
Pep Boys did not give a timeline on when it might resume advertising on Facebook — if at all.
SpaceX and Tesla
Elon Musk made his feelings about Facebook pretty clear when he agreed to remove pages for two of his companies from the social network as part of a Twitter challenge.
While Musk hasn’t explicitly said that he deleted SpaceX and Tesla’s Facebook pages because of the Cambridge Analytica controversy, the challenge arose from a call by WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton to delete Facebook in the wake of the scandal. (Facebook bought WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014.)
It is time. #deletefacebook
— Brian Acton (@brianacton) March 20, 2018
When challenged to delete SpaxeX’s Facebook profile by a Twitter user replying to Acton’s tweet, Musk replied, “I didn’t realize there was one. Will do.”
I didn’t realize there was one. Will do.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 23, 2018
When asked whether he would do the same for Tesla’s page, Musk responded, “Definitely. Looks lame anyway.”
Definitely. Looks lame anyway.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 23, 2018
Musk added that his companies weren’t suspending advertising on Facebook because they never advertised in the first place. “None of my companies buy advertising or pay famous people to fake endorse,” Musk said in a tweet. “Product lives or dies on its own merits.”
Commerzbank
Germany’s second-largest bank, based in Frankfurt, said it would not advertise on Facebook until further notice.
“We are pausing our campaign on Facebook. Brand safety and data security are very important to us,” Commerzbank head of brand strategy Uwe Hellmann told German business newspaper Handelsblatt, according to Reuters.
Stock Market Surges on News That U.S. and China Hope to Avert a Trade War
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 02:33 PM PDT
News that the U.S. and China are open to negotiating to avert a trade war put investors in a buying mood Monday, giving the market its best day in more than two years and erasing about half of its huge losses last week.
Technology companies accounted for much of the broad rally, which powered the Dow Jones industrial average to a gain of nearly 670 points. Microsoft was the biggest gainer in the 30-company Dow and the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, climbing nearly 8 percent.
Banks also notched solid gains, benefiting from a pickup in bond yields. Retailers, consumer goods companies and health care stocks were among the big gainers.
The market rebound followed the worst week for U.S. stocks in two years as investors traded last week’s jitters for a more optimistic outlook on trade, and an opportunity to buy.
“Certainly nothing’s settled,” said Rob Haworth, senior investment strategist at U.S. Bank Wealth Management. “Investors are still viewing this as a glass half-full market and a constructive economy, so it’s not surprising to see them buy on value here, buy on dips to try to rebuild their positions.”
The Standard & Poor’s 500 index rose 70.29 points, or 2.7 percent, to 2,658.55. The Dow Jones industrial average gained 669.40 points, or 2.8 percent, to 24,202.60. The Dow lost more than 1,400 points last week and is still down slightly for the year.
The Nasdaq added 227.88 points, or 3.3 percent, to 7,220.54. The Russell 2000 index of smaller-company stocks picked up 33.63 points, or 2.2 percent, to 1,543.72.
All told, the Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq posted their best one-day gains since August 2015, making up slightly more than half of the market’s losses on Thursday and Friday.
Global stock markets fell sharply last week amid fears of a trade war after President Donald Trump announced duties on $60 billion worth of Chinese goods in a dispute over technology policy. On Friday, Beijing released a $3 billion list of U.S. goods targeted for possible retaliation over an earlier U.S. tariff hike on steel and aluminum imports. That prompted fears the spat might depress trade worldwide and set back the global economic recovery.
Those fears eased Monday, after China’s government said it is open to negotiating with Washington. That announcement followed a news report indicating that U.S. officials have submitted a list of market-opening requests.
A foreign ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, didn’t confirm the report by The Wall Street Journal but said at a regular briefing, “Our door for dialogue and discussion is always open.”
China has yet to say how it might respond to Trump’s tariff proposals. That didn’t appear to dampen investors’ resurgent optimism Monday.
“This declaration of tariffs on the president’s part was his typical opening salvo into a negotiation process,” said Randy Frederick, vice president of trading & derivatives at Charles Schwab. “He’s done these things in the past, and now it looks like the markets are telling us, ‘Yep, that’s what’s happening.'”
Meanwhile, a top trade negotiator for South Korea said Monday that the nation has agreed to further open its auto market to the United States as the two countries prepare to amend their six-year-old trade agreement.
Technology companies recouped some of the sector’s big losses last week. Microsoft rose $6.60, or 7.6 percent, to $93.78.
Financial stocks surged as bond yields rose. Higher yields are good for banks, because they drive up interest rates on mortgages and other loans, making them more profitable for lenders. Bank of America added $1.27, or 4.4 percent, to $30.44.
The yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 2.85 percent from 2.81 percent late Friday.
Lowe’s climbed 6.6 percent after the home-improvement retailer said Chairman and CEO Robert Niblock is retiring. The stock gained $5.53 to $89.30.
Facebook ended barely higher after erasing an early slide triggered by new questions about collecting phone numbers and text messages from Android devices. The Federal Trade Commission confirmed Monday that it is investigating the social media giant’s privacy practices, including whether the company engaged in “unfair acts” that cause “substantial injury” to consumers. The stock eked out a gain of 67 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $160.06.
Traders also had their eye on the latest corporate deal news Monday.
Finish Line vaulted $3.28, or 31.1 percent, to $13.83 after the sporting goods retailer agreed to be bought by JD Sports Fashion PLC.
USG Corp. jumped $6.52, or 19.5 percent, to $40.03 after the building products company rejected an offer worth $42 per share from Knauf.
Benchmark U.S. crude fell 33 cents to settle at $65.55 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Brent crude, used to price international oils, shed 33 cents to close at $70.12 in London.
In other energy futures trading, heating oil was little changed at $2.02 a gallon. Wholesale gasoline lost 2 cents to $2.01 a gallon. Natural gas added 3 cents to $2.62 per 1,000 cubic feet.
Gold rose $5.10 to $1,355 an ounce. Silver gained 10 cents to $16.68 an ounce. Copper slipped 2 cents to $2.97 a pound.
The dollar rose to 105.22 yen from 104.82 yen on Friday. The euro strengthened to $1.2455 from $1.2367.
In Europe, Germany’s DAX fell 0.8 percent, while France’s CAC-40 lost 0.6 percent. Britain’s FTSE 100 shed 0.5 percent. In Asia, Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 added 0.7 percent, while Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 0.7 percent. Sydney’s S&P-ASX 200 fell 0.5 percent. Seoul’s Kospi gained 0.8 percent. India’s Sensex rose 0.3 percent.
Cambridge Analytica Whistleblower Tells U.K. Lawmakers His Predecessor Was Poisoned - TIME
Cambridge Analytica Whistleblower Tells U.K. Lawmakers His Predecessor Was Poisoned
Posted: 27 Mar 2018 05:31 AM PDT
Christopher Wylie, the former employee of Cambridge Analytica who alleged that the data firm had harvested data from 50 million Facebook users, told Members of Parliament in the U.K. that he believes his predecessor at the firm was poisoned in a Kenyan hotel room after a deal went wrong.
Wylie told a parliamentary select committee that he was told by the firm a few months after he began his position that the man whose job he took, Dan Muresan, had died in Kenya. Muresan was in his thirties when he died, said Wylie. Wylie emphasized that what he had heard was “pure speculation,” but that he had been told Muresan had been working on a political deal that soured, that Muresan had been poisoned, and that police had been bribed not to enter the hotel room.
“That is what I was told. I wasn’t there. I can’t speak to the veracity of the account, but thats what I was told,” he said.
Christopher Wylie was a part-time contractor who left in July 2014 and has no direct knowledge of our work or practices since that date.
— Cambridge Analytica (@CamAnalytica) March 27, 2018
Wylie is appearing before British lawmakers to testify about his role at Cambridge Analytica, which is under fire after Wylie alleged that it obtained data from millions of Facebook profiles without users knowledge in an effort to aid U.S. political campaigns, including President Donald Trump’s.
The firm tweeted Tuesday morning that anything Wylie knew about its operations was outdated, since he left in 2014. “Christopher Wylie was a part-time contractor who left in July 2014 and has no direct knowledge of our work or practices since that date,” the firm tweeted.
Cambridge Analytica has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and said it deleted the Facebook data when it learned it violated Facebook’s policies.
The revelations have led to calls from both Washington and London for new regulations on how Facebook and other firms handle user data.
Posted: 27 Mar 2018 05:31 AM PDT
Christopher Wylie, the former employee of Cambridge Analytica who alleged that the data firm had harvested data from 50 million Facebook users, told Members of Parliament in the U.K. that he believes his predecessor at the firm was poisoned in a Kenyan hotel room after a deal went wrong.
Wylie told a parliamentary select committee that he was told by the firm a few months after he began his position that the man whose job he took, Dan Muresan, had died in Kenya. Muresan was in his thirties when he died, said Wylie. Wylie emphasized that what he had heard was “pure speculation,” but that he had been told Muresan had been working on a political deal that soured, that Muresan had been poisoned, and that police had been bribed not to enter the hotel room.
“That is what I was told. I wasn’t there. I can’t speak to the veracity of the account, but thats what I was told,” he said.
Christopher Wylie was a part-time contractor who left in July 2014 and has no direct knowledge of our work or practices since that date.
— Cambridge Analytica (@CamAnalytica) March 27, 2018
Wylie is appearing before British lawmakers to testify about his role at Cambridge Analytica, which is under fire after Wylie alleged that it obtained data from millions of Facebook profiles without users knowledge in an effort to aid U.S. political campaigns, including President Donald Trump’s.
The firm tweeted Tuesday morning that anything Wylie knew about its operations was outdated, since he left in 2014. “Christopher Wylie was a part-time contractor who left in July 2014 and has no direct knowledge of our work or practices since that date,” the firm tweeted.
Cambridge Analytica has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and said it deleted the Facebook data when it learned it violated Facebook’s policies.
The revelations have led to calls from both Washington and London for new regulations on how Facebook and other firms handle user data.
Remington Files for Bankruptcy Amid a ‘Trump Slump’ in Gun Sales - TIME Business
Remington Files for Bankruptcy Amid a ‘Trump Slump’ in Gun Sales
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 06:19 AM PDT
Remington Outdoor Co., the 200-year-old maker of rifles, handguns and bullets controlled by Cerberus Capital Management, filed for bankruptcy, after the election of a “true friend” to the White House ironically wound up stifling sales.
The chapter 11 filing in Delaware bankruptcy court Sunday comes with a revised plan to eliminate $620 million in debt, pay most creditors in full, and hand over most of the company to a group of lenders. Remington, which makes weapons for military, law enforcement, and hunting customers, had already outlined a plan on Feb. 12 to file for bankruptcy and give control to lenders including Franklin Resources Inc. and JPMorgan Asset Management.
The filing came after a weekend of marches across the U.S. seeking tighter laws to fight gun violence. Remington said in court filings that its efforts to finance a turnaround were complicated by parties who were reluctant to lend to a gunmaker. After approaching 30 potential lenders, financial adviser Lazard Freres & Co. found “the vast majority” indicated “they were reluctant.” Eight parties who entered into further discussions later declined, and one outside lender who had agreed to provide a $100 million bankruptcy loan changed its mind, according to the filing.
Remington’s fortunes took a hit last year after the election of Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed “ true friend” of the gun industry. Gun enthusiasts traditionally stock up on firearms at times when political winds suggest tighter gun control lies ahead. But Hillary Clinton’s defeat erased those fears, leaving retailers stuffed with unsold inventory.
Chief Financial Officer Stephen P. Jackson described the reason for the company’s demise as a “significant decline” in sales and revenues in the last year after it had increased production rates to meet demand in 2017 that never materialized.
The Madison, North Carolina-based company has 2,700 employees at seven U.S. manufacturing plants, according to court filings. It plans to win bankruptcy court approval of the restructuring by May 3.
Reorganization Terms
The turnaround differs slightly from a prior plan already negotiated with lenders that would cut debt by about $700 million and inject $145 million of new capital. The current plan will eliminate $620 million of funded debt in exchange for equity in a new company. Financing to get that done totals $338 million, including a $193 million asset-based loan, a $100 million debtor-in-possession financing loan, and a $45 million “bridge” or “rescue” loan from Remington’s parent company to its operating subsidiaries.
After the outside lender backed out of the $100 million loan, Remington got financing on better terms from its term-loan lenders and secured noteholders, according to the filing. The company seeks to keep fees for the loan under seal, according to a court request.
The reorganization will convert the rescue loan into 17.5 percent of equity in a new company, and the $100 million loan will convert to an exit loan, while the asset-based loan will be repaid in cash, according to court papers. Pre-bankruptcy term loan lenders will get 82.5 percent of the new parent entity, while third lien lenders will get cash and warrants. Current equity will be canceled.
The company has asked to forgo the usual procedure of filing a full schedule of its debts and assets and seek final approval of a plan by May 3.
Several Setbacks
Recent setbacks for Remington have included an aborted public offering in 2011 and an investor revolt after one of its rifles was used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting.
The troubles have been a blow to Cerberus, owned by private-equity billionaire Stephen Feinberg, who has been a prominent Trump supporter. New York-based Cerberus acquired Remington in 2007 and saddled it with almost $1 billion in debt.
After the Sandy Hook shooting, Cerberus announced it would sell the company, as its own agitated investors demanded an exit, but it failed to find a buyer.
Concerns about rising gun violence, mass shootings and accidents have prompted litigation, some of it including Remington. In 2016, the Massachusetts attorney general sought information from the company on complaints and recalls, citing an investigation into its compliance with state laws and regulations on gun safety. Remington has also been sued by individuals claiming some guns are defective, and voluntarily recalled some of its models.
Industry Pressure
The industry came under added pressure in February when a gunman using an AR-15 assault rifle was used in the Stoneman High School mass murder in Parkland, Florida, just days after Remington announced plans for a pre-arranged bankruptcy. That weapon was a Smith & Wesson, made by a unit of American Outdoor Brands Corp.
Remington, which began with a hand-built rifle in 1816, went on to supply more than half the ammunition used by U.S. and its allies in World War I and World War II, according to its website. It currently employs 3,500 people and is among the largest American manufacturers of ammunition and firearms.
More than 11 million firearms were manufactured in the U.S. in 2016, up from fewer than four million a decade ago, according to data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Another pillar of American gun industry, Colt Holding Co., also took a trip through bankruptcy in 2015.
The case is: In re Remington Outdoor Company Inc., 18-10684, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware (Delaware.)
Posted: 26 Mar 2018 06:19 AM PDT
Remington Outdoor Co., the 200-year-old maker of rifles, handguns and bullets controlled by Cerberus Capital Management, filed for bankruptcy, after the election of a “true friend” to the White House ironically wound up stifling sales.
The chapter 11 filing in Delaware bankruptcy court Sunday comes with a revised plan to eliminate $620 million in debt, pay most creditors in full, and hand over most of the company to a group of lenders. Remington, which makes weapons for military, law enforcement, and hunting customers, had already outlined a plan on Feb. 12 to file for bankruptcy and give control to lenders including Franklin Resources Inc. and JPMorgan Asset Management.
The filing came after a weekend of marches across the U.S. seeking tighter laws to fight gun violence. Remington said in court filings that its efforts to finance a turnaround were complicated by parties who were reluctant to lend to a gunmaker. After approaching 30 potential lenders, financial adviser Lazard Freres & Co. found “the vast majority” indicated “they were reluctant.” Eight parties who entered into further discussions later declined, and one outside lender who had agreed to provide a $100 million bankruptcy loan changed its mind, according to the filing.
Remington’s fortunes took a hit last year after the election of Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed “ true friend” of the gun industry. Gun enthusiasts traditionally stock up on firearms at times when political winds suggest tighter gun control lies ahead. But Hillary Clinton’s defeat erased those fears, leaving retailers stuffed with unsold inventory.
Chief Financial Officer Stephen P. Jackson described the reason for the company’s demise as a “significant decline” in sales and revenues in the last year after it had increased production rates to meet demand in 2017 that never materialized.
The Madison, North Carolina-based company has 2,700 employees at seven U.S. manufacturing plants, according to court filings. It plans to win bankruptcy court approval of the restructuring by May 3.
Reorganization Terms
The turnaround differs slightly from a prior plan already negotiated with lenders that would cut debt by about $700 million and inject $145 million of new capital. The current plan will eliminate $620 million of funded debt in exchange for equity in a new company. Financing to get that done totals $338 million, including a $193 million asset-based loan, a $100 million debtor-in-possession financing loan, and a $45 million “bridge” or “rescue” loan from Remington’s parent company to its operating subsidiaries.
After the outside lender backed out of the $100 million loan, Remington got financing on better terms from its term-loan lenders and secured noteholders, according to the filing. The company seeks to keep fees for the loan under seal, according to a court request.
The reorganization will convert the rescue loan into 17.5 percent of equity in a new company, and the $100 million loan will convert to an exit loan, while the asset-based loan will be repaid in cash, according to court papers. Pre-bankruptcy term loan lenders will get 82.5 percent of the new parent entity, while third lien lenders will get cash and warrants. Current equity will be canceled.
The company has asked to forgo the usual procedure of filing a full schedule of its debts and assets and seek final approval of a plan by May 3.
Several Setbacks
Recent setbacks for Remington have included an aborted public offering in 2011 and an investor revolt after one of its rifles was used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting.
The troubles have been a blow to Cerberus, owned by private-equity billionaire Stephen Feinberg, who has been a prominent Trump supporter. New York-based Cerberus acquired Remington in 2007 and saddled it with almost $1 billion in debt.
After the Sandy Hook shooting, Cerberus announced it would sell the company, as its own agitated investors demanded an exit, but it failed to find a buyer.
Concerns about rising gun violence, mass shootings and accidents have prompted litigation, some of it including Remington. In 2016, the Massachusetts attorney general sought information from the company on complaints and recalls, citing an investigation into its compliance with state laws and regulations on gun safety. Remington has also been sued by individuals claiming some guns are defective, and voluntarily recalled some of its models.
Industry Pressure
The industry came under added pressure in February when a gunman using an AR-15 assault rifle was used in the Stoneman High School mass murder in Parkland, Florida, just days after Remington announced plans for a pre-arranged bankruptcy. That weapon was a Smith & Wesson, made by a unit of American Outdoor Brands Corp.
Remington, which began with a hand-built rifle in 1816, went on to supply more than half the ammunition used by U.S. and its allies in World War I and World War II, according to its website. It currently employs 3,500 people and is among the largest American manufacturers of ammunition and firearms.
More than 11 million firearms were manufactured in the U.S. in 2016, up from fewer than four million a decade ago, according to data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Another pillar of American gun industry, Colt Holding Co., also took a trip through bankruptcy in 2015.
The case is: In re Remington Outdoor Company Inc., 18-10684, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware (Delaware.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
