Here is a list of News Blogs ordered by Most Liked, posted by members. A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you've learned. Post an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Update your blog on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with others. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about others. Click here to post a blog.
Yesterday in Newsweek; Trump is financially compromised by Russia
In response to:
Donald Trump Is 'Financially Compromised' by Russia. Mueller Didn't Investigate but Congress Must: Ex-Federal Prosecutor
By Alexandra Hutzler On 4/13/19 at 7:10 AM EDT
While special counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year probe may not have established conspiracy between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election, it did not dive nearly deep enough into the president’s relationship with the foreign power.
In fact, it barely scratched the surface, according to former federal prosecutor and counterintelligence expert Kenneth McCallion. McCallion once represented former Ukraine Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in her civil case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in the Southern District of New York. The case served as a basis for Mueller's indictments of Manafort and former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates.
“I would not have much difficulty, nor would most experienced prosecutors, given what evidence is available now, prosecuting Mr. Trump,” McCallion told Newsweek shortly after Attorney General William Barr handed over his summary of the Mueller report to Congress.
“I think that may still happen—it may not happen immediately, but time will tell,” he added.
McCallion, who spent the early part of his 40-year legal career working as a federal prosecutor for the Department of Justice, had a front-row seat in the 1980s watching then-real estate mogul Trump elude investigators looking into corrupt “sweetheart deals” between mob-controlled labor unions and developers.
It came as no surprise to McCallion when he did it again throughout the Mueller investigation, attacking the probe as a “witch hunt” and refusing to do more than provide written answers to questions posed by the special counsel.
“Both Trump and [his attorney] Roy Cohn went through the motions of cooperating, but Trump continued to adamantly deny that he had this corrupt deal,” McCallion recalled, adding that in the end he got “no real cooperation” from either Trump or Cohn. Eventually, the duo were given a pass as the department focused on taking down bigger felons.
But it was there that the former prosecutor first noted the connection between Trump and Russian organized crime leaders, who, McCallion said, essentially provided him with enough money and labor to keep his real estate empire afloat.
That business relationship turned political when Trump became the Republican nominee for president. Since then, the former federal prosecutor argues, there is a case to be made that the president has “aided and abetted” Russia to the harm of U.S. interest out of financial obligation—treasonous behavior that was not explored in the special counsel’s investigation.
That case is laid out in McCallion’s upcoming book Treason & Betrayal: The Rise and Fall of Individual-1, which will be released on April 15.
The book provides a detailed analysis of Trump’s murky relationship with a foreign power, breaking down moments in which Trump has decided to walk a pro-Russian line (often in contradiction to U.S. interests) both throughout his campaign and during his presidency. It also makes the argument for how and why a sitting president can be indicted or impeached.
McCallion does not mince words in Treason & Betrayal, describing the president as “traitor to the traditional American democratic ideals” who “must be removed as soon as possible before he can do more harm."
“Eventually Trump, either as a sitting president or as a private citizen, will find out that he is not above the law and will be held accountable for his duplicity and his aiding and abetting of Russia,” McCallion said.
Donald Trump Is 'Financially Compromised' by Russia. Mueller Didn't Investigate but Congress Must: Ex-Federal Prosecutor
By Alexandra Hutzler On 4/13/19 at 7:10 AM EDT
While special counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year probe may not have established conspiracy between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election, it did not dive nearly deep enough into the president’s relationship with the foreign power.
In fact, it barely scratched the surface, according to former federal prosecutor and counterintelligence expert Kenneth McCallion. McCallion once represented former Ukraine Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in her civil case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in the Southern District of New York. The case served as a basis for Mueller's indictments of Manafort and former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates.
“I would not have much difficulty, nor would most experienced prosecutors, given what evidence is available now, prosecuting Mr. Trump,” McCallion told Newsweek shortly after Attorney General William Barr handed over his summary of the Mueller report to Congress.
“I think that may still happen—it may not happen immediately, but time will tell,” he added.
McCallion, who spent the early part of his 40-year legal career working as a federal prosecutor for the Department of Justice, had a front-row seat in the 1980s watching then-real estate mogul Trump elude investigators looking into corrupt “sweetheart deals” between mob-controlled labor unions and developers.
It came as no surprise to McCallion when he did it again throughout the Mueller investigation, attacking the probe as a “witch hunt” and refusing to do more than provide written answers to questions posed by the special counsel.
“Both Trump and [his attorney] Roy Cohn went through the motions of cooperating, but Trump continued to adamantly deny that he had this corrupt deal,” McCallion recalled, adding that in the end he got “no real cooperation” from either Trump or Cohn. Eventually, the duo were given a pass as the department focused on taking down bigger felons.
But it was there that the former prosecutor first noted the connection between Trump and Russian organized crime leaders, who, McCallion said, essentially provided him with enough money and labor to keep his real estate empire afloat.
That business relationship turned political when Trump became the Republican nominee for president. Since then, the former federal prosecutor argues, there is a case to be made that the president has “aided and abetted” Russia to the harm of U.S. interest out of financial obligation—treasonous behavior that was not explored in the special counsel’s investigation.
That case is laid out in McCallion’s upcoming book Treason & Betrayal: The Rise and Fall of Individual-1, which will be released on April 15.
The book provides a detailed analysis of Trump’s murky relationship with a foreign power, breaking down moments in which Trump has decided to walk a pro-Russian line (often in contradiction to U.S. interests) both throughout his campaign and during his presidency. It also makes the argument for how and why a sitting president can be indicted or impeached.
McCallion does not mince words in Treason & Betrayal, describing the president as “traitor to the traditional American democratic ideals” who “must be removed as soon as possible before he can do more harm."
“Eventually Trump, either as a sitting president or as a private citizen, will find out that he is not above the law and will be held accountable for his duplicity and his aiding and abetting of Russia,” McCallion said.
(continued in my first comment below)
Here it is - the more semi-complete redacted Mueller report
It does contain some damning information regarding the president and his campaign with regard to
Russian interference. They even re-tweeted, or published directly faulty information that the less
intelligent public actually believed.
However, Mueller did not conclude that he had enough evidence to prosecute that they knew
what the actual source of that misinformation was. Typically, Trump just spouts what he hears,
and like his supporters, has no idea how to critically evaluation the validity.
Regardless, there is a LOT of the Russian involvement still being investigated, and much of it is thus,
redacted. Indeed, there are quite a few full pages, or near full pages redacted.
On the matter of obstruction of justice, apparently there was some evidence found for Trump interfering with witness cooperation.
Admittedly, I have only skim read the several hundred pages and I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV.
I'm guessing that legal minds over time will fully read the unredacted parts of the manuscript and give their opinions on what the redacted parts likely are.
When I get more of a chance I will more thoroughly read it too.
However, I hastily wanted to give everyone here an opportunity to read the redacted report to see what is actually there, and where there was redactions.
Nonetheless, realize, that this is only step one in the investigations of Trump.
There are many investigations not only with regard to what is contained in the report, which are being
handled in other courts, but also that are not covered at all by the narrow focus of Mueller's investigation.
Happy reading.
The TIME for the impending impeachment of Donald Trump grows closer
From TIME;
(Continued in my first comment below)
In response to:
Robert Mueller Told Congress They Can Prosecute the President. Now It Gets Ugly
Alana Abramson
Time•April 18, 2019
More than two years after Robert Mueller began investigating whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, the special counsel offered the American people a sobering conclusion in his final report, released Thursday: The most powerful law enforcement officials in the country are not in a position to prosecute their boss, the President.
But Congress, Mueller said, is.
Despite witness testimony that Trump tried to get underlings to derail Mueller’s probe and lie under oath, Mueller and his team determined not to make a “traditional prosecutorial judgment” about whether the president violated the law that criminalizes obstruction of justice. That doesn’t mean Trump can do whatever he wants, though. “Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office,” Mueller wrote. That conclusion, he said, “accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”
That Solomonic decision left some unsatisfied. For Trump opponents hoping for his ouster, Mueller’s apparent referral to Congress seemed like a punt. For Trump’s backers, it was a source of outrage. But at a moment when Americans see threats of government overreach on the left and the right, Mueller’s restraint has its merits. Rather than reaching to bring down a democratically elected president, Mueller has deferred directly to voters’ popularly elected officials on Capitol Hill.
Which is where things are likely to get ugly.
Democrats have heard Mueller’s message loud and clear. “Mueller makes a very powerful argument that the President can be found guilty of obstructing justice and he essentially puts the ball in the court of Congress,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, who sits on the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, told TIME. The six Democratic chairs of the committees with the broadest oversight jurisdiction are also preparing for battle. “We are profoundly troubled by the astonishing efforts by President Trump identified in the report to obstruct the investigation, including his attempts to remove the Special Counsel and encourage witnesses to lie and to destroy or conceal evidence,” they wrote in a joint statement Thursday evening. “It must fall to Congress to assess the President’s improper, corrupt and immoral conduct in an effort to obstruct the investigation.”
Republicans for their part, are preparing to counter a new round of Democratic investigations with attacks of their own. Trump supporters are claiming Mueller’s refusal to prosecute Trump is vindication. “It seems nothing will stop Democrats in Congress from trying to get the President at all costs,” tweeted GOP Congressman Jim Jordan. Some Republicans say they want to launch their own probes into the origins of Mueller’s investigation. “We must take a hard look at how we got here and at the relevant issues that the Mueller report did not address,” wrote Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. “Were our premiere law enforcement and intelligence agencies co-opted by candidate Trump’s political opponents in an attempt to take him down? Did political bias or unverified claims taint decisions by senior agency officials?”
Just a few weeks ago, this renewed battle seemed unlikely. As Mueller’s probe wound to a close, and Attorney General William Barr declared the Special Counsel’s report had exonerated Trump, talk of taking Trump down was fading on Capitol Hill. Democrats were already inclined to dance around the issue of impeachment, taking pains to avoid moves that would be seen as overtly partisan. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had dismissed the avenue just a month ago, declaring Trump’s “not worth it.”
Robert Mueller Told Congress They Can Prosecute the President. Now It Gets Ugly
Alana Abramson
Time•April 18, 2019
More than two years after Robert Mueller began investigating whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, the special counsel offered the American people a sobering conclusion in his final report, released Thursday: The most powerful law enforcement officials in the country are not in a position to prosecute their boss, the President.
But Congress, Mueller said, is.
Despite witness testimony that Trump tried to get underlings to derail Mueller’s probe and lie under oath, Mueller and his team determined not to make a “traditional prosecutorial judgment” about whether the president violated the law that criminalizes obstruction of justice. That doesn’t mean Trump can do whatever he wants, though. “Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office,” Mueller wrote. That conclusion, he said, “accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”
That Solomonic decision left some unsatisfied. For Trump opponents hoping for his ouster, Mueller’s apparent referral to Congress seemed like a punt. For Trump’s backers, it was a source of outrage. But at a moment when Americans see threats of government overreach on the left and the right, Mueller’s restraint has its merits. Rather than reaching to bring down a democratically elected president, Mueller has deferred directly to voters’ popularly elected officials on Capitol Hill.
Which is where things are likely to get ugly.
Democrats have heard Mueller’s message loud and clear. “Mueller makes a very powerful argument that the President can be found guilty of obstructing justice and he essentially puts the ball in the court of Congress,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, who sits on the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, told TIME. The six Democratic chairs of the committees with the broadest oversight jurisdiction are also preparing for battle. “We are profoundly troubled by the astonishing efforts by President Trump identified in the report to obstruct the investigation, including his attempts to remove the Special Counsel and encourage witnesses to lie and to destroy or conceal evidence,” they wrote in a joint statement Thursday evening. “It must fall to Congress to assess the President’s improper, corrupt and immoral conduct in an effort to obstruct the investigation.”
Republicans for their part, are preparing to counter a new round of Democratic investigations with attacks of their own. Trump supporters are claiming Mueller’s refusal to prosecute Trump is vindication. “It seems nothing will stop Democrats in Congress from trying to get the President at all costs,” tweeted GOP Congressman Jim Jordan. Some Republicans say they want to launch their own probes into the origins of Mueller’s investigation. “We must take a hard look at how we got here and at the relevant issues that the Mueller report did not address,” wrote Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. “Were our premiere law enforcement and intelligence agencies co-opted by candidate Trump’s political opponents in an attempt to take him down? Did political bias or unverified claims taint decisions by senior agency officials?”
Just a few weeks ago, this renewed battle seemed unlikely. As Mueller’s probe wound to a close, and Attorney General William Barr declared the Special Counsel’s report had exonerated Trump, talk of taking Trump down was fading on Capitol Hill. Democrats were already inclined to dance around the issue of impeachment, taking pains to avoid moves that would be seen as overtly partisan. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had dismissed the avenue just a month ago, declaring Trump’s “not worth it.”
(Continued in my first comment below)
Kamla Harris joins Elizabeth Warren in call to impeach Trump
Yesterday in USA Today;
(Continued in my first comment below)
In response to:
Kamala Harris joins Elizabeth Warren in advocating for President Trump's impeachment
William Cummings, USA TODAY Published 8:16 a.m. ET April 23, 2019 | Updated 11:58 a.m. ET April 23, 2019
California Sen. Kamala Harris joined the call for President Donald Trump's impeachment on Monday in a prime-time town hall meeting.
WASHINGTON – Sen. Kamala Harris joined the ranks of 2020 Democratic presidential candidates advocating for the impeachment of President Donald Trump before they get the chance to unseat him at the ballot box.
The California Democrat said she supports impeachment proceedings during a CNN town hall event on Monday.
"I believe that we need to get rid of this president. That's why I'm running to become president of the United States," Harris said in response to an audience member who asked if she thought special counsel Robert Mueller's report was damning enough to warrant Trump's impeachment.
But while she would be happy to defeat him at the ballot box, Harris said the evidence from the report "tells us that this president and his administration engaged in obstruction of justice."
"I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment."
Harris cautioned that the process "doesn't end there," however. She said the Democratic majority in the House would likely be able to impeach Trump, but she did not think that enough Republicans would join Democrats to secure the two-thirds majority needed in the Senate that would remove Trump from office.
"I've not seen any evidence to suggest that they will weigh on the facts instead of on partisan adherence to being protective of this president," Harris said. "So we have to be realistic about what might be the end result, but that doesn't mean the process should not take hold."
Other 2020 Democrats who have called for impeachment proceedings against Trump include Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Miramar, Florida, Mayor Wayne Messam.
Warren called for impeachment in a tweet last week after the release of the redacted Mueller report.
"The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States," she said.
Warren repeated that call Monday during a CNN town hall.
"If any other human being in this country had done what's documented in the Mueller report, they would be arrested and put in jail," she said.
During his own CNN town hall on Monday. Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders called for Congress to "do a hard investigation" to "get to the truth" and determine whether or not Trump obstructed justice.
But Sanders cautioned that if Congress focused on impeachment and not about "issues that concern ordinary Americans" then he fears "that works to Trump's advantage."
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar also called for further hearings on Mueller's findings in the House and Senate during a town hall on Monday. She said Mueller's report included "very disturbing things that would lead you to believe there's obstruction of justice" but "impeachment proceedings are up to the House."
She said that if the House votes to impeach Trump, as a member of the Senate she would become a juror, "so I am not going to predispose things."
During his CNN town hall, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said it is "pretty clear that he deserves impeachment," when asked if would support moving forward with proceedings against Trump. But he said he is "going to leave it to the House and Senate to figure that out."
Kamala Harris joins Elizabeth Warren in advocating for President Trump's impeachment
William Cummings, USA TODAY Published 8:16 a.m. ET April 23, 2019 | Updated 11:58 a.m. ET April 23, 2019
California Sen. Kamala Harris joined the call for President Donald Trump's impeachment on Monday in a prime-time town hall meeting.
WASHINGTON – Sen. Kamala Harris joined the ranks of 2020 Democratic presidential candidates advocating for the impeachment of President Donald Trump before they get the chance to unseat him at the ballot box.
The California Democrat said she supports impeachment proceedings during a CNN town hall event on Monday.
"I believe that we need to get rid of this president. That's why I'm running to become president of the United States," Harris said in response to an audience member who asked if she thought special counsel Robert Mueller's report was damning enough to warrant Trump's impeachment.
But while she would be happy to defeat him at the ballot box, Harris said the evidence from the report "tells us that this president and his administration engaged in obstruction of justice."
"I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment."
Harris cautioned that the process "doesn't end there," however. She said the Democratic majority in the House would likely be able to impeach Trump, but she did not think that enough Republicans would join Democrats to secure the two-thirds majority needed in the Senate that would remove Trump from office.
"I've not seen any evidence to suggest that they will weigh on the facts instead of on partisan adherence to being protective of this president," Harris said. "So we have to be realistic about what might be the end result, but that doesn't mean the process should not take hold."
Other 2020 Democrats who have called for impeachment proceedings against Trump include Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Miramar, Florida, Mayor Wayne Messam.
Warren called for impeachment in a tweet last week after the release of the redacted Mueller report.
"The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States," she said.
Warren repeated that call Monday during a CNN town hall.
"If any other human being in this country had done what's documented in the Mueller report, they would be arrested and put in jail," she said.
During his own CNN town hall on Monday. Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders called for Congress to "do a hard investigation" to "get to the truth" and determine whether or not Trump obstructed justice.
But Sanders cautioned that if Congress focused on impeachment and not about "issues that concern ordinary Americans" then he fears "that works to Trump's advantage."
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar also called for further hearings on Mueller's findings in the House and Senate during a town hall on Monday. She said Mueller's report included "very disturbing things that would lead you to believe there's obstruction of justice" but "impeachment proceedings are up to the House."
She said that if the House votes to impeach Trump, as a member of the Senate she would become a juror, "so I am not going to predispose things."
During his CNN town hall, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said it is "pretty clear that he deserves impeachment," when asked if would support moving forward with proceedings against Trump. But he said he is "going to leave it to the House and Senate to figure that out."
(Continued in my first comment below)
Russian Agent Maria Butina Sentenced to 18 months in Prison (already served 3 months of that)
From The Daily Beast
(Continued below)
In response to:
Russian Agent Maria Butina Sentenced to 18 Months in Prison: ‘I Destroyed My Own Life’
Betsy Woodruff
April 26, 2019
Maria Butina, who admitted to conspiring to act as a covert Russian agent and charmed American conservative leaders with her gun-rights activism, was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison on Friday.
The prison term was what the Justice Department requested for Butina, though she’ll spend closer to nine months behind bars thanks to time already served in jail. “The conduct was sophisticated and penetrated deep into U.S. political organizations,” D.C. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan said before handing down the stiff sentence.
Butina is a 30-year-old Russian national who came to the U.S. to study at American University in Washington, D.C. and courted gun-rights and conservative activists, especially in the National Rifle Association. She was arrested last July and charged with violating a U.S. law that bars people from acting as foreign agents without telling the attorney general—a charge Justice Department lawyers characterize as “espionage-lite.” Butina pleaded guilty in December and agreed to cooperate with the government.
Just before she was sentenced, Butina made an emotional plea for leniency. Her voice shook as she spoke.
“My parents discovered my arrest on the morning news they watch in their rural house in a Siberian village,” she said. “I love them dearly, but I harmed them morally and financially. They are suffering from all of that. I destroyed my own life as well. I came to the United States not under any orders, but with hope, and now nothing remains but penitence.”
While living in the U.S., Butina communicated with then-Russian Central Bank official Alexander Torshin about her efforts to build relationships with Americans. In one instance, she claimed she had influence over who would become Trump’s secretary of state. In December 2015, she even helped arrange for a delegation of NRA leaders to visit Moscow, where they met with powerful figures in the Russian government.
Butina said she would have registered as a foreign agent with the Justice Department, but she claimed not to have known U.S. law.
“I deeply regret this crime, not merely because it has harmed me, my beloved friends, and my cherished family, but ironically, it has harmed my attempts to improve the relationships between the two countries,” she said.
Chutkan had none of it.
“This was no simple misunderstanding by an overeager foreign student,” Chutkan said, saying the crime Butina pled guilty to “is serious, and jeopardized this country’s national security.”
Erik Kenerson, the prosecutor handling her case, told Chutkan that Butina was executing a plan to establish contact between the two governments, for the benefit of Russia. The information was “of extreme importance to the Russian Federation,” he said.
“There is no doubt that she was not simply a grad student,” he said.
“Her conduct shows how easy it can be for a foreign government to target Americans in the U.S.,” he added.
One of her lawyers, Alfred Carry, pushed back against Kenerson’s argument.
“Maria is not a spy,” he said. “She’s not intelligence. She’s never been employed by the Russian government. She knows of no secret codes, safehouses, illegals. She has never engaged in covert activity and she has never lied to our government.”
During her time in the U.S., Butina also entered a romantic relationship with Paul Erickson, a longtime conservative-movement insider who helped her befriend people in the NRA. Erickson was indicted this year in South Dakota on charges of several financial crimes, none of which involved Butina or Russia.
The sentence marks the end of a two-year saga that has riveted Washington and embodied tensions between the U.S. and Russia stemming from Moscow’s interference in the 2016 election.
Russian Agent Maria Butina Sentenced to 18 Months in Prison: ‘I Destroyed My Own Life’
Betsy Woodruff
April 26, 2019
Maria Butina, who admitted to conspiring to act as a covert Russian agent and charmed American conservative leaders with her gun-rights activism, was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison on Friday.
The prison term was what the Justice Department requested for Butina, though she’ll spend closer to nine months behind bars thanks to time already served in jail. “The conduct was sophisticated and penetrated deep into U.S. political organizations,” D.C. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan said before handing down the stiff sentence.
Butina is a 30-year-old Russian national who came to the U.S. to study at American University in Washington, D.C. and courted gun-rights and conservative activists, especially in the National Rifle Association. She was arrested last July and charged with violating a U.S. law that bars people from acting as foreign agents without telling the attorney general—a charge Justice Department lawyers characterize as “espionage-lite.” Butina pleaded guilty in December and agreed to cooperate with the government.
Just before she was sentenced, Butina made an emotional plea for leniency. Her voice shook as she spoke.
“My parents discovered my arrest on the morning news they watch in their rural house in a Siberian village,” she said. “I love them dearly, but I harmed them morally and financially. They are suffering from all of that. I destroyed my own life as well. I came to the United States not under any orders, but with hope, and now nothing remains but penitence.”
While living in the U.S., Butina communicated with then-Russian Central Bank official Alexander Torshin about her efforts to build relationships with Americans. In one instance, she claimed she had influence over who would become Trump’s secretary of state. In December 2015, she even helped arrange for a delegation of NRA leaders to visit Moscow, where they met with powerful figures in the Russian government.
Butina said she would have registered as a foreign agent with the Justice Department, but she claimed not to have known U.S. law.
“I deeply regret this crime, not merely because it has harmed me, my beloved friends, and my cherished family, but ironically, it has harmed my attempts to improve the relationships between the two countries,” she said.
Chutkan had none of it.
“This was no simple misunderstanding by an overeager foreign student,” Chutkan said, saying the crime Butina pled guilty to “is serious, and jeopardized this country’s national security.”
Erik Kenerson, the prosecutor handling her case, told Chutkan that Butina was executing a plan to establish contact between the two governments, for the benefit of Russia. The information was “of extreme importance to the Russian Federation,” he said.
“There is no doubt that she was not simply a grad student,” he said.
“Her conduct shows how easy it can be for a foreign government to target Americans in the U.S.,” he added.
One of her lawyers, Alfred Carry, pushed back against Kenerson’s argument.
“Maria is not a spy,” he said. “She’s not intelligence. She’s never been employed by the Russian government. She knows of no secret codes, safehouses, illegals. She has never engaged in covert activity and she has never lied to our government.”
During her time in the U.S., Butina also entered a romantic relationship with Paul Erickson, a longtime conservative-movement insider who helped her befriend people in the NRA. Erickson was indicted this year in South Dakota on charges of several financial crimes, none of which involved Butina or Russia.
The sentence marks the end of a two-year saga that has riveted Washington and embodied tensions between the U.S. and Russia stemming from Moscow’s interference in the 2016 election.
(Continued below)
William Barr - dishonest unpatiotic AG
Today in USA Today
Perhaps Barr is very confused about his job. It is not to protect a criminal with lies of his own, but to allocate personnel to investigate crimes.
In response to:
Nancy Pelosi: AG Barr 'lied to Congress,' that's a crime
Maureen Groppe and Bart Jansen
USA TODAY•May 2, 2019
WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said Attorney General William Barr "lied to Congress" during a hearing – an act that was not a technicality but a crime.
"If anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime," Pelosi told reporters.
Asked if Barr should go to jail, Pelosi said the House Judiciary Committee "will act upon how we will proceed."
At an April 4 House subcommittee hearing, Barr was questioned about media reports that some officials in special counsel Robert Mueller's office were "frustrated" with his handling of the investigation report.
"Do you know what they are referencing with that?" Rep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., asked.
"No, I don't," Barr replied.
On Wednesday, however, the Department of Justice made public a letter Mueller sent to Barr on March 27 that expressed concerns with the way the attorney general had characterized the special counsel's findings.
Barr was grilled about his answer to Crist by Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats on Wednesday.
He said that when he discussed Mueller's letter with the special counsel, the concern was about media coverage, not the contents of a four-page summary the attorney general had released describing the special counsel's conclusions.
In a statement, Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec called Pelosi's comments a "baseless attack on the attorney general" and said it was "reckless, irresponsible and false.”
The disclosure of Mueller's letter prompted calls Wednesday for Barr's resignation from lawmakers including Sens. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, who is head of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee and a member of the Judiciary Committee, also said Barr should resign
Pelosi's remarks came on a day of intensifying tensions as Barr made good on his threat to skip a hearing on the Mueller report.
After Barr refused to testify before the House Judiciary Committee Thursday, Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said that if Barr doesn't cooperate with the panel, his “moment of accountability will come soon enough.”
“And I think that probably applies,” Pelosi said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Barr shouldn't be attorney general if he believes, as he testified Thursday, that presidents can stop investigations that are based on false allegations.
"My god," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "What president doesn't believe that they're not being falsely accused?"
Barr told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday that a president doesn't have to allow an investigation to run its course "if it was a groundless proceeding, if it was based on false allegations."
"The president could terminate that proceeding, and it would not be a corrupt intent because he was being falsely accused and he would be worried about the impact on his administration," Barr said.
Schumer wrote Barr on Thursday to ask if he stands by that statement.
"If those views are truly your views," Schumer wrote, "you do not deserve to be attorney general."
Nancy Pelosi: AG Barr 'lied to Congress,' that's a crime
Maureen Groppe and Bart Jansen
USA TODAY•May 2, 2019
WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said Attorney General William Barr "lied to Congress" during a hearing – an act that was not a technicality but a crime.
"If anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime," Pelosi told reporters.
Asked if Barr should go to jail, Pelosi said the House Judiciary Committee "will act upon how we will proceed."
At an April 4 House subcommittee hearing, Barr was questioned about media reports that some officials in special counsel Robert Mueller's office were "frustrated" with his handling of the investigation report.
"Do you know what they are referencing with that?" Rep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., asked.
"No, I don't," Barr replied.
On Wednesday, however, the Department of Justice made public a letter Mueller sent to Barr on March 27 that expressed concerns with the way the attorney general had characterized the special counsel's findings.
Barr was grilled about his answer to Crist by Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats on Wednesday.
He said that when he discussed Mueller's letter with the special counsel, the concern was about media coverage, not the contents of a four-page summary the attorney general had released describing the special counsel's conclusions.
In a statement, Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec called Pelosi's comments a "baseless attack on the attorney general" and said it was "reckless, irresponsible and false.”
The disclosure of Mueller's letter prompted calls Wednesday for Barr's resignation from lawmakers including Sens. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, who is head of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee and a member of the Judiciary Committee, also said Barr should resign
Pelosi's remarks came on a day of intensifying tensions as Barr made good on his threat to skip a hearing on the Mueller report.
After Barr refused to testify before the House Judiciary Committee Thursday, Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said that if Barr doesn't cooperate with the panel, his “moment of accountability will come soon enough.”
“And I think that probably applies,” Pelosi said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Barr shouldn't be attorney general if he believes, as he testified Thursday, that presidents can stop investigations that are based on false allegations.
"My god," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "What president doesn't believe that they're not being falsely accused?"
Barr told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday that a president doesn't have to allow an investigation to run its course "if it was a groundless proceeding, if it was based on false allegations."
"The president could terminate that proceeding, and it would not be a corrupt intent because he was being falsely accused and he would be worried about the impact on his administration," Barr said.
Schumer wrote Barr on Thursday to ask if he stands by that statement.
"If those views are truly your views," Schumer wrote, "you do not deserve to be attorney general."
Perhaps Barr is very confused about his job. It is not to protect a criminal with lies of his own, but to allocate personnel to investigate crimes.
Breaking News - Donald Trump Jr. has been subpoenaed to testify and Don Sr. can't block it.
Today in USA Today;
(Continued in my first comment below)
In response to:
Donald Trump Jr. gets subpoenaed; it's up to Republicans to get the truth [/b
]
USA TODAY Published 5:10 p.m. ET May 9, 2019
Unlike so many other subpoenas issued by Congress, this one can't be blocked by the president.
The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, has issued a subpoena for Donald Trump Jr. to appear before the committee.
Did Trump Jr. lie to the Senate? We're about to find out
By Paul Seamus Ryan
The Senate Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr. to testify as part of its ongoing probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Those proceedings warrant close scrutiny in light of Chairman Richard Burr’s close ties to the Trump administration and the deliberately misleading public statements he made during and after the presidential campaign to downplay Russian interference in support of Donald Trump's candidacy.
As a member of the congressional Gang of Eight, Burr was fully briefed by U.S. intelligence officials on the Russian hacks of Democratic email servers and other attacks, but his camp downplayed them publicly.
The subpoena of Trump Jr. likely relates to a meeting he had in Trump Tower on June 9, 2016, with several Russians, in which Trump Jr. expected, based on prior emails, to receive from the Russians "official documents and information that would incriminate" Hillary Clinton as "part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump."
Our group, Common Cause, filed complaints in July 2017 with the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission alleging that, by attending this meeting to obtain opposition research on Clinton, Trump Jr. and the Trump campaign violated a federal law banning solicitation of political contributions from foreign nationals.
Trump Jr. was interviewed by Senate Judiciary Committee staff in September 2017 about the Trump Tower meeting and emails that led up to it. Trump Jr. stated that he had not told his father in advance of the meeting about the emails offering dirt on Clinton and the planned meeting with the Russians to receive that dirt.
However, special counsel Robert Mueller's report indicates that Trump Jr. might have lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would be a crime. According to Mueller’s report: "Michael Cohen recalled being in Donald J. Trump’s office on June 6 or 7 when Trump Jr. told his father that a meeting to obtain adverse information about Clinton was going forward," and that from the "tenor of the conversation, Cohen believed that Trump Jr. had previously discussed the meeting with his father."
Mueller's report states that Trump Jr.'s emails and meeting with Russians in 2016 "could implicate the federal election-law ban on contributions and donations by foreign nationals," affirming the validity of Common Cause's complaints. But Mueller decided not to criminally prosecute Trump Jr. because, in short, he believed Trump Jr. would successfully plead ignorance of the law. A person can only be criminally convicted of campaign finance violations with proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person acted with "knowledge of the illegality of their conduct."
It's no wonder that the Senate wants to question Trump Jr., again, regarding the inconsistencies between his story and Cohen's testimony to Mueller. The Senate would be negligent not to re-question Trump Jr.
Donald Trump Jr. gets subpoenaed; it's up to Republicans to get the truth [/b
]
USA TODAY Published 5:10 p.m. ET May 9, 2019
Unlike so many other subpoenas issued by Congress, this one can't be blocked by the president.
The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, has issued a subpoena for Donald Trump Jr. to appear before the committee.
Did Trump Jr. lie to the Senate? We're about to find out
By Paul Seamus Ryan
The Senate Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr. to testify as part of its ongoing probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Those proceedings warrant close scrutiny in light of Chairman Richard Burr’s close ties to the Trump administration and the deliberately misleading public statements he made during and after the presidential campaign to downplay Russian interference in support of Donald Trump's candidacy.
As a member of the congressional Gang of Eight, Burr was fully briefed by U.S. intelligence officials on the Russian hacks of Democratic email servers and other attacks, but his camp downplayed them publicly.
The subpoena of Trump Jr. likely relates to a meeting he had in Trump Tower on June 9, 2016, with several Russians, in which Trump Jr. expected, based on prior emails, to receive from the Russians "official documents and information that would incriminate" Hillary Clinton as "part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump."
Our group, Common Cause, filed complaints in July 2017 with the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission alleging that, by attending this meeting to obtain opposition research on Clinton, Trump Jr. and the Trump campaign violated a federal law banning solicitation of political contributions from foreign nationals.
Trump Jr. was interviewed by Senate Judiciary Committee staff in September 2017 about the Trump Tower meeting and emails that led up to it. Trump Jr. stated that he had not told his father in advance of the meeting about the emails offering dirt on Clinton and the planned meeting with the Russians to receive that dirt.
However, special counsel Robert Mueller's report indicates that Trump Jr. might have lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would be a crime. According to Mueller’s report: "Michael Cohen recalled being in Donald J. Trump’s office on June 6 or 7 when Trump Jr. told his father that a meeting to obtain adverse information about Clinton was going forward," and that from the "tenor of the conversation, Cohen believed that Trump Jr. had previously discussed the meeting with his father."
Mueller's report states that Trump Jr.'s emails and meeting with Russians in 2016 "could implicate the federal election-law ban on contributions and donations by foreign nationals," affirming the validity of Common Cause's complaints. But Mueller decided not to criminally prosecute Trump Jr. because, in short, he believed Trump Jr. would successfully plead ignorance of the law. A person can only be criminally convicted of campaign finance violations with proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person acted with "knowledge of the illegality of their conduct."
It's no wonder that the Senate wants to question Trump Jr., again, regarding the inconsistencies between his story and Cohen's testimony to Mueller. The Senate would be negligent not to re-question Trump Jr.
(Continued in my first comment below)
A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, your thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you have learned. It's your own page on Connecting Singles that you can update on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. You can write about an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with Connecting Singles members. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about members you have met here. Please be sure to read the blog rules before posting.
Would YOU like to post a blog on Connecting Singles? Have you written blogs that you'd like to share with other members? Posting your blogs shows your skill and creativity and helps members get to know you better. Your blog will appear on the Connecting Singles Blogs page and also in a link on your profile page. Click here to post a blog »