Thursday, January 11, 2018

Trump-Russia inquiry: Why attacks on Robert Mueller are mounting - BBC News

Trump-Russia inquiry: Why attacks on Robert Mueller are mounting
Anthony Zurcher
North America reporter
@awzurcher on Twitter
17 December 2017
Attacks on Robert Mueller have been mounting
In recent weeks, conservative commentators and politicians have begun arguing, with growing intensity, that Robert Mueller's investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia is the result of an intentional effort by biased investigators to undermine the Trump presidency.
There are a number of components to the case they are presenting, from doubts about the impartiality of Mr Mueller and his team to questions about the integrity of the FBI and the Obama-era Justice Department.
Mueller improperly obtained emails, lawyer says
All of it could be setting the ground for new investigations into the FBI or Democrat Hillary Clinton's actions while secretary of state - something Mr Trump himself has suggested - or perhaps even for the president to order the end of Mr Mueller's probe.
Such an action would provoke a major political crisis and could have unpredictable consequences. For Mr Trump's defenders, it may be enough simply to mire Mr Mueller's investigation in a partisan morass. Here are some are some of the ways they're trying to do that.
Presentational grey line
Tell-tale texts?
Peter Strzok, a senior counter-intelligence agent in the FBI and until this summer a top member of Mr Mueller's special counsel team, has become Exhibit A of anti-Trump bias in the Russia investigation.
A Justice Department inspector general review of the FBI's handling of its 2016 election investigations unearthed text messages between Mr Strzok and Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer who also temporarily worked on the Mueller investigation and with whom Mr Strzok was having an extramarital affair.
Some of the messages, which were provided to reporters, showed the two had a hostility toward then-candidate Trump in 2016. Ms Page called Mr Trump a "loathsome human" in March, as the candidate was cementing his lead in the Republican primary field. Three months later - after Mr Trump had secured the nomination - Mr Strzok wrote that he was an "idiot" who said "bigoted nonsense".
In an August text, Mr Strzok discussed a meeting with then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in which Ms Page apparently had mentioned there was "no way" Mr Trump could be elected.
"I'm afraid we can't take that risk," Mr Strzok wrote. "It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40."
Some have theorised that the "insurance policy" in question was an FBI plan to destroy Mr Trump if he were to win. Others have suggested that it was simply a reference to the need to continue working the Trump-Russia investigation even though his election seemed unlikely.



Media captionPresident Trump renews attack on 'disgraceful' FBI
"It is very sad when you look at those documents," Mr Trump said on Friday, apparently referring to the texts. "And how they've done that is really, really disgraceful, and you have a lot of very angry people that are seeing it." He said it was a shame what had happened to the FBI and that it would be "rebuilt".
Since the first coverage of the story, reporters have reviewed more of the Strzok-Page texts and found the two made disparaging comments about a wide range of public figures, including Chelsea Clinton, Democrat Bernie Sanders, then-Attorney General Eric Holder, Republican presidential candidates Ted Cruz and John Kasich, and Mrs Clinton.
"I'm worried about what happens if HRC is elected," Mr Strzok wrote, referring to Mrs Clinton by her initials.
Why it could matter: If Mr Strzok, a high-ranking member of the FBI who officially launched the initial investigation of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, harboured anti-Trump animus, there is the possibility it could have motivated him to influence the investigation to the president's disadvantage.
Why it might not: Government employees are allowed to express political views as long as they don't influence their job performance. The breadth of the Strzok-Page texts could indicate they were just gossiping lovers. Without context, Mr Strzok's "insurance" line is vague. When Mr Mueller learned of the text this summer, Mr Strzok was removed from the independent counsel investigation and reassigned to a human resources job.
The Clinton case
Mr Strzok also figures prominently in Republican concerns about the FBI's handling of its investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
Mr Strzok took part in interviews with key Clinton aides and reportedly was involved in drafting the report that concluded Mrs Clinton's actions did not warrant criminal charges, including changing the description of her handling of classified material from "grossly negligent" - which might have suggested illegal behaviour - to "extremely careless".
The Trump-Russia saga in 200 words
Who is in the drama to end all dramas?
What is Robert Mueller tasked with?
During the campaign Mr Trump repeatedly insisted that the Justice Department should re-open its investigation into Mrs Clinton and, after backing away from the idea early in his presidency, has once again renewed those calls.
Donald Trump: "Hillary Clinton is guilty. She knows it. The FBI knows it"
"High ranking FBI officials involved in the Clinton investigation were personally invested in the outcome of the election and clearly let their strong political opinions cloud their professional judgement," Republican Congressman Bob Goodlatte said during a House Judicial Committee hearing.
There's also the possibility that there were more communications between Ms Page and Mr Strzok about the Clinton investigation that have yet to come to light.
"We text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced, you were just venting [because] you feel bad that you're gone so much but it can't be helped right now," Ms Page wrote in one text.
Chuck Grassley, the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said he wants more information about the use of these "untraceable" phones.
Why it could matter: If FBI agents backed off their investigation of Mrs Clinton in 2016 it could be further evidence of bias within the bureau that could affect its ongoing investigation into Mr Trump. If public confidence in the FBI is eroded, the ultimate findings of Mr Mueller's probe may be cast in doubt.
Why it might not: Lest anyone forget, Mrs Clinton's candidacy was the one wounded by FBI actions in the final days of the 2016 campaign. Then-Director James Comey's announcement of new evidence in the inquiry into her private email server - perhaps prompted by anti-Clinton leaks from the bureau's New York office - dominated the headlines and renewed concerns about the former secretary of state. News of the ongoing Trump-Russia investigation, on the other hand, didn't emerge until well after the election.
Marital woes
When it comes to the ongoing investigations into the investigations, it's not just the actions of the principals involved that have come under the spotlight. Spouses have figured prominently, as well.
FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the bureau's second-in-command, is married to Jill McCabe, a paediatrician who ran as a Democrat for a Virginia state senate seat in 2015 (before Mr McCabe was promoted to his current position). During the hotly contested race, Ms McCabe received $467,500 in campaign contributions from a political action committee controlled by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a close political ally of the Clinton family.
Conservatives contend that this donation should have disqualified Mr McCabe from involvement in the Clinton case - and was yet another example of possible anti-Trump bias in the FBI's Russia investigation.
Andrew McCabe's impartiality has been questioned because of his wife's political fundraising
"If Mr McCabe failed to avoid the appearance of a partisan conflict of interest in favour of Mrs Clinton during the presidential election, then any participation in [the Russia] inquiry creates the exact same appearance of a partisan conflict of interest against Mr Trump," Senator Grassley wrote in a letter to then-Director Comey in March.
Meanwhile, the wife of Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce G Ohr was recently reported as being employed in 2016 by Fusion GPS, the political research firm that produced the dossier containing unconfirmed allegations of Mr Trump's Russia entanglements. Mr Ohr himself has been connected to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent who collected the material for the dossier.
Fusion GPS's anti-Trump research efforts were originally funded by a Republican donor and later backed by groups associated with the Democratic Party and the Clinton presidential campaign.
Why it matters: "Power couples" - spouses with influential, complementary political jobs - are a Washington tradition, and the actions of one partner are often considered to reflect on the views and behaviour of the other. In Mr McCabe's case, his wife's Democratic activism and allegiances could shed light on his political sympathies. For Mr Ohr, his marriage could have served as a conduit to inject Democratic-funded opposition research into the Justice Department.
Why it might not: Having a political spouse is not evidence of official bias. The identity of the individuals or groups that funded and gathered anti-Trump research and how it ended up in government hands does not necessarily have a bearing on whether the information is valid or merits further investigation.
Follow the money
The individuals working on the Russia investigation have been billed as a "dream team" by Democrats and liberal commentators hoping the efforts will eventually topple the Trump presidency.
Many conservatives beg to differ.
In June, as details of the special counsel hires began to emerge, conservatives noted that some of the biggest names - Andrew Weissmann, James Quarles, Jeannie Rhee and Michael Dreeben - had given money to Democratic presidential candidates.
"Republicans are delusional if they think the special counsel is going to be fair," former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich tweeted. "Look who he is hiring."
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz has called for Robert Mueller's firing
Ms Rhee's private law work included representing Democrats, such as Obama Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation in a lawsuit brought by a conservative activist group.
Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz recently travelled to Florida with Mr Trump and said he told the president that the independent counsel investigation was "infected with bias" against him - a view echoed in the conservative press.
"What we've seen over the past seven months of the Mueller investigation reveals a lot about how big government can end up becoming a threat to representative democracy," Laura Ingraham said on her Fox News programme. "And the more we look at the web of Clinton and Obama loyalists who burrowed into Mueller's office, the more obvious it all becomes."
Why it could matter: Political donations and legal work may be evidence of the ideological tilt of Mr Mueller's investigative team. That he has assembled a group of lawyers that may lean to the left could mean the investigation itself is predisposed to findings damaging to Mr Trump.
Why it might not: Investigators are adversarial by nature, and as long as Mr Mueller's team builds its cases with hard evidence, personal political views should not matter. While political partisans may focus on staff-level appointments, the investigation will rise and fall based on perceptions of Mr Mueller himself.

Presentational grey line
Mr Mueller's waiver
Prior to accepting the position as special counsel investigating possible Trump campaign ties to Russia, Mr Mueller requested - and received - an "ethics waiver" for possible conflicts of interest from the US Department of Justice.
The government has confirmed the existence of the waiver but has not revealed any details, although speculation at the time was that it had to do with Mr Mueller's work at the law firm WilmerHale, which represented former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort - who Mr Mueller has since indicted on money-laundering charges - and the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
Why it could matter: Without further information about the nature of the waiver, some are speculating that there is more to this request than simply routine ethical paperwork. Given that Mr Mueller is a former director of the FBI, with ties to many of the bureau officials who are now coming under conservative scrutiny, Mr Mueller's own allegiances are being called into question.
Why it might not: Mr Mueller is a decorated war veteran who, prior to taking the special counsel role was widely praised for his independence and probity. He was appointed FBI head by Republican George W Bush in 2001. If Mr Mueller's waiver had explosive details indicating clear bias, it probably would have leaked by now.

Trump-Russia inquiry: President says he is unlikely to be interviewed - BBC News

Trump-Russia inquiry: President says he is unlikely to be interviewed
11/1/2018
Mr Trump made the comments at a press conference in Norway
US President Donald Trump has said it is "unlikely" he will be interviewed by Robert Mueller - the man investigating possible ties between the Trump presidential campaign and Russia.
There was no collusion, Mr Trump said, adding: "I'll see what happens."
In June 2017, Mr Trump said he would "100%" be interviewed under oath.
He has consistently denied that his campaign worked with Russia to undermine his opponent Hillary Clinton, calling the accusations a "witch hunt".
Earlier this week the US media reported that Mr Trump's lawyers were in talks with the Mueller investigation to set a date for an interview.
Russia-Trump: Who's who in the drama to end all dramas?


"When they have no collusion - and nobody has found any collusion at any level - it seems unlikely that you would even have an interview," Mr Trump told reporters on Wednesday.

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Federal judge temporarily revives part of DACA immigration program - NBC News

JAN 10 2018, 12:06 AM ET
Federal judge temporarily revives part of DACA immigration program
by ALEX JOHNSON
A federal judge on Tuesday night ordered the Trump administration to revive part of the program that protected children illegally brought to the United States by their parents from being deported, calling the administration's abrupt decision to end the program last year "arbitrary" and "capricious."
The ruling came just hours after a bipartisan meeting between President Donald Trump and members of Congress appeared to have moved negotiations forward, however slightly, on how to address the fate of undocumented immigrants under the DACA program.
The Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, rescinded the program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, in September and said it would stop accepting applications from people already covered under the act to renew their two-year DACA permits. The administration said the repeal would take effect in March.
Partly granting a request from the University of California, U.S. District Judge William Alsup issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday night in San Francisco ordering DHS to resume accepting renewal applications from people who are already protected under DACA while challenges to the September order work their way through the courts. But DHS doesn't have to accept new applications, he ruled.
Immigrants' rights activists rallied to defend the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in Washington in August. Jim Lo Scalzo / EPA file
Alsup, who was nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton, scolded DHS for having presented no analysis of the impact its order would have on the almost 700,000 young people "who had come to rely on DACA to live and to work in this country."
"These individuals had submitted substantial personal identifying information to the government, paid hefty fees, and planned their lives according to the dictates of DACA," Alsup wrote. "The administrative record includes no consideration to the disruption a rescission would have on the lives of DACA recipients, let alone their families, employers and employees, schools and communities."
And he called the government's argument that DHS doesn't even have the authority to administer DACA "arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion."
At the same time, he wrote, the plaintiffs "have not made a comparable showing as to individuals who have never applied for or obtained DACA" — so DHS doesn't have to process new requests for protection.
In a statement, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra called Alsup's ruling "a huge step in the right direction."
There was no immediate reaction from the White House.
The Department of Justice said the decision doesn’t change its view that the program was an illegal circumvention of Congress, and it is within the agency’s power to end it.
“The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement to the Associated Press.
Alsup issued his ruling only a few hours after a bipartisan meeting between President Donald Trump and members of Congress on DACA and border security that was made open to the press.
Trump, Congress reach deal to negotiate DACA, border security Play Facebook Twitter Embed
Trump, Congress reach deal to negotiate DACA, border security
The White House and members of both parties said they agreed that issues to be worked out included DACA, border security, changes to family-based migration, also known as chain migration, and the visa lottery system.
No agreements were immediately reached. During the meeting, Trump reiterated that he was willing to revive DACA, at least in the short term, but only in return for funding for a wall that the president wants to build along the U.S.-Mexican border.
Surprising observers and participants in the room, Trump said he wanted "a bill of love" to address the initial issues first then endorsed moving ahead on comprehensive immigration reform once those are addressed.
"We'll do DACA," Trump said at the start of the meeting. "Then we can start comprehensive immigration reform the next afternoon."
The bipartisan meeting came at a particularly tenuous time, with Congress facing the threat of a government shutdown in just 10 days and the lack of agreement on DACA tangling up efforts to keep the government’s lights on.
Late Tuesday, Trump repeated on Twitter that a wall "must be part of any DACA approval."
@realDonaldTrump
As I made very clear today, our country needs the security of the Wall on the Southern Border, which must be part of any DACA approval.
11:16 AM - Jan 10, 2018
NBC News reported on Friday that the Department of Homeland Security has requested $18 billion in funding to complete the wall, a key campaign promise of Trump's.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the minority whip, called the $18 billion request "outrageous."
The plan would include 316 miles of new fencing and 407 miles of reinforcing existing fence over the next decade.
Republican senators who have been talking to the White House have been softly redefining the definition of a border wall for the past week, saying Trump wasn't literal when he promised a physical structure spanning the entire length of the southern border.
At the meeting Tuesday, Trump appeared to be talking in similar terms, and he didn't mention that Mexico would pay for it.
"We are doing a study of that right now, but there are large areas where you do not need a wall because you have a mountain, and you have a river, you have a violent river. You don't need it," he said

Catalan separatists seek to elect exiled Puigdemont as leader - Financial Times

10/1/2018
Catalan separatists seek to elect exiled Puigdemont as leader
People close to his party say he could preside over the region via Skype
Mas steps down from pro-independence Catalan party
© Reuters
Michael Stothard in Madrid
Catalan separatists have agreed to try to re-elect Carles Puigdemont as regional leader later this month, in a move that is set to re-ignite tensions between Madrid and Barcelona.
At a dinner on Tuesday in Brussels, Marta Rovira, the number two in the separatist Esquerra Republicana (ERC) party, agreed to support Mr Puigdemont, the head of Junts per Catalunya, the largest pro independence party in the region.
Mr Puigdemont, who is in exile in Brussels to avoid charges of rebellion and sedition in Spain, is planning to preside over the region via Skype, according to several people close to the party.
The decision is an upset for some of the moderates in the pro-independence camp, who were hoping a less controversial leader would be chosen to head the region after the failed independence push in October last year.
Oriol Junqueras, the head of the ERC party and another possible candidate for president, was seen as someone who would take a more moderate line, looking to push for independence over the long term.
The decision to try to re-appoint Mr Puigdemont will open up a new legal battle, because it is far from clear if the former regional leader will be allowed to take up his formal duties from Brussels.
The rules of the chamber say the leader of the region has to present the government programme “in front of the house”, which means, most legal experts argue, that this person has to be physically present.
The rules, however, were written before the era of videoconferencing, and physical presence is not explicitly stated. People close to Junts per Catalunya say there is no reason why Mr Puigdemont cannot conduct official business via Skype. They also say that a fellow party member could read the mandatory speech that a candidate to the regional leadership needs to deliver before voting.
The decision over what is technically allowed will be made by the “board” of the Catalan parliament, which is set to be appointed on January 17. This board is likely to have a majority of pro-independence members.
Any decision to allow an investiture via Skype would then likely be challenged in the Spanish courts. This could well mean Mr Puigdemont would ultimately be unable to take up the role.
If his investiture is blocked by the courts, it could be used as another weapon by the separatists to try to show that Spain mistreats the region and tramples its democratic rights — and therefore independence is the only option.
In December, the three separatist parties together won 70 seats in the 135-seat assembly, less than they collectively won in the last election in 2015, but crucially just ahead of the 68-seat threshold required to form a government.
The pro-independence parties won 48 per cent of the popular vote.

Eastman Kodak unveils cryptocurrency, stock doubles - Reuters

JANUARY 10, 2018 / 5:44 AM / UPDATED 7 HOURS AGO
Eastman Kodak unveils cryptocurrency, stock doubles
Noel Randewich
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Shares of Eastman Kodak Co (KODK.N) more than doubled on Tuesday after the one-time leader in photography became the latest company to jump on the cryptocurrency bandwagon.
The storied Rochester, New York-based company said in a statement it is launching a cryptocurrency called “KODAKCoin” for photographers, part of “KODAKOne,” an image rights management platform in a licensing partnership with WENN Digital.
The platform uses blockchain technology, the backbone of bitcoin and other digital currencies that have surged in recent months and raised fears of a price bubble.
The stock was last up 92 percent at $5.95 in midafternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange, off an earlier high at $6.65.
The film pioneer founded over a century ago has struggled to transform itself into an imaging software and technology company. Kodak was a Dow Jones Industrials .DJI component until April 2004, and its stock has slumped 90 percent since it emerged from bankruptcy in 2013.
The Kodak logo is shown on a booth during the 2017 CES in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S., January 6, 2017. REUTERS/Steve Marcus
Several other companies in recent weeks have been rewarded with sharp rises in share price after announcing their transformation into cryptocurrency businesses.
“This is getting ridiculous,” said Dennis Dick, a proprietary trader at Bright Trading LLC in Las Vegas. “From a fundamental point of view, none of this makes sense.”
Eastman Kodak Co
6.8
KODK.NNEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE
+3.70(+119.36%)
KODK.N
KODK.N.DJIRIOT.OLBCC.OINPX.O
Riot Blockchain (RIOT.O) shares have tripled since October when the former biotechnology firm changed its name and said it was revising its business focus to bitcoins.
Soft drinks maker Long Island Iced Tea has more than doubled since it said it was shifting its focus to blockchain technology and changing its name to Long Blockchain Corp (LBCC.O).
Also on Tuesday, Inpixon (INPX.O) surged 9 cents or 40 percent to 31 cents per share after the data analytics company announced it would adopt blockchain technology.
WENN Digital belongs to WENN Media, which provides photos to websites and media.
Reporting by Noel Randewich, Editing by G Crosse and Matthew Lewis