Trump’s lawyer in Russia probe has clients with Kremlin ties

The following article by Shawn Boburg was posted on the Washington Post website June 9, 2017:

Marc E. Kasowitz, attorney for President Trump, makes a statement to the media Thursday . (Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post)

The hard-charging New York lawyer President Trump chose to represent him in the Russia investigation has prominent clients with ties to the Kremlin, a striking pick for a president trying to escape the persistent cloud that has trailed his administration.

Marc E. Kasowitz’s clients include Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who is close to President Vladimir Putin and has done business with Trump’s former campaign manager. Kasowitz also represents Sberbank, Russia’s largest state-owned bank, U.S. court records show.

Kasowitz has represented one of Deripaska’s companies for years in a civil lawsuit in New York and was scheduled to argue on the company’s behalf May 25, two days after news broke that Trump had hired him, court records show. A different lawyer in Kasowitz’s firm showed up in court instead, avoiding a scenario that would have highlighted Kasowitz’s extensive work for high-profile Russian clients. Continue reading “Trump’s lawyer in Russia probe has clients with Kremlin ties”

Did Trump just acknowledge (in a tweet, of course) that he told Comey to back off Michael Flynn?

The following article by Amber Phillips was posted on the Washington Post website June 9, 2017:

Update: President Trump gave the same maybe-I-did, maybe-I-didn’t statement in a press conference Friday. When asked by ABC’s Jonathan Karl whether he told Comey to back off the Flynn investigation, Trump said: “I didn’t say that. I will tell you I didn’t say that. And there’d be nothing wrong if I did say that, according to everything I read today.” The original post about why this doesn’t make sense follows. 

The president is tweeting, and perhaps tweeting himself into more trouble, about James B. Comey, the FBI director he fired in May.

In his second tweet before lunchtime Friday, President Trump potentially undermined his private lawyer’s statements denying key parts of Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee the day before.

Here’s the tweet: Continue reading “Did Trump just acknowledge (in a tweet, of course) that he told Comey to back off Michael Flynn?”

There’s no indication Comey violated the law. Trump may be about to.

The following article by Philip Bump was posted n the Washington Post website June 9, 2017:

Former FBI director James B. Comey testified he used a third party to share the details of his private meetings with President Trump. When Sen. Blunt (R-Mo.) asked Comey why he didn’t share the memos himself, Comey said he worried the media was camping at the end of his driveway and he thought it would “be like feeding seagulls at the beach.” (Photo: Matt McClain / The Washington Post/Reuters)

This article has been updated.

President Trump’s declaration that the Thursday testimony of former FBI director James B. Comey was a “total and complete vindication” despite “so many false statements and lies” was the sort of brashly triumphant and loosely-grounded-in-reality statement we’ve come to expect from the commander in chief. It was news that came out a bit later, news about plans to file a complaint against Comey for a revelation he made during that Senate Intelligence Committee hearing meeting, that may end up being more damaging to the president. Continue reading “There’s no indication Comey violated the law. Trump may be about to.”

Trump thinks he got ‘total vindication’ from Comey. Except he didn’t.

The following article by Amber Phillips was posted on the Washington Post website June 9, 2016:

Despite so many false statements and lies, total and complete vindication…and WOW, Comey is a leaker!

As former FBI director James B. Comey tells it, the president pursued him with an almost singular focus to say one thing publicly: President Trump is not under investigation.

Trump finally got what he wanted Thursday, when Comey testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Here’s an excerpt of an exchange between Comey and Trump ally Sen. James E. Risch (R-Idaho): Continue reading “Trump thinks he got ‘total vindication’ from Comey. Except he didn’t.”

Intelligence Officials Sidestep Senate Questions on Trump and Russia

The following article by Emmarie Huetteman and Charlie Savage was posted on the New York Times website June 7, 2017:

From left, the acting F.B.I. director, Andrew G. McCabe; Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein; the director of national intelligence, Dan Coats; and the N.S.A. director, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, appearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Two top intelligence officials refused to answer senators’ questions on Wednesday about whether President Trump had asked them to intervene in the F.B.I. investigation into Russian election interference, saying only that they had never felt “pressured” by the White House to do anything improper.

The two officials — Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency — testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the eve of a highly anticipated appearance before the panel by James B. Comey, who was fired as F.B.I. director by Mr. Trump last month. Mr. Comey, in prepared remarks released by the committee after the two officials testified, said Mr. Trump had asked him to drop an investigation into the president’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn. Continue reading “Intelligence Officials Sidestep Senate Questions on Trump and Russia”

The Problem With Jared Kushner

The following commentary by the Editorial Board of the New York Times was posted June 2, 2017:

Image: World News

What are we supposed to make of the news that Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser, met with the Russian ambassador in December to discuss establishing a back channel between the incoming Trump administration and the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities?

Start with the reactions from America’s intelligence community, whose job it is to monitor foreign actors’ attempts to steal the nation’s most closely guarded secrets. Continue reading “The Problem With Jared Kushner”

Putin: ‘Patriotic’ Hackers May Have Targeted The West

The following article by Mirren Gidda of Newsweek was posted on the National Memo website June 2, 2017:

(Don Emmert/Agence France-Presse; Natalia Kolesnikova/Getty Images)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has weighed in on the furor surrounding alleged Russian hacking. After multiple claims from Western officials that Russia has interfered in national elections, Putin conceded that some “patriotic” people may have been pushed to “fight against those who speak badly about Russia.”

During a meeting Thursday with editors of international news agencies, Putin nevertheless rejected allegations that the Russian state had meddled in the U.S. or French elections. According to AP, the president also denied claims that Russia might try to shape the September 24 German federal election. “We never engaged in that on a state level, and have no intention of doing so,” Putin said. He added that he has a good relationship with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, despite her criticism of Moscow during a joint press conference early May. Continue reading “Putin: ‘Patriotic’ Hackers May Have Targeted The West”

Nunes-led House Intelligence Committee asked for ‘unmaskings’ of Americans

NOTE:  In Republican World, this issue isn’t that our security agencies say that Russia meddled in our election, it’s that names were “unmasked” for security committee members. As our president would say, “sad.”

The following article by Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima was posted on the Washington Post website June 2, 2017:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has criticized “violations of Americans’ civil liberties via unmaskings.” (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

The Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee asked U.S. spy agencies late last year to reveal the names of U.S. individuals or organizations contained in classified intelligence on Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, engaging in the same practice that President Trump has accused the Obama administration of abusing, current and former officials said.

The chairman of the committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), has since cast the practice of “unmasking” of U.S. individuals and organizations mentioned in classified reports as an abuse of surveillance powers by the outgoing Obama administration.

Trump has argued that investigators should focus their attention on former officials leaking names from intelligence reports, rather than whether the Kremlin coordinated its activities with the Trump campaign, an allegation he has denied. “The big story is the ‘unmasking and surveillance’ of people that took place during the Obama administration,” Trump tweeted Thursday.

According to a tally by U.S. spy agencies, the House Intelligence Committee requested five to six unmaskings of U.S. organizations or individuals related to Trump or Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton between June 2016 and January 2017. Officials familiar with the matter said that the committee’s requests focused on the identities of U.S. organizations that had been hacked by the Russians in 2016. Officials declined to say how many of the requests came from Democrats vs. Republicans.

The chairman of the committee wields enormous control over the actions of its members and requests for more information from intelligence agencies. Officials said that committee rules require the chairman to sign off on the requests, even ones that are not his own.

A spokesman for Republicans on Nunes’s committee declined to comment on whether the panel made any requests for unmasking.

He added, “It is standard operating procedure for the House Intelligence Committee to forward all committee members’ questions from both parties to the appropriate agencies, whether or not they are answered. I refer you to committee Democrats for further questions on this subject.”

Every day, U.S. intelligence agencies sweep up vast quantities of foreign communications. Sometimes, they pick up communications involving U.S. individuals or organizations. In reports based on those communications, intelligence agencies “mask” the identities of the Americans, part of an effort to protect their privacy.

Senior government officials, however, can ask spy agencies to reveal the names of Americans or U.S. organizations in the reports if they believe that doing so will help them better understand the underlying intelligence. They must have a legitimate need to know, and National Security Agency unmaskings are reviewed by the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, known as the ODNI.

Some officials said that House Intelligence Committee members may not have realized spy agencies would count their requests as unmaskings. These officials said lawmakers submitted questions that intelligence officers could answer only by revealing the identities of U.S. individuals.

Nunes served subpoenas this week to the CIA, the NSA and the FBI asking for information about unmaskings requested by three former officials: national security adviser Susan E. Rice, CIA director John Brennan and U.N. ambassador Samantha Power.

On Thursday, Nunes tweeted, “Seeing a lot of fake news from media elites and others who have no interest in violations of Americans’ civil liberties via unmaskings.”

Democrats on the panel say they believe the latest direction of Nunes’s investigation is designed to deflect attention from the Russia probe. In April, Nunes was forced to recuse himself from the committee’s probe of Russia because of allegations he may have inappropriately disclosed classified information. Nunes has denied any wrongdoing.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials say requests for unmaskings are a routine and necessary part of their national security work. After requests are made, spy agencies decide whether to provide the names. Officials say few requests are rejected because most are legitimate.

Still, senior officials know that unmaskings can be controversial and are often reluctant to submit large numbers of requests. To protect themselves from any allegations of abuse, spy agencies track unmasking requests closely.

Rice and Brennan declined to comment. During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” in April, Rice denied that she sought to improperly unveil the names of Trump campaign or transition officials for political purposes. In recent congressional testimony, Brennan also has denied that he made any improper unmaskings.

Power did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Nunes first called for his committee to investigate alleged Obama administration-era surveillance of Trump and his associates after the president, in a March 4 tweet, accused Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower. Officials said at the time that Trump’s wiretap allegations were false.

On March 15, Nunes and the committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Adam B. Schiff of California, sent a joint letter to the CIA, the NSA and the FBI asking them to provide the names of any intelligence and law enforcement agencies, as well as senior executive branch officials, who requested or authorized the unmasking of any U.S. persons or organizations between June 2016 and January 2017 related to “presidential candidates Donald J. Trump and Hillary Rodham Clinton and their associates in 2016.”

While the House Intelligence Committee asked only for the names of administration officials who requested unmaskings related to Trump and Clinton, intelligence agencies responded to the request by providing a tally that included requests by lawmakers.

The tally showed several requests from the House Intelligence Committee — requests that one official said were no different than those made by Obama administration officials. “This notion that there are these politically motivated unmaskings is just nonsense,” said the official.

In contrast to the committee’s handful of unmasking requests, officials said the tally showed that Rice requested a single unmasking related to Trump’s activities between June and January.

The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee made no requests for unmaskings related to either Trump or Clinton during that time frame, according to the tally.

At a House Intelligence Committee briefing in May, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) pressed Brennan on whether he had ever requested the unmasking of a U.S. person’s identity. Brennan responded that he had.

Gowdy then pressed Brennan on whether he was aware of any requests made by any “U.S. ambassadors,” a possible reference to Power.

Brennan said he was not aware of any unmasking requests by ambassadors.

According to the ODNI, last year the NSA unmasked at least 1,934 identities of U.S. persons at the request of government officials. That figure relates to a certain court-authorized program of foreign intelligence gathering inside the United States.

View the post here.

As White House defends Jared Kushner, experts question his back-channel move

The following article by Abby Phillips and Max Ehrenfreund was posted on the Washington Post website May 28, 2017:

Donald Trump with son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump on Nov. 9. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

The Trump administration argued over the weekend that back-channel communications are acceptable in building dialogue with foreign governments, part of an effort to minimize fallout over White House adviser Jared Kushner’s reported discussion about creating a secret conduit to the Kremlin at a Russian diplomatic compound.

But some former administration officials on Sunday criticized the use of such secret channels, especially during a presidential transition, saying they could send a confusing message and be manipulated by a foreign power. Continue reading “As White House defends Jared Kushner, experts question his back-channel move”

Sessions Was Advised Not to Disclose Russia Meetings on Security Forms

The following article by Rebecca R. Ruiz was posted on the New York Times website May 24, 2017:

Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Jeff Sessions failed to disclose meetings with Russian officials when he applied for security clearance because he was told not to do so by advisers and the F.B.I., a Justice Department spokesman said Wednesday.

Mr. Sessions met with Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, at least twice in 2016. But asked on an official government form to note any contact he or family members had with foreign governments or their representatives over the past seven years, Mr. Sessions did not include his encounters with Mr. Kislyak. It is a federal crime to make false statements or withhold relevant information on the background check form. Continue reading “Sessions Was Advised Not to Disclose Russia Meetings on Security Forms”