The following article by James Hohmann with Breanne Deppisch was posted on the Washington Post website May 23, 2017:
THE BIG IDEA: James Comey was not alone. Even Donald Trump’s own pick for director of national intelligence, former Republican Sen. Dan Coats, refused to comply with a request by the president to push back against the FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government.
Trump also reached out to Adm. Mike Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency. He pressed both men to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election. Each saw the president’s entreaty as inappropriate.
The Post’s Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima broke this latest bombshell last night: “Current and former senior intelligence officials viewed Trump’s requests as an attempt by the president to tarnish the credibility of the agency leading the Russia investigation. A senior intelligence official said Trump’s goal was to ‘muddy the waters’ about the scope of the FBI probe … Senior intelligence officials also saw the March requests as a threat to the independence of U.S. spy agencies, which are supposed to remain insulated from partisan issues. ‘The problem wasn’t so much asking them to issue statements, it was asking them to issue false statements about an ongoing investigation,’ a former senior intelligence official said of the request to Coats.”
This new scoop is hugely significant because it suggests a concerted, multi-front effort by the president and top White House staff to rein in an FBI investigation in the months before Trump fired Comey. You really should read Adam and Ellen’s full story, but here are three important nuggets:
1. There is a paper trail: “Trump’s conversation with Rogers was documented contemporaneously in an internal memo written by a senior NSA official.” This could wind up being a key evidence for special counsel Robert Mueller.
2. Trump staffers were enlisted: “In addition to the requests to Coats and Rogers, senior White House officials sounded out top intelligence officials about the possibility of intervening directly with Comey to encourage the FBI to drop its probe of Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser … The officials said the White House appeared uncertain about its power to influence the FBI. ‘Can we ask him to shut down the investigation? Are you able to assist in this matter?’ one official said of the line of questioning from the White House.”
3. “Current and former officials said that Trump either lacks an understanding of the FBI’s role as an independent law enforcement agency or does not care about maintaining such boundaries. Trump’s effort to use the director of national intelligence and the NSA director to dispute Comey’s statement and to say there was no evidence of collusion echoes President Richard Nixon’s ‘unsuccessful efforts to use the CIA to shut down the FBI’s investigation of the Watergate break-in on national security grounds,’ said Jeffrey H. Smith, a former general counsel at the CIA. Smith called Trump’s actions ‘an appalling abuse of power.’”
Reaction from a Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee:
 |
LAWYERING UP:
— Trump is moving rapidly toward assembling a team of outside lawyers to help him navigate the expanding investigations into his campaign and Russian election interference. Robert Costa and Ashley Parker report on the list of finalists being considered: “That search process, in which Trump has been personally involved, is expected to yield a formal legal unit in the coming days, made up of lawyers from several firms who would work together to guide Trump as he responds both to the ongoing federal probe and the congressional investigations.”
Attorneys who have spoken to the White House and are seen as the finalists include Marc Kasowitz, Robert Giuffra Jr., Reid Weingarten, and Ted Olson: “Kasowitz, who has known Trump for decades, is expected to take a leading role. A partner at Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman in New York, Kasowitz has represented Trump in numerous cases, including on his divorce records, real estate transactions and allegations of fraud at Trump University … Giuffra, Olson and Weingarten have already spoken with senior administration officials about the team.”
It is unclear how Trump will pay for his legal team, the cost of which cannot be covered by the federal government: “But campaign finance lawyers said Trump could probably draw funds from his reelection committee to cover legal expenses related to the Russia inquiries, including money donated after he assumed office.”
A smart point in Bob and Ashley’s story: Outside experts note that the president’s decision to consider a team of lawyers from several different firms, rather than a single outside counselor, may exacerbate his existing problem of competing power factions within an already chaotic White House. “The one thing he’s trying to do is to manage some of the disorder that seems to have affected his legal position,” said a lawyer who worked in a previous administration. “And so to create a Tower of Babel within his legal team is sort of mirroring some of the problems that got him in trouble in the first place.”
— Layering: Trump is also looking to hire former campaign officials Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie to lead a separate “crisis management operation,”as he seeks to wall off the scandals threatening to derail his agenda. Trump personally reached out to those aides to sound them out about working with the administration as “crisis managers,” Politico reports, and both men were spotted in the West Wing last week. It reflects how little confidence he has in his pre-existing press shop.
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL GETS TO WORK:
— Robert Mueller has been briefed on the contents of some of Comey’s memos, which he created to document his private meetings with Trump. CNN’s Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz report: “Additionally, he has already visited FBI headquarters, where he met with the counterintelligence agents who have been working on the case since last July … One source added that part of Mueller’s investigation is expected to focus on obstruction of justice. In that case, Comey would be a witness and Mueller will likely interview him as part of the probe…
“Potentially complicating that effort is Comey’s acceptance to testify on Capitol Hill after Memorial Day. The source says Comey likely will be limited with what he will be able to say now that the Russia probe is in the hands of Mueller. ‘There’s no way in the world Mueller wants his witness testifying,’ the source said. ‘He wants to question him before anyone else does but before that he’ll have to go through tons of documents.’ That means there will likely be a lot of negotiating happening in the early stages of the investigation particularly when it comes to congressional inquiries on the same material …”
— House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz postponed a planned Wednesday hearing because Comey told him he wants to speak with Mueller first.
CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS?
— Flynn’s refusal to comply with the Senate Intelligence Committee’s subpoena puts the ball in Richard Burr’s court. “Members of the Senate Intelligence Committee must now meet to vote and decide whether to hold Flynn in contempt or accept his attempt to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination,” Karoun Demirjian reports. “The committee has demanded that Flynn provide it with a list of any contacts he had with Russian officials between June 16, 2015, and Jan. 20, 2017.” Burr (R-N.C.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) said in a joint statement that they are “disappointed” by Flynn’s decision and will “vigorously pursue General Flynn’s testimony and his production of any and all pertinent materials pursuant to the Committee’s authorities.” (One thing they could try to do: make Flynn appear before their committee to awkwardly plead the Fifth in front of television cameras.)
The Fifth Amendment protects you from making incriminatory comments about yourself — but it does not protect you from things you’ve said in the past. Philip Bump explains: “Documents are similarly a form of past behavior to which the Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply. … If the Senate Intel Committee were to hold him in contempt, the full Senate would be asked to weigh in on the matter and, if the Senate agreed to hold Flynn in contempt, the matter would be referred to the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington for criminal charges. In other words, Flynn could end up being convicted of a crime for withholding the documents and face prison time — regardless of what the documents say.”
ANOTHER SHOE DROPS:
— The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings,cited a previously undisclosed document to allege that Flynn “lied” to federal investigators about payments he received “directly” from Russia after appearing at a gala hosted by the state-owned media company RT. From Karoun: “Cummings cites the March 14, 2016, Report of Investigation indicating Flynn ‘told security clearance investigators that he was paid by ‘U.S. companies’ when he traveled to Moscow’ for that gala and told investigators that ‘he has not received any benefit from a foreign country.’ But payment vouchers and other documents showed that Russia had ‘directly’ paid for Flynn’s airfare, accommodations and other expenses, Cummings wrote, citing the investigators’ report.” Cummings stressed his view that Jason Chaffetz must issue subpoenas to various White House officials to learn what “top officials knew about General Flynn — and when they knew it.”
RED FLAGS:
— Former Trump transition chairman Chris Christie said he “repeatedly” recommended that Trump not give a job to Michael Flynn. “If I were president-elect of the United States, I wouldn’t let General Flynn in the White House, let alone give him a job,” Christie told reporters Monday in Trenton, per John Wagner. While he declined to go into specifics – noting that some information was classified – the New Jersey governor said Flynn was “not my cup of tea” and that the two “didn’t see eye-to-eye.” “I didn’t think that he was someone who would bring benefit to the president or to the administration,” Christie continued. “And I made that very clear to candidate Trump, and I made it very clear to President-elect Trump.”
We presume Mueller will eventually want to talk with Christie about these conversations: What did Christie know about Flynn that he cannot say right now because it remains classified? What exactly did he tell Trump? How did Trump respond? Did Christie’s concerns about Flynn play a role in Trump ousting him as head of the transition team?
DAYLIGHT:
— Nikki Haley, who at only 45 years old has her own political future to think about salvaging, is putting a little more distance between herself and Trump. The U.N. ambassador said on NBC’s “Today” show that she is working to reassure allies that the administration can be trusted with sensitive information after the president slipped code-word classified material to the Russians. More importantly, she also offered support for the work that Mueller will do as special counsel. “I think we absolutely need the investigation,” Haley said. “I think that all these questions need to be answered so that the administration can get back to work.” (Trump calls it “a witch hunt.”)
View the post here.