March 13, 2018


News and Views


WHEN I FIRST HEARD TRUMP’S CATCHPHRASE “FAKE NEWS,” ESPECIALLY AS BEING USED AGAINST THE RESPONSIBLE AND RELIABLE NEWS SOURCES IN THE USA, I WAS: STARTLED, SHOCKED, FRIGHTENED AND ANGRY. THAT IS BECAUSE GOVERNMENT TAMPERING WITH THE IDEA OF WHAT IS TRUE INFORMATION AND WHAT SOURCES OF TRUTH ARE RELIABLE ARE MUCH TOO DANGEROUS IN A FREE SOCIETY.

I’VE ALWAYS HEARD THAT THE FIRST THING A DICTATOR TRIES TO DO IS MUZZLE, DISENFRANCHISE OR CRIMINALIZE TRUTH AND OPENNESS IN A SOCIETY, ESPECIALLY IN THE FORM OF A FREE PRESS. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST THING THAT TRUMP HAS TRIED TO DO THAT IS DIRECTLY AGAINST GOOD PRINCIPLES FOR A NATION SUCH AS OURS. AT FIRST THERE WERE COUNTERVAILING VOICES FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, AND THEN THE REPUBLICANS BECAME LESS AND LESS OUTSPOKEN AGAINST THE FAR RIGHT TIDE. WE HAVEN’T EVEN HAD AS MANY DEMOCRATS AS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TAKING A STAND AGAINST THIS BLATANT MANIPULATION OF THE MINDS OF CITIZENS.

THE CONSERVATIVE AND THE ALT-RIGHT ARE NOW ALMOST A PERFECT RUBBER STAMP FOR WHATEVER PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS HE WANTS TO DO. EVERY TIME ANOTHER CABINET MEMBER SPEAKS OUT AND GETS THE AXE, I CAN ONLY SAY AGAIN HOW WRONG IT IS, BUT IT WILL TAKE MORE VOICES THAN MINE TO CAUSE GOOD CHANGES. AFTER SILENCING THE FREE PRESS, THE AUTOCRAT WILL MOVE TO SILENCE ALL FREE SPEECH, WHICH MEANS MOST AMERICANS. THEN, THOSE WHO ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF SYCOPHANT WILL BE ENCOURAGED TO BE MORE ASSERTIVE, AND IT MAY NOT BE LONG BEFORE THE POPULATION AS A WHOLE WILL COME TO BELIEVE WHATEVER THE WHITE HOUSE NEWS CHANNEL SAYS.

IF WE, AS A GROUP OF GENUINELY PATRIOTIC PEOPLE – I.E. NOT THE WAR MONGERS BUT THOSE WHO WILL STAND UP FOR FAIRNESS IN OUR OWN COUNTRY AND OUTSIDE -- DON’T EVEN HAVE ENOUGH INTEREST IN THE WORLD TO PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS HAPPENING, OUR FATE WILL BE LEAPING UPON US.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/CBS-News-chief-in-Jerusalem-Social-media-isnt-tackling-fake-news-544981
Meet with top Israeli leaders at the Jerusalem Post Annual Conference 2018
Photograph -- David Rhodes and Yonit Levi. (photo credit: ODED KARNI)

They are words that echo from Jerusalem to Washington: "Fake news." And on Tuesday morning in the capitol of Israel, two respected news figures from the two countries sat down to discuss the news industry at the Keshet INTV conference.

Yonit Levi, anchor of the Israeli Channel 2 evening broadcast, interviewed David Rhodes, the president of CBS News, about covering the White House, the #MeToo movement and even porn star Stormy Daniels.

Rhodes told Levi that this is his first visit to Israel, which he hopes will give him a better understanding of the region when directing news coverage, he said. At times, he added, there has been criticism leveled at him for not visiting, "and now I can say I've been."

The two discussed the epidemic of both actual fake news and the "fake news" label that both US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have leveled at media coverage.

"It's easy to draw comparisons," said Levi, "between a US president and an Israeli prime minister galvanizing their base by attacking the media." She added that both often seek to bypass the media - Trump on Twitter and Netanyahu on Facebook - "they act like they don't need you or us as an outlet and they don't want us as an outlet."

But Rhodes - who got his start at Fox and then worked at Bloomberg - said he stills sees viewers appreciating media coverage and the "higher value information" it provides. He also said that some coverage of the White House in the Trump era has been overblown.

“There are important things happening and we try to cover those things but some of this is a distraction," he said. "It’s not new, there is too much in our news industry in the US lamenting that it’s never been like this and it’s totally different, a little bit of an argument that the standards need to be different. That’s a mistake."

Rhodes admitted publicly for the first time that the CBS flagship show 60 Minutes had conducted an interview with Stormy Daniels, the adult film star who allegedly conducted an affair with Trump and was paid $130,000 in hush money. He would not give an exact air date for the interview - which he said he hasn't seen - between Daniels and Anderson Cooper, but said it would be "in the coming Sundays."

The reason for the delay, he said, is not any injunction but that "there's still a lot of journalistic work left to do - conversations with attorneys and documents, we have to run all that down before it runs."

Rhodes was most animated discussing the spread of fake news online and its impact on the public.

"Social media has basically created a platform to amplify fake news in equal measure with real, authentic information," he said. "And it's really disgusting. There is not a strong enough effort to clean that up."

He added that part of the spread if [is] fueled by the fact that "some people want to be manipulated" an would rather believe a fake version of events. "A lot of what we report and a lot of what’s going on out there is scary, and people would rather it’s not true."

Levi also asked Rhodes about the decision to suspend and then fire veteran CBS journalist Charlie Rose after multiple accusations of sexual harassment and assault.

"We as an industry have a long way to go," he said. "We're only partway through a process... we have a lot more to do."



MUSICAL CHAIRS, ANYONE?

“TILLERSON APPEARED TO BREAK WITH THE WHITE HOUSE IN HIS ASSESSMENT OF THE POISONING OF AN EX-SPY IN BRITAIN. HE SINGLED OUT RUSSIA AS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACK, ECHOING THE FINGER-POINTING OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT. “IT CAME FROM RUSSIA,” TILLERSON SAID ....”

I THINK THERE SHOULD BE NO DOUBT THAT TRUMP’S ACTION IS ONE OF RAGE – FIRST, BECAUSE HE JUST DOESN’T LIKE ANY “LIP” FROM HIS PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY IN FRONT OF MEMBERS OF THE MAINSTREAM PRESS; SECOND, BECAUSE HE IS VERY MUCH AFRAID OF ANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF “THE RUSSIA CONNECTION.” HIS ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION IS, “NO COLLUSION.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-ousts-tillerson-will-replace-him-as-secretary-of-state-with-cia-chief-pompeo/2018/03/13/30f34eea-26ba-11e8-b79d-f3d931db7f68_story.html
Politics
Trump ousts Tillerson, will replace him as secretary of state with CIA chief Pompeo
By Ashley Parker and Philip Rucker
March 13 at 9:55 AM

President Trump has ousted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and plans to nominate CIA Director Mike Pompeo to replace him as the nation’s top diplomat, orchestrating a major change to his national security team amid delicate outreach such as possible talks with North Korea, White House officials said Tuesday.

Trump last Friday asked Tillerson to step aside, and the embattled diplomat cut short a trip to Africa on Monday to return to Washington.

Tension between Trump and Tillerson has simmered for many months, but the president and his top diplomat reached a breaking point over the past week, officials said.

The reason for the latest rift was unclear, but Trump and Tillerson have often appeared at odds over policies such as the nuclear deal with Iran and the tone of U.S. diplomacy. A spokesman for Tillerson said the secretary of state “had every intention of staying” in his job and was “unaware of the reason” for his firing.

Tillerson cut short his trip to Africa on Monday to return to Washington. “I felt like, look, I just need to get back,” he told reporters aboard his plane home. The White House, however, had told him the previous Friday he would be dismissed, according to two administration officials. The news was not conveyed in person by Trump.

At the White House on Tuesday, Trump said the move had been considered for “a long time.”

“We disagreed on things ... the Iran deal,” Trump told reporters. “So we were not thinking the same. With Mike Pompeo, we have a similar thought process.”

Trump selected Gina Haspel — the deputy director at the CIA — to succeed Pompeo at the CIA. She would become the first woman to run the spy agency.

Both would need to be confirmed by the Senate at a time when the closely divided chamber has stalled on confirming dozens of Trump nominees.

In a statement issued to The Washington Post, Trump praised both Pompeo and Haspel.

“I am proud to nominate the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Mike Pompeo, to be our new Secretary of State,” Trump said. “Mike graduated first in his class at West Point, served with distinction in the U.S. Army, and graduated with Honors from Harvard Law School. He went on to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives with a proven record of working across the aisle.”

[Trump makes major gambit with plans for talks with North Korean leader]

Photograph -- CIA Director Mike Pompeo during a security summit in Washington on Oct. 19, 2017. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

The president continued, “Gina Haspel, the Deputy Director of the CIA, will be nominated to replace Director Pompeo and she will be the CIA’s first-ever female director, a historic milestone. Mike and Gina have worked together for more than a year, and have developed a great mutual respect.”

Trump also had words of praise for Tillerson: “Finally, I want to thank Rex Tillerson for his service. A great deal has been accomplished over the last fourteen months, and I wish him and his family well.”

A spokesman for Tillerson said the secretary of state has not spoken directly with Trump about the move.

“The secretary had every intention of staying because of the critical progress made in national security and other areas,” Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of public diplomacy for the State Department, said in a statement.

“He will miss his colleagues greatly at the Department of State, and the foreign ministers he’s worked with throughout the world,” Goldstein continued. “The secretary did not speak to the president, and is unaware of the reason. He is grateful for the opportunity to serve, and believes strongly that public service is a noble calling.”

The president — who has long clashed with Tillerson, who he believes is “too establishment” in his thinking — felt it was important to make the change now, as he prepares for possible high-stakes talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, as well as upcoming trade negotiations, three White House officials said.

“I am deeply grateful to President Trump for permitting me to serve as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and for this opportunity to serve as Secretary of State,” Pompeo said in a statement. “His leadership has made America safer and I look forward to representing him and the American people to the rest of the world to further America’s prosperity. Serving alongside the great men and women of the CIA, the most dedicated and talented public servants I have encountered, has been one of the great honors of my life.”

Haspel in a statement also said she was excited for her promotion.

[Trump’s tumultuous Cabinet, ranked]

“After 30 years as an officer of the Central Intelligence Agency, it has been my honor to serve as its Deputy Director alongside Mike Pompeo for the past year,” she said. “I am grateful to President Trump for the opportunity, and humbled by his confidence in me, to be nominated to be the next Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.”

On the flight from Nigeria, Tillerson appeared to break with the White House in his assessment of the poisoning of an ex-spy in Britain. He singled out Russia as responsible for the attack, echoing the finger-pointing of the British government.

“It came from Russia,” Tillerson said, according to the Associated Press. “I cannot understand why anyone would take such an action. But this is a substance that is known to us and does not exist widely.”

Earlier Monday, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders condemned the attack as “reckless, indiscriminate and irresponsible,” and expressed solidarity with Britain, but would not say whether the United States believes Russia was behind it.

Tillerson was especially frustrated when Trump last Thursday unilaterally agreed to the meeting with Kim while Tillerson was traveling abroad in Africa, according to officials familiar with his thinking.

Tillerson had long expressed interest in a diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff with North Korea, and was upset to have been left totally out of the loop when Trump decided to move forward, according to a White House official.

Foggy Bottom was also acutely aware — and chagrined — that when Pompeo appeared on the television shows this past Sunday to explain the North Korea developments, he did not mention Tillerson.

Pompeo long has been mentioned as Tillerson’s most likely replacement. The former Republican lawmaker from Kansas developed a warm relationship with Trump as the CIA director, often delivering the President’s Daily Brief to Trump in person, and racing over to the West Wing at a moment’s notice to field the president’s queries on a range of topics.

Last November, the White House readied a plan to replace Tillerson with Pompeo, and Trump seriously considered making the move, but was convinced to keep the current team in place.

Pompeo often is found in a host of meetings that do not necessarily deeply involve his agency, simply because Trump likes him, said one White House official.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) was initially mentioned as a replacement for Pompeo, but Trump opted to promote from within by elevating Haspel.

Tillerson’s exit had been so widely expected that the rumors were given a nickname: Rexit. Speculation about his ouster has come in waves, including in October after NBC News reported that Tillerson had called Trump a “moron.”

Tillerson, 65, spent his career at ExxonMobil, climbing the ranks at the oil giant to become chief executive officer, where he cut deals across the Middle East and in Mexico. Having never worked in government before being named secretary of state, he struggled to adapt to Washington’s ways and the administration’s culture of backstabbing.

Tillerson emerged as one of the strongest voices in the administration critical of Russia. For months, he has been saying Russia clearly meddled in the 2016 U.S. election, even as Trump shied away from any critical remarks.

Trump seemed to resent pressure to stay the course on such issues as China’s trade practices, the war in Afghanistan and the Iran nuclear deal, those people said.

Tillerson pushed Trump to preserve the Iran nuclear deal, at least for now, with a July pronouncement that Iran was meeting its end of the bargain. Trump said in a Wall Street Journal interview that he regretted making that determination and strongly suggested he would not go along with another such certification of compliance due in October.

Although Tillerson supported the approach to the war in Afghanistan that Trump announced last week, he felt no need to frame U.S. goals in the same maximal terms as the commander in chief. Where Trump proclaimed on Aug. 21 that “our troops will fight to win,” Tillerson laid out a much more modest agenda.


Josh Dawsey, John Hudson and Carol Morello contributed to this report.

Ashley Parker is a White House reporter for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2017, after 11 years at the New York Times, where she covered the 2012 and 2016 presidential campaigns and Congress, among other things. Follow @ashleyrparker

Philip Rucker is the White House bureau chief for The Washington Post. He previously has covered Congress, the Obama White House, and the 2012 and 2016 presidential campaigns. He joined The Post in 2005 as a local news reporter. Follow @PhilipRucker



WE HAVE A NEW TELL-ALL BOOK WHICH IS CERTAIN TO BE INTERESTING, BUT MAY NOT BE TRUE. I SAY THAT, BECAUSE THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT REASON BEHIND THESE BOOKS IS FOR THE AUTHOR TO PAINT HIMSELF AS A GOOD GUY –IN ADDITION TO THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT HE HOPES TO MAKE ON IT. OF COURSE THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THERE ISN’T TRUTH IN THEM. I HAVE PUT MOTHER JONES’ ARTICLE ON THE TRUMP AND PAPADOPOULOS RELATIONSHIP BELOW THIS ONE. I OFTEN LIKE WHAT MOTHER JONES HAS TO SAY AND I TRUST THEIR HONESTY.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/papadopoulos-says-trump-personally-encouraged-arrange-meeting-putin-new-book-reports-010056370.html?soc_trk=gcm&soc_src=dbb2094c-7d9a-37c0-96b9-7f844af62e78&.tsrc=notification-brknews
Papadopoulos says that Trump personally encouraged him to arrange meeting with Putin, new book reports
Dylan Stableford,Yahoo News•March 12, 2018

Photographs -- Donald Trump, George Papadopouolos and Robert Mueller. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: AP (4), Twitter.

George Papadopoulos, a former foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign and potentially a key witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, told federal investigators that before the election, Donald Trump personally encouraged him to pursue a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to a new book being published Tuesday.

Papadopoulos’s account to Mueller — as reported in “Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump,” by Yahoo News’ Michael Isikoff and Mother Jones’ David Corn — contradicts the public accounts of what took place at a critical meeting of Trump’s foreign policy team on March 31, 2016. It was at that meeting that Papadopoulos first informed Trump and the then candidate’s other foreign policy advisers that he had contacts in Britain who could arrange a summit between the GOP candidate and Putin.

Related Searches -- Trump PutinTrump Putin LetterPutin Praises Trump

Although one of the campaign officials present, J.D. Gordon, has said the idea was shot down by then Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, Papadopoulos told Mueller’s investigators that Trump encouraged him, saying he found the idea “interesting,” according to the book, which cites sources familiar with his questioning by Mueller’s investigators.

Trump looked at Sessions, as if he expected him to follow up with Papadopoulos, and Sessions nodded in response, the authors write. Sessions has said he has “no clear recollection” of the exchange with Papadopoulos. A White House official said that others at the meeting remember it differently than Papadopoulos.

Last fall, Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russians and became a cooperating witness in Mueller’s probe.

The story of what happened at the only known meeting between Trump and Papadopoulos is one of a number of new details revealed in “Russian Roulette” about contacts that Trump, his campaign advisers and others had with various Russian figures and their associates during the 2016 campaign.

(The first two excerpts from the book were published last week by Yahoo News and Mother Jones. You can read them here and here.)

Photo illustration: Yahoo News

The book chronicles the efforts of Alexander Torshin, a deputy governor of Russia’s central bank and a close Putin ally, and his assistant, Maria Butina, to curry favor with the Trump campaign — including their own attempt to set up a Trump-Putin meeting in Moscow.

Those efforts began as early as July 2015, when Butina showed up at FreedomFest, a conservative gathering, in Las Vegas, where Trump was speaking. During a Q&A session, Trump called on Butina, who asked him about his stance on Russia and the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration on the country — eliciting the first response from the new GOP candidate on an issue that was a top priority of Putin’s government.

“I know Putin,” Trump replied during the course of a five-minute answer. “I believe I would get along very nicely with Putin, OK? I don’t think you’d need the sanctions.”

Later in the campaign, the book reports that two top Trump officials — Steve Bannon and Reince Preibus — discussed a video of the Las Vegas event and wondered how Butina gained such quick access to Trump’s ear.

“How was it that this Russian woman happened to be in Las Vegas for that event? And how was it that Trump happened to call on her?” Isikoff and Corn write. “And Trump’s response? It was odd, Bannon thought, that Trump had a fully developed answer. Priebus agreed there was something strange about Butina. Whenever there were events held by conservative groups, she was always around.”

In the spring of 2016, Torshin and Butina — who had close ties to the National Rifle Association — made a direct play to gain influence with the Trump campaign, floating their own proposal for a Trump-Putin summit during an international conference in Moscow on the plight of persecuted Christians, organized by Franklin Graham.

In an email to Trump campaign officials, Rick Clay, a conservative activist, described Torshin as a “very close friend of President Putin” and encouraged the Trump team to strongly consider the offer.

Maria Butina; Donald Trump and Alexander Torshin
Maria Butina; candidate Donald Trump speaks at FreedomFest in 2015; and Alexander Torshin. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: ITAR-TASS/ZUMAPRESS.com, John Locher/AP, Alexander Shalgin\TASS via Getty Images)

“Please excuse the play on words, but this is HUGE!” Clay wrote, according to a copy of the email that was reviewed by the authors. “The optics of Mr. Trump in Russia with Franklin Graham attending an event of over 1000 World Christian Leaders addressing the Defense of Persecuted Christians accompanied by a very visible meeting between President Putin and Mr. Trump would devastate the Clinton campaign’s efforts to marginalize Mr. Trump on foreign policy and embolden him further with evangelicals.”

The then-candidate’s son-in-law Jared Kushner subsequently sent an email recommending that the campaign “pass on this,” warning, “Be careful.”

Among other revelations in “Russian Roulette”:

The U.S. government had a secret source inside the Kremlin who warned as early as 2014 that Russia was mounting an ambitious campaign of cyberattacks and information warfare against Western European democracies and the United States. The reports from the source were “startling” because they spelled out the “magnitude” of the Kremlin’s “intention to do us harm,” according to a U.S. official familiar with the matter. The secret Kremlin source also provided stark insights into the contempt that Putin and his senior officials had for President Barack Obama and his administration — often expressed in racist terms. In Putin’s presence, Obama would be called a “monkey,” and it was not uncommon for the American president to be referred to by the N-word, the book reports.

Robby Mook, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager, was so concerned about Trump’s ties to Russia-friendly advisers that he contemplated an idea to catch the Trump campaign in the act of colluding with Moscow by mounting what he called a “honeypot” operation straight out of a spy novel. The idea was that the Clinton team would plant a phony story about Clinton in the Democratic National Committee’s computer system and wait to see if the Trump campaign or its allies made public use of it. If they did, it would prove the Trump campaign was receiving intelligence from the Russian hackers who had infiltrated the DNC’s servers. But after Mook floated the idea to Marc Elias, the Clinton campaign’s lawyer, they decided it was “harebrained” and could backfire.

President Obama was incredulous when he was first briefed in early January 2017 about the contents of a dossier, prepared by former British spy Christopher Steele, alleging that the Kremlin had a videotape of Trump engaging in sordid sexual behavior with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room. “Why am I hearing this?” he asked his national security adviser, Susan Rice. “Why is this happening?” Rice explained that the intelligence community had no idea if the claim was true but that Obama needed to be aware that the allegation was circulating. A few days later, when Vice President Joe Biden was briefed about intelligence reports on contacts between various players in the Trump orbit and the Kremlin, he had a visceral reaction. “If this is true, it’s treason,” Biden exclaimed.


When then President-elect Trump was handed a two-page synopsis of the Steele dossier, at the end of a U.S. intelligence briefing about Russia, he too had a visceral reaction. “It’s a shakedown,” Trump said, after FBI Director James Comey left the room. Trump believed he was being blackmailed by Comey. The incident, the authors write, may well have planted the seeds for what was later described by one of the most disastrous decisions of Trump’s presidency to date: the firing of Comey, a move that led to the appointment of Mueller as special counsel.


MORE ON “RUSSIAN ROULETTE,” FROM MOTHER JONES:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/03/george-papadopoulos-claimed-trump-encouraged-his-efforts-to-establish-a-russian-backchannel/
George Papadopoulos Claimed Trump Encouraged His Efforts to Establish a Russian Back Channel
And more scoops from “Russian Roulette,” the new book co-authored by Mother Jones’ Washington bureau chief.
MOTHER JONES WASHINGTON BUREAU MAR. 12, 2018 9:00 PM

Photograph -- Former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulus, pled guilty to lying to the FBI in early October.

A campaign adviser for Donald Trump saying that Trump encouraged his efforts during the 2016 election to make contact with the Kremlin. President Barack Obama’s reaction to the salacious details in the infamous memos written by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. Steele’s own assessment of the accuracy of the reports he compiled regarding Trump’s personal conduct in Russia. Roger Stone’s alibi challenged. A secret source in the Russian government telling a US official in 2014 that Vladimir Putin was planning a major information war campaign against the West and the United States. These are some of the scoops in Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, a new book by Michael Isikoff, the chief investigative reporter for Yahoo News, and David Corn, the Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones.

Last week, Mother Jones and Yahoo News published excerpts from two chapters of the book—one recounting Trump’s 2013 visit to Moscow, the other telling the secret story of Obama’s response to Russia’s attack on the 2016 election. Each one generated news stories about revelations in these chapters including that Trump in 2013 partied at a raunchy Las Vegas nightclub with two men who would later help set up the infamous June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower between top Trump campaign advisers and a Russian emissary supposedly bringing them Kremlin “dirt” on Hillary Clinton; that Trump was obsessively eager to meet Putin when he was in Moscow for his Miss Universe contest and even suggested to a colleague they lie and say Putin, who was a no-show, attended the event; that Trump routinely dumped finalists at his beauty pageants because they looked too “ethnic”; and that a clash occurred within the Obama White House over whether to hit Russia with cyberattacks in retaliation for Moscow’s assault on the US election.

The rest of the book has other significant disclosures. Here’s an incomplete list.

– George Papadopoulos claimed Trump encouraged him to connect with the Russian government. As a member of Trump’s team of foreign policy advisers, Papadopoulos, a young energy consultant with little national security experience, spent months in the spring and summer of 2016 trying to set up a back channel between the campaign and the Kremlin, in part to arrange a Trump-Putin meeting before Election Day. His efforts were known to senior campaign aides, including campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis and top campaign aide Paul Manafort. According to a later court filing, Papadopoulos, who in October 2017 pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, aimed to set up an “off the record” meeting between campaign representatives and Putin’s office. Trump has famously denied there was any relationship between his campaign and Moscow. But Russian Roulette reveals that Papadopoulos has told investigators that at a March 31, 2016, meeting Trump held with his foreign policy team, when Papadopoulos informed Trump he had contacts in the United Kingdom who could set up a meeting between Trump and Putin, Trump said this was an “interesting” idea. Trump, according to Papadopoulos’ account, looked at then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a top Trump adviser at the time, as if he expected him to follow up. Afterward, Papadopoulos, working with Russian cutouts, kept pursuing such a meeting.

– A secret source. According to the book, a US official in Russia in 2014 developed a high-level source in the Russian government who regularly shared inside information about Kremlin doings. After Viktor Yanukovych, the president of Ukraine and a Putin ally, fled Kiev in February, this source told his American contact that Putin was planning to move into Crimea. He also informed the US official that Putin was increasingly under the influence of an ultranationalist* [nationalistic to the exclusion of the needs of all other nations or peoples.”] Orthodox Russian monk named Father Tikhon Shevkunov and that Putin and his inner circle had total contempt for Obama, denigrating the president as weak but also accusing him of meddling in Russia’s affair. Putin’s aides often used racist terms when referring to Obama, calling him a “monkey” and using the N-word. But most alarming, this secret source told the US official that the Kremlin was planning a wide-ranging clandestine campaign to undermine Western democracies that would include cyberattacks, information warfare, propaganda, and social media efforts. The US official sent in reports based on the source’s information. Yet these warnings garnered little attention within the US government. “Anybody who had any doubt about Putin’s intentions,” the US official later said, “just wasn’t reading what we reported.”


– Steele isn’t sure the pee party happened. Steele’s dossier became most notorious because it included the allegation that Trump had prostitutes put on a “golden showers” performance in his hotel room when he was in Moscow in 2013. Steele’s larger point was that the Russian government, according to his sources, had obtained compromising information about Trump’s personal conduct that could be used to blackmail Trump. There still is no confirmation anything sordid happened in Trump’s suite that particular night. (At least one Trump associate has said Trump engaged in sexual antics on previous trips to Russia.) Steele, according to Russian Roulette, has told people that he believes that 70 to 90 percent of the broad assertions of his reporting—that Russia mounted a campaign to cultivate Trump and in some manner colluded with the Trump campaign—was accurate. But he is less certain about the most sordid allegation. Regarding whether prostitutes in Moscow had urinated in Trump’s presence, Steele has told colleagues, “It’s fifty-fifty.”

– Roger Stone’s alibi. In August 2016, Stone, a longtime adviser to Trump and self-proclaimed dirty trickster, repeatedly claimed he was in direct contact with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. And several times during the campaign, he posted tweets that suggested he had advance knowledge about WikiLeaks’ dumps targeting the Clinton campaign. After the election, Stone retreated from his claim that he was in touch with Assange and maintained that he had never communicated directly with Assange. He insisted that whatever he knew about WikiLeaks’ intentions had been gleaned from Assange’s own tweets and then “confirmed” with a back channel he had to Assange: Randy Credico, a New York radio show host and comic who was an Assange supporter. But in an interview for this book, Credico said he had never spoken to Assange before August 25—17 days after Stone first publicly said he had “communicated” with Assange. Credico also said he “absolutely” never told Stone anything about Assange’s plans—because he knew nothing about them. “He’s got me as the fall guy,” Credico said of Stone. “It’s ridiculous.” Credico’s statements undercut Stone’s postelection cover story. In an interview for the book, Stone said of Credico, “His memory is either selective or faulty.”

– Paranoia in Trumpland. In early January 2017, four leaders of the US intelligence community—Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI chief James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and National Security Agency director Admiral Michael Rogers—briefed President-elect Trump on their about-to-be-released report that concluded that Russia had waged its cyberattack on the 2016 election to help Trump become president. They knew he wouldn’t like hearing this. They also had a dilemma on their hands: whether to tell Trump about the Steele dossier, which had not yet become public but was circulating among officials and reporters in Washington. After much discussion, the four had decided that after the briefing Comey would stay behind and give Trump a two-page summary of the Steele memos. Comey did just that, telling Trump that none of the lurid allegations had been confirmed and that he and the others had merely wanted to provide Trump a head’s up about material that could become public. After Comey departed, Trump was livid. He told aides, “This is bullshit.” He and his aides wondered why Comey had gone through this exercise. Then it hit Trump. “It’s a shakedown,” he exclaimed. Comey was trying to blackmail him, sending him a message that he and the others had something on him. This belief would shape Trump’s tumultuous relationship with Comey and the intelligence community.

– Obama’s reaction to the Steele dossier. Near the time the spy chiefs briefed Trump on the intelligence community’s report on the Russian attack, Susan Rice, the national security adviser, encouraged Clapper during the daily intelligence briefing to tell Obama about the “golden showers” allegations. After Clapper did so, Obama turned to Rice and said, “Why am I hearing this?” The president was incredulous. He added, “What’s happening?” One participant in the meeting later said, “You don’t really expect to hear the term ‘golden showers’ in the President’s Daily Brief or that the guy who is going to become president may be a Manchurian candidate.”

– Biden: “It’s treason.” In the last weeks of the Obama presidency, Vice President Joe Biden was briefed on intelligence reports on the connections between assorted Trump associates and Russians. He had a visceral reaction. “If this is true,” he exclaimed. “It’s treason.”

– Paranoia in Clintonland. In March 2016, FBI agents showed up unannounced at the Brooklyn headquarters for Hillary Clinton’s campaign to discuss the campaign’s computer network. Several senior Clinton aides freaked out when they saw the agents entering the office. At the time, Clinton was under investigation for her mishandling of emails and classified information when she had been secretary of state and had used a private server for her electronic communications. Some Clinton campaign officials believed that agents within the bureau were dragging out the investigation to do Clinton harm and wondered if this visit was related to that probe. Robbie Mook, the campaign manager, was so worried about the FBI that he refused to meet with the agents. He was concerned that if he attended a meeting with FBI agents, they might share with him classified information and that subsequently he might in a public forum inadvertently refer to this material. Then he could become a target of an FBI investigation. He even wondered if the FBI might be trying to set him up. He ordered the campaign’s lawyers and IT people to meet with the agents, who had nothing of note to convey other than they had information indicating that entities they would not identify had tried to penetrate the campaign’s network. This was not news to the campaign. Its IT crew had detected many such attempts. With the FBI refusing to provide any details, the Clintonites considered the meeting pointless. Later, they would realize that the FBI did not share with them what would have been valuable information that the bureau possessed at the time: Russian hackers had penetrated the Democratic National Committee. This episode was a sign of just how suspicious the Clinton campaign was. “I was paranoid,” Mook later recalled. “I thought it was a ruse.”

– Not naming Putin. On October 7, 2016, after weeks of White House deliberations over how to respond to Russia’s cyberattacks on the election, the Obama administration issued a statement blaming Moscow for this assault. In the days leading up to this release, Obama’s top national security advisers discussed and debated the details—and the punctuation—of the statement, especially one significant element: accusing Putin by name. The US intelligence community had assessed that Putin had ordered and was overseeing the attack on American democracy, and a near-to-final draft stated this explicitly. But there was concern among Obama’s top policymakers that naming Putin in a public document would be an overly provocative step—and could place at risk some of the intelligence community’s sources. His name was deleted. The statement would say, “only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized” the attack.

– High fives in Moscow. In the weeks after the election, the intelligence community reviewed intelligence previously gathered and concluded by early December that the Russian operation had aimed not just to foment chaos but to elect Trump. As one administration official later explained, “We vacuum up a lot of intelligence that is not exploited in real time. Things sat in databases until queried. Not until after the election did analysts go into these databases and find a lot of stuff that changed the assessments. Plus, intelligence picked up certain Russians high-fiving after the election.” And weeks earlier, before Election Day, one top-secret intelligence report circulated among administration officials reporting that in July, following WikiLeaks’ dump of Democratic Party emails stolen by Russian hackers, Kremlin officials were congratulating themselves on a job well done. “The Russians were talking, telling one another, ‘great job,’” an official who reviewed the report later said. “It was pretty specific. They were celebrating their success.”

– Real-life Homeland. During the transition, Obama administration officials saw numerous intelligence reports indicating there were communications between Trump associates and Russians. This pattern of contact—which included conversations that Michael Flynn and Jared Kushner were each having with Russians—disturbed these aides. They suspected—and feared—the worst. Some Justice Department officials believed the Trump team might be violating the Logan Act, a law over 200 years old (and never successfully prosecuted) that prohibits private citizens from interfering in US diplomatic interactions with other governments. “We got a sinking feeling, a feeling of dread,” an Obama aide recalled. “Were the incoming national security adviser and Trump’s son-in-law in the bag with the Russians? It looked like a season of Homeland.”

– A 2016 Trump Russian deal with offshore companies. During the first few months of Trump’s presidential campaign, he and his lawyer, Michael Cohen, were trying to score a deal in Moscow: the building of a tower that would bear Trump’s name. The venture had been put together by a former felon named Felix Sater who years earlier had worked with Trump to develop the Trump SoHo project in New York City and to search for projects in Russia. Now, as Trump was campaigning for president (and making a series of comments favorable for Putin), he was not telling the voters that he was at the same time negotiating a deal that would need the approval of Putin’s government to proceed. (Cohen would kill the venture in early 2016.) Not until well after Trump was elected president would news of this enterprise become public. But one fact was not revealed: who was truly behind the Russian side of the project. A Russian company named I.C. Expert had negotiated the deal with Cohen. And in a letter of intent Trump signed, the chairman of I.C. Expert, Andrey Rozov, stated he owned 100 percent of the firm. Yet, as Russian Roulette notes, according to the Russian tax registry, I.C. Expert, which had no experience in developing luxury hotels and apartment complexes, was actually owned by three offshore companies, with one of those firms controlled by a Cypriot attorney connected to Russian finance. This deepens the mystery: who was trying to strike a lucrative deal with Trump when he was a candidate?

Russian Roulette contains other news. It reports that during the top-secret White House meetings about Putin’s covert campaign against the 2016 election, the administration’s top national security officials never discussed the wide-ranging clandestine social media campaign Russia had mounted—an operation that included posting divisive material on Facebook, Twitter, and other sites, much of it promoting Trump and denigrating Clinton. This is an indication that the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA did not catch this operation—a major intelligence failure. And in the book, Clapper confirms that in mid-August 2016 when Trump, as the Republican nominee, received his first intelligence briefing, he was told that the US intelligence community had concluded that Moscow was orchestrating the cyberattacks that targeted the Democratic Party. Nevertheless, Trump continued to deny vociferously that Russia was meddling in the election. Though the book does provide ammunition to critics of how Obama handled the Russian attack, it shows that Trump essentially provided cover to Moscow and made it harder for Obama to forge a bipartisan response to Putin’s assault.

FACT:
Mother Jones was founded as a nonprofit in 1976 because we knew corporations and the wealthy wouldn’t fund the type of hard-hitting journalism we set out to do.

Today, reader support makes up about two-thirds of our budget, allows us to dig deep on stories that matter, and lets us keep our reporting free for everyone. If you value what you get from Mother Jones, please join us with a tax-deductible donation so we can keep on doing the type of journalism that 2018 demands.



SESSIONS, ROSENSTEIN AND MUELLER

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/vladmir-putin-has-something-donald-trump-news-anchor-megyn-kelly-interview-a8250446.html#spark_watch_next
News anchor who recently interviewed Vladimir Putin believes he 'has something' on Donald Trump
'I think there’s a very good chance Putin knows some things about Donald Trump that Mr Trump does not want repeated publicly'
Jeff Farrell March 11, 2018

WASHINGTON — Despite unrelenting criticism from the White House on the course of the investigation into Russia's election interference, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Monday offered unqualified support for special counsel Robert Mueller.

"The special counsel is not an unguided missile," Rosenstein said in an exclusive interview with USA TODAY. "I don't believe there is any justification at this point for terminating the special counsel."

Rosenstein's remarks are among the first to address Mueller's status since it was disclosed more than a month ago that President Trump sought to have the special counsel dismissed last summer. The president relented only when White House counsel Donald McGahn threatened to resign if forced to carry out the directive.

The deputy attorney general, who is tasked with overseeing the special counsel, appointed Mueller last May to run the wide-ranging investigation after Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself because of his prior contacts with Russia Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Appearing upbeat and at ease in his fourth-floor office, Rosenstein said oversight of the inquiry requires only "a fraction" of his daily work. He estimated that less than 5% of his week is related to briefings or other matters involving Mueller's investigation.

He dismissed the near-constant and pointed criticism aimed at the Justice Department from the White House and from an ultra-conservative Tea Party Patriots group. The group has run an ugly ad campaign, describing Rosenstein as "a weak careerist" and suggesting that he tender his own resignation.

"I believe much of the criticism will fall by the wayside when people reflect on this era and the Department of Justice," said Rosenstein, who did not refer to Trump directly. "I'm very confident that when the history of this era is written, it will reflect that the department was operated with integrity."

Confident in his job

Of his own job status, Rosenstein appeared both secure and pragmatic in the unpredictable age of Trump.

"I feel very confident in my ability to do the job," he said. "In any political job, you recognize that your time is going to be limited. My goal is to get as much done for as long as I'm here in the job.

More: Ex-Trump aide Sam Nunberg calls Mueller subpoena request 'ridiculous'

"And when my time is up, whenever that may be, I'm confident that I'm going to be able to look back proudly on the work our department has done while I've been fortunate enough to be here."

Rosenstein did invoke Trump's name when he referred to the Justice Department's so-far signature campaign aimed at reducing crime, while pushing for harsher punishments in cases involving violent crime. He said the department was responding to the priorities laid out by the president, while "restoring" the authority of federal prosecutors and other law enforcement officials to bring homicides down across the country after two years of increases.

Rosenstein also referred to the department's effort against the scourge of opioid addiction, with Justice recently pledging to pursue manufacturers.

"Most of the work goes unheralded and un-criticized," he said, adding that his work is focused in "implementing the priorities of the president and the attorney general."

Comey's dismissal increased pressure
The deputy attorney general first emerged as a central figure in the tumultuous first months of the Trump administration when the White House disclosed that Rosenstein and Sessions had recommended the May dismissal of FBI Director James Comey.

Later that month, Rosenstein announced the appointment of Mueller to oversee the continuing inquiry into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, igniting Trump's bitter campaign against his own Justice Department.

The criticism only seems to escalate with the announcement of every new indictment in an inquiry that has snared — among others — Trump's former national security adviser, former campaign and deputy campaign chief.

"Ignore the media," Rosenstein says he tells his worried children. "They know I'm here to do the right thing."

"Ignore the media," Rosenstein says he tells his worried children. "They know I'm here to do the right thing." (Photo: Jarrad Henderson, USA TODAY)

The decision to appoint Mueller fell to Rosenstein after Sessions' recusal in March. Two months later, Rosenstein called the appointment of a special counsel "necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome."

"Our nation is grounded on the rule of law and the public must be assured that government officials administer the law fairly," Rosenstein said in May. "Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result."

Although Trump continues to refer to the inquiry as a "witchhunt" and has leveled bitter criticism against the leadership of Rosenstein and Sessions at Justice, the deputy attorney general has not wavered from his support of Mueller.

"I can assure you that the special counsel is conducting himself consistently with our understanding of the scope of the investigation," Rosenstein told a House panel in December, before offering a stirring defense of the special counsel's credibility.

"I think it would be very difficult to find anybody better qualified for this job...I believe that, based upon his reputation, his service, his patriotism, his experience with the department and the FBI, he was an ideal choice for this task."

Rosenstein acknowledged Monday that the work is sometimes difficult in the face of constant scrutiny.

He also conceded that the public nature of his job, traditionally carried out in near-anonymity, was un-expected.

"I anticipated that this would be a lower-profile job," he said.

Still, Rosenstein said he wouldn't trade places with any of his predecessors, including those who served during Watergate and more recently during the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

"It's inevitable that the deputy attorney general will get caught up in matters that are the subject of public controversy."

“We need to do what we believe is right based on the facts and the law,” he said. “To the extent we get any criticism from any side, we need to set that aside. That can’t influence us in our decision making.”

Explaining that criticism to his two teenage children is another matter.

“No offense,” Rosenstein said, referring to the reporter sitting across from him, “ignore the media. They know I’m here to do the right thing.”



“... WE HAVE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED THE AGREED-UPON PARAMETERS....” I WONDER IF ANY DEMOCRATIC ISSUES WERE INCLUDED IN THOSE “AGREED UPON” MATTERS FOR INVESTIGATION. I UNDERSTAND THEY WERE GIVEN NO INPUT TO THE MATTER. SEE REP SCHIFF’S COMMENTS. CBS STATES THAT TODAY’S TRUMP-PUTIN REPORT FROM THE REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE, SHOWS A TOTALLY CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH FOR TRUMP. YOU KNOW IT!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-intel-committee-finishes-its-russia-probe-interviews/
By OLIVIA VICTORIA GAZIS CBS NEWS March 12, 2018, 6:02 PM
House Intel Committee finishes its Russia probe interviews, finds "no collusion"

Photograph -- Rep. Mike Conaway on Capitol Hill on May 23, 2017, in Washington, D.C. DREW ANGERER / GETTY IMAGES
FILE: WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 23: Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX), now leading the House Intelligence investigation after Devin Nunes was forced to recuse himself, arrives for a hearing featuring former Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan at the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Capitol Hill, May 23, 2017 in Washington, DC. DREW ANGERER / GETTY IMAGES

WASHINGTON -- Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee announced Monday that they found no evidence of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and Russia as they announced the completion of the interview phase of the committee's year-long investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

"We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians," said a one-page summary of the committee's findings, which Democrats on the committee immediately criticized.

The summary document also says the report includes "concurrence with the Intelligence Community's Assessment's judgments, except with respect to Putin's supposed preference for candidate Trump."

That assessment, issued by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence last January, said with "high confidence" that President Vladimir Putin and the Russian government "developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump," and sought to help his election chances.

"After conducting 73 witness interviews, holding nine hearings and briefings, and reviewing over 300,000 documents, we are confident that we have thoroughly investigated the agreed-upon parameters, and developed reliable initial findings and recommendations," said Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, who has been leading the investigation.

Democrats have said the number of witnesses is closer to 60, and pointed out that the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is carrying out a parallel investigation, had interviewed more than one hundred witnesses as of October 2017.

Republicans will share their 150-page draft report with the committee's Democratic minority on Tuesday. As of Monday afternoon, Democrats were not informed that the committee had completed all of its interviews or intended to end its investigation.

In a blistering statement, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the committee, called the shutdown of the investigation "premature" and "another tragic milestone for this Congress."

"By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly," Schiff said.

"On a whole host of investigative threads, our work is fundamentally incomplete, some issues partially investigated," Schiff said, "others, like that involving credible allegations of Russian money laundering, remain barely touched. If the Russians do have leverage over the President of the United States, the Majority has simply decided it would rather not know."

Democrats have been saying for weeks that ending the investigation credibly would require calling in dozens more witnesses and issues subpoenas for hundreds of more documents, including those related to developments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Mueller has indicted 13 Russian nationals and four Trump campaign associates to date.

`Schiff has said the committee's work would not be complete without hearing from some of the witnesses cooperating with Mueller's probe, including former campaign aides George Papadopoulos and Rick Gates and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

He has also said the committee had obtained only incomplete -- and, in some cases, potentially incorrect -- testimony from a spate of other witnesses, including Donald Trump, Jr., Attorney General Jeff Sessions, former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, outgoing White House communications director Hope Hicks and Trump associate and Blackwater founder Erik Prince.

Prince's testimony before the committee has been called into question by recent reports that a Lebanese-American adviser to the United Arab Emirates, George Nader, told investigators from the special counsel's office that he attended a January 2017 meeting in the Seychelles with a Russian banker with ties to the Kremlin.

In a statement Monday, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan said, "After more than a year investigating Russia's actions in the 2016 election, we are well into the primary season for the 2018 elections and experts are warning that we need to safe guard against further interference. That's what this next phase is about and we hope Democrats will join us in seeing this through."

Conaway said he wanted to complete the report "as quickly as we can," but said the intelligence community would have to review it for declassification. Its public release is not expected for several weeks.

He also said he would seek Democrats' input to edit the report, and that he expected some of the process would be bipartisan "with precious little pushback."

He conceded, though, that in other areas Democrats "may take a different interpretation of the facts, or want to add a different conclusion."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.


THE CLEVER REPUBLICAN REP. MIKE CONAWAY SAYS THAT ALL OF US ON THIS SIDE OF THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN “READING TOO MANY TOM CLANCY NOVELS.” NO, THAT’S NOT TRUE. WE JUST KNOW WHEN WE’RE BEING “JOSHED.” WAIT ‘TIL IT’S OUR TURN, GUYS!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/draft-gop-report-no-coordination-between-trump-russia-220046436--politics.html?soc_trk=gcm&soc_src=ecd5e8af-dc90-3332-9efb-d522bf6b8dfa&.tsrc=notification-brknews
MARY CLARE JALONICK
Associated Press • March 12, 2018

Photograph -- In this March 8, 2018, photo, Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, left, at the Capitol in Washington. Republicans on the House intelligence committee have completed a draft report concluding there was no collusion or coordination between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia. The finding is sure to please the White House and enrage panel Democrats who have not yet seen the document. After a yearlong investigation, Conaway says the committee has finished doing witness interviews. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee have completed a draft report concluding there was no collusion or coordination between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia, a finding that is sure to please the White House and enrage panel Democrats.

After a yearlong investigation, Texas Rep. Mike Conaway announced Monday that the committee has finished interviewing witnesses and will share the report with Democrats on Tuesday. Conaway is the Republican leading the House probe, one of several investigations on Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.

Conaway previewed several of the report's conclusions.

"We found no evidence of collusion," Conaway told reporters Monday, suggesting that those who believe there was are reading too many spy novels. "We found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings, inappropriate judgment in taking meetings. But only Tom Clancy or Vince Flynn or someone else like that could take this series of inadvertent contacts with each other, or meetings or whatever, and weave that into sort of a fiction page turner, spy thriller."

The public will not see the report until Democrats have reviewed it and the intelligence community has decided what information can become public, a process that could take weeks. Democrats are expected to issue a separate report with much different conclusions.

In addition to the statement on coordination with Russians, the draft picks apart a central assessment made by the U.S. intelligence community shortly after the 2016 election — that Russian meddling in the campaign was intended to help Trump and support Democrat Hillary Clinton. Committee aides said they spent hundreds of hours reviewing raw source material used by the intelligence services to make that claim and that it did not meet the appropriate standards.

The aides spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the intelligence material. Conaway said there will be a second report just dealing with the intelligence assessment and its credibility.

Democrats have criticized Republicans on the committee for shortening the investigation, pointing to multiple contacts between Trump's campaign and Russia and saying they have seen far too few witnesses to make any judgment on collusion. The Democrats and Republicans have openly fought throughout the investigation, with Democrats suggesting a cover-up for a Republican president and one GOP member of the panel calling the probe "poison" for the previously bipartisan panel.

According to Conaway, the report will agree with the intelligence assessment on most details, including that Russians did meddle in the election. It will detail Russian cyberattacks on U.S. institutions during the election and the use of social media to sow discord. It will also show a pattern of Russian attacks on European allies — information that could be redacted in the final report. It will blame officials in former President Barack Obama's administration for a "lackluster" response and look at leaks from the intelligence community to the media.

It will include at least 25 recommendations, including how to improve election security, respond to cyberattacks and improve counterintelligence efforts.

The report is also expected to turn the subject of collusion toward the Clinton campaign, saying an anti-Trump dossier compiled by a former British spy and paid for by Democrats was one way that Russians tried to influence the election. Conaway did not suggest that Clinton knowingly coordinated with the Russians, but said the dossier clearly "would have hurt him and helped her."

He also said there was no evidence that anything "untoward" happened at a 2016 meeting between members of the Trump campaign and Russians, though he called it ill-advised. Despite a promise of dirt on Clinton ahead of the meeting, there's no evidence that such material was exchanged, he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is also investigating the Russian intervention, and is expected to have a bipartisan report out in the coming weeks dealing with election security. The Senate panel is expected to issue findings on the more controversial issue of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia at a later date.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, also investigating the meddling, is expected to release transcripts soon of closed-door interviews with several people who attended the 2016 meeting between the Trump campaign and Russians. It's unclear if the Judiciary panel will produce a final report.

The congressional investigations are completely separate from special counsel Robert Mueller's probe, which is likely to take much longer. Unlike Mueller's, congressional investigations aren't criminal but serve to inform the public and to recommend possible legislation.


Marcus Burkett Jr11 minutes ago
GOP Draft or Mueller's Draft?.................I'll wait for Muller's
ReplyReplies (42)38893

Will
Will8 minutes ago
More evidence of party over country. Our system is horribly broken. We need term limits. We need a viable third party. We need campaign finance reform.
ReplyReplies (4)12413

Joseph Peschel
Joseph Peschel3 minutes ago
Republicans on this rigged committee may find no evidence of election collusion between Trump and Russia, but I wonder the Democrats think. Mueller has certainly found all sorts of evidence of misdeeds: possibly collusion, but certainly obstruction of justice.
Reply9



ROD ROSENSTEIN SEEMS CONFIDENT IN HIS POSITION, AND PERFECTLY TRUSTING IN ROBERT MUELLER. I WISH MORE OF THE TRUMP APPOINTEES WERE AS LEVEL-HEADED, CONCERNED ABOUT HUMAN ISSUES AND INTELLIGENT AS HE SEEMS TO BE.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/12/rosenstein-mueller-not-unguided-missle-interview/416388002/?csp=chromepush
Rod Rosenstein, deputy attorney general, says Robert Mueller is 'not an unguided missile'
Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY Published 5:46 p.m. ET March 12, 2018

WASHINGTON — Despite unrelenting criticism from the White House on the course of the investigation into Russia's election interference, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Monday offered unqualified support for special counsel Robert Mueller.

"The special counsel is not an unguided missile," Rosenstein said in an exclusive interview with USA TODAY. "I don't believe there is any justification at this point for terminating the special counsel."

Rosenstein's remarks are among the first to address Mueller's status since it was disclosed more than a month ago that President Trump sought to have the special counsel dismissed last summer. The president relented only when White House counsel Donald McGahn threatened to resign if forced to carry out the directive.

The deputy attorney general, who is tasked with overseeing the special counsel, appointed Mueller last May to run the wide-ranging investigation after Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself because of his prior contacts with Russia Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Appearing upbeat and at ease in his fourth-floor office, Rosenstein said oversight of the inquiry requires only "a fraction" of his daily work. He estimated that less than 5% of his week is related to briefings or other matters involving Mueller's investigation.

He dismissed the near-constant and pointed criticism aimed at the Justice Department from the White House and from an ultra-conservative Tea Party Patriots group. The group has run an ugly ad campaign, describing Rosenstein as "a weak careerist" and suggesting that he tender his own resignation.

"I believe much of the criticism will fall by the wayside when people reflect on this era and the Department of Justice," said Rosenstein, who did not refer to Trump directly. "I'm very confident that when the history of this era is written, it will reflect that the department was operated with integrity."

Confident in his job

Of his own job status, Rosenstein appeared both secure and pragmatic in the unpredictable age of Trump.

"I feel very confident in my ability to do the job," he said. "In any political job, you recognize that your time is going to be limited. My goal is to get as much done for as long as I'm here in the job.

More: Ex-Trump aide Sam Nunberg calls Mueller subpoena request 'ridiculous'

"And when my time is up, whenever that may be, I'm confident that I'm going to be able to look back proudly on the work our department has done while I've been fortunate enough to be here."

Rosenstein did invoke Trump's name when he referred to the Justice Department's so-far signature campaign aimed at reducing crime, while pushing for harsher punishments in cases involving violent crime. He said the department was responding to the priorities laid out by the president, while "restoring" the authority of federal prosecutors and other law enforcement officials to bring homicides down across the country after two years of increases.

Rosenstein also referred to the department's effort against the scourge of opioid addiction, with Justice recently pledging to pursue manufacturers.

"Most of the work goes unheralded and un-criticized," he said, adding that his work is focused in "implementing the priorities of the president and the attorney general."

Comey's dismissal increased pressure

The deputy attorney general first emerged as a central figure in the tumultuous first months of the Trump administration when the White House disclosed that Rosenstein and Sessions had recommended the May dismissal of FBI Director James Comey.

Later that month, Rosenstein announced the appointment of Mueller to oversee the continuing inquiry into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, igniting Trump's bitter campaign against his own Justice Department.

The criticism only seems to escalate with the announcement of every new indictment in an inquiry that has snared — among others — Trump's former national security adviser, former campaign and deputy campaign chief.

"Ignore the media," Rosenstein says he tells his worried children. "They know I'm here to do the right thing."

"Ignore the media," Rosenstein says he tells his worried children. "They know I'm here to do the right thing." (Photo: Jarrad Henderson, USA TODAY)

The decision to appoint Mueller fell to Rosenstein after Sessions' recusal in March. Two months later, Rosenstein called the appointment of a special counsel "necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome."

"Our nation is grounded on the rule of law and the public must be assured that government officials administer the law fairly," Rosenstein said in May. "Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result."

Although Trump continues to refer to the inquiry as a "witchhunt" and has leveled bitter criticism against the leadership of Rosenstein and Sessions at Justice, the deputy attorney general has not wavered from his support of Mueller.

"I can assure you that the special counsel is conducting himself consistently with our understanding of the scope of the investigation," Rosenstein told a House panel in December, before offering a stirring defense of the special counsel's credibility.

"I think it would be very difficult to find anybody better qualified for this job...I believe that, based upon his reputation, his service, his patriotism, his experience with the department and the FBI, he was an ideal choice for this task."

Rosenstein acknowledged Monday that the work is sometimes difficult in the face of constant scrutiny.

He also conceded that the public nature of his job, traditionally carried out in near-anonymity, was un-expected.

"I anticipated that this would be a lower-profile job," he said.

Still, Rosenstein said he wouldn't trade places with any of his predecessors, including those who served during Watergate and more recently during the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

"It's inevitable that the deputy attorney general will get caught up in matters that are the subject of public controversy."

“We need to do what we believe is right based on the facts and the law,” he said. “To the extent we get any criticism from any side, we need to set that aside. That can’t influence us in our decision making.”

Explaining that criticism to his two teenage children is another matter.

“No offense,” Rosenstein said, referring to the reporter sitting across from him, “ignore the media. They know I’m here to do the right thing.”



FACEBOOK BLEW OUT THE TOP ON THE STATISTICS CHART OF WHOSE MATERIAL WAS USED BY CBS, ETC. IN 2015, 2016 AND 2017, PROBABLY DUE TO THE NUMBER OF RUSSIAN STORIES, THE MAIN SOURCE WAS FACEBOOK. SAD. I NEVER WOULD GET MY NEWS FROM FACEBOOK, ANYWAY. TO ME, THEY ARE A FAR, FAR, FAR LESS RELIABLE SITE THAN ANY OF THE WELL-KNOWN SOURCES LIKE CBS.

https://www.wired.com/story/why-facebook-has-been-less-important-to-news-publishers/
FOR NEWS PUBLISHERS, FACEBOOK IS A LESS RELIABLE FRIEND
AUTHOR: FRED VOGELSTEINFRED VOGELSTEIN
BUSINESS
03.12.1807:00 AM

Photograph – NO CAPTION ON THIS PHOTO, BUT IT IS PROBABLY THE FACEBOOK BUILDING DUE TO THE LARGE “THUMBS UP” THAT IS OUTSIDE THE FRONT ENTRANCE. NIALL CARSON/GETTY IMAGES

CHART -- The chart shows the share of traffic coming from Facebook, Google, and Twitter to 2,500 news sites tracked by Parse.ly, quarterly since 2012. PARSE.LY

IN JANUARY, FACEBOOK said it will reduce the volume of news in its news feed, in favor of more posts from friends and family. In fact, Facebook’s role in distributing news has been falling dramatically for more than a year.

Data from Parse.ly, which tracks visits to more than 2,500 publisher sites, shows that ahead of the 2016 US presidential election, more than 40 percent of traffic to those sites came from Facebook. By the end of 2017, Facebook accounted for less than 26 percent of traffic to those publishers.

That trend will likely continue as Facebook rolls out the changes to news feed. At a February conference sponsored by Recode, news feed boss Adam Mosseri said that in the coming months, news will represent roughly 4 percent of content in the news feed, down from 5 percent before the recent change. On some days in February, Parse.ly data show that the share of publisher traffic coming from Facebook dipped as low as 20 percent, lower than at any time since 2013.

Facebook says a big part of the decline in 2017 stemmed from the explosion of video being posted in news feed after the election. News feed spokesman Tucker Bounds said people spent longer watching video than snacking on headlines. News feed algorithm changes to reduce clickbait, sensationalism, and misinformation in 2017 also reduced referral traffic, he said.

The chart shows the share of traffic coming from Facebook, Google, and Twitter to 2,500 news sites tracked by Parse.ly, quarterly since 2012. PARSE.LY

Another factor in Facebook's decline has been the rising popularity of Google’s Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) technology with publishers. AMP is Google's effort to make publisher content load more quickly in mobile web pages and to make it easier for readers to find their content on Google sites. At an event in San Francisco in February, Google general counsel Kent Walker said to expect Google to post further gains. “We are not backing away from news—we are doubling down on news," he said.

Lastly, publishers themselves have contributed to the drop in Facebook referral traffic. From their perspective, Facebook's distribution strategy has been schizophrenic, so they've grown less willing to give Facebook access to all of their content. For example, during 2015 and 2016, publishers were excited by Facebook’s Instant Articles feature designed to allow their content to load faster. But by 2017 many publishers concluded the arrangement wasn't helping them make money, and they made less content available for that program.

As recently as January it seemed that Facebook was having trouble making up its mind about how to think about news distribution. For example, one week after announcing that it was changing news feed to promote more meaningful interactions between friends and family and deemphasize news, Facebook said it would start giving boosts to the most trustworthy publications based on user surveys. A few weeks later it said it also plans to boost content from local newspapers, in an effort to help struggling publishers who’ve watched much of their ad revenue flow to Facebook and Google.

In the Recode appearance, Mosseri and news partnerships head Campbell Brown tried to clear up any confusion: Longer and better-reported stories will now do better in newsfeed than shorter more clickbaity pieces. Also, more news appearing in newsfeed will mirror the paywalls publishers are erecting on their own sites. Translation: If you ever counted on Facebook to distribute your content, stop.

Brown acknowledged that even the best publishers have found Facebook’s approach to news distribution to be maddening. “We are going to have to be way more transparent with publishers and candid” that we are going to need to experiment and that some experiments may not work out, she told the conference. “We have not been as open about that as we should have been.”

But she also said that sites that are more interested in news quantity over news quality, that are overly attached to short stories with clickbaity headlines, should not expect Facebook’s warm embrace either. “My job is not to go recruit people from news organization to put their stuff on Facebook. This is not about us trying to make everyone happy. My job is to ensure that there is quality news on Facebook and that the publishers who want to do quality news on Facebook have a business model that works.” If Brown makes good on that promise, many publishers won’t have a problem forgiving Facebook for previous transgressions.

FACING THE NEWS – RELATED STORIES
Facebook in January said it plans to reduce the volume of news in its news feed, in favor of more content from friends and family.
A bill introduced in Congress would allow publishers to collaborate in negotiating with Facebook and Google.
Read WIRED's examination of the past two years of crises for Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg.