Vindman dismissal spurs Chuck Schumer to request all 74 inspectors general look into potential whistleblower retaliation

Vindman dismissal spurs Chuck Schumer to request all 74 inspectors general look into potential whistleblower retaliationSenate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) wants to have a word with all 74 of the United States' 74 inspectors general.In a letter sent Monday, Schumer requested the inspectors general "take immediate action to investigate any and all instances of retaliation against anyone who has made, or in the future makes, protected disclosures of presidential misconduct to Congress or inspectors general."Schumer's call for investigations was inspired by Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman's dismissal from his post at the National Security Council last week, months after he provided damaging testimony against President Trump during the House's impeachment inquiry. Schumer clearly sees Vindman's firing as an act of revenge by the White House, and said he wants to make sure witnesses and whistleblowers, whose rights are protected by law, don't face professional or personal consequences for disclosing information about the president."Regrettably, these rights are now being challenged like never before, creating a chilling effect among those who, in previous administrations, may have come forward to expose abuses of power," Schumer wrote. "If this chilling effect persists, it will inhibit our ability to hold public officials and institutions accountable and it will irreparably harm the ability of Congress to fulfill its constitutional oversight responsibilities." > Here's the letter: pic.twitter.com/35jC4rMW3U> > -- Manu Raju (@mkraju) February 10, 2020More stories from theweek.com For better pasta sauce, throw away your garlic American democracy is dying Is New Hampshire the end for Joe Biden?


Posted in Uncategorized

Romney banned from CPAC over safety fears as Trump continues impeachment revenge tour

Romney banned from CPAC over safety fears as Trump continues impeachment revenge tourDemocratic leaders have sought to tamp down Donald Trump’s impeachment revenge tour after the president dismissed key witnesses in the investigation from their government posts, while attacking those who voted to convict him last week.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slammed Mr Trump after he fired Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, a former National Security Council director who testified about the president’s phone call with Ukraine, calling the move a “brazen act of retaliation”.


Posted in Uncategorized

Kellyanne Conway bewilderingly argues the Vindman brothers weren't fired

Kellyanne Conway bewilderingly argues the Vindman brothers weren't firedWhite House counselor Kellyanne Conway would like to make a distinction.Conway on Monday disputed the idea that Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and his brother, Yevgeney Vindman, were fired from their posts at the National Security Council in retaliation for the former's testimony during the House impeachment inquiry. In fact, Conway said President Trump didn't fire them at all. Instead, she said they were simply being reassigned to their original jobs because National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien has wanted to trim down a "bloated staff" since he took over.> "They weren't fired," says @KellyannePolls this morning of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman or his brother. She says they were detailed to the WH by the Army and are merely returning to their previous assignments. Disputes WH retaliating for Vindman's public criticism. pic.twitter.com/gkcNHksuS1> > — Mark Knoller (@markknoller) February 10, 2020Not everyone is buying this, especially because some people believe it's quite clear Trump wanted Vindman's removal to be seen as revenge.> And it's clear @realDonaldTrump **wants it seen** as vindictive. That's what makes @KellyannePolls explanation so ridiculous and insulting. The day after the acquittal Trump just happens to get around to recalling Sondland and re-assigning both Vindman brothers? Foolishness! https://t.co/x7DitDgJbg> > — Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) February 10, 2020But Conway wants to know why Trump would have waited so long to get rid of impeachment witnesses. "Victory is the ultimate statement," she said, referring to Trump's acquittal in the Senate. "If he wanted to clean house of the testifiers he could have done that quite a while ago."More stories from theweek.com For better pasta sauce, throw away your garlic American democracy is dying Angela Merkel's hand-picked successor steps down in Germany amid split in ruling party


Posted in Uncategorized

In New Hampshire, a Third-Place Finish Could Still Be a ‘Win’

In New Hampshire, a Third-Place Finish Could Still Be a ‘Win’(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe.Here’s a guess for you: Things have now aligned to make the “winner” of the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday … whichever candidate finishes third. And that’s not entirely crazy.Yes, primaries can be weird, especially the early ones. Media reaction matters, and the media doesn’t always give the biggest stories to the candidate who gets the most votes. In fact, Pete Buttigieg basically “won” the Iowa caucuses in terms of media coverage despite at best finishing in a muddled tie with Bernie Sanders. Why? Mostly because Buttigieg beat expectations.So now we’re on to New Hampshire. The polling right now suggests that Sanders is likely to get the most votes, with Buttigieg benefiting from a post-Iowa bounce to wind up second. If that’s in fact how it plays out, it’s quite possible that neither will get much out of it. For Sanders, the problem isn’t just polling expectations; it’s that he’s from Vermont, and he won the 2016 New Hampshire primary with a whopping 60% of the vote (to Hillary Clinton’s 38%), so if he winds up around 30% this time and with a relatively narrow margin, there’s a good argument that it’s at least a bit disappointing. As for Buttigieg, an outright win would certainly be impressive, but a solid second — what the polls currently say — might not seem particularly newsworthy.Ah, but then there’s third place.Polling right now is muddled, but I think at this point whoever of the three contenders — Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar — finishes third would seem to be a good story to many journalists. It can’t quite be true that whichever of them finishes third would be a surprise … but it sort of feels like that right now.For what it’s worth, the FiveThirtyEight estimate right now based on all the polls has Warren edging out Biden with Klobuchar a few percentage points behind. However, Klobuchar narrowly leads both Warren and Biden in the two polls taken entirely after Friday’s debate.Biden has set expectations for himself pretty low at this point, and the polling has him sinking fairly rapidly over the last week and received plenty of dismal press coverage for it (see my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Francis Wilkinson’s weekend report). If he winds up recovering to finish third? Political scientist Seth Masket makes a good comparison: “Biden has the combination of low expectations and strong party support that Bill Clinton did right before The NHprimary.” Clinton actually finished second in New Hampshire, but declared victory by calling himself the “comeback kid.” Biden would be able with some justification to call himself something similar.What if it’s Warren in third? She’s been mostly missing from a lot of media coverage after her respectable third in Iowa — the botched count, Buttigieg’s surprising strength, and Biden’s miserable results left little room for much else. Her debate performance didn’t generate a lot of attention, either. It was enough to get some people talking about how she was being “erased.” And perhaps enough that a third-place showing in a neighboring state might now seem notable, and not embarrassing.And then there’s Klobuchar. After a fifth-place finish in her neighboring state, it appeared that New Hampshire would be the end of the road for her. If she winds up beating Biden and Warren in New Hampshire, it would certainly be a significant surprise based on where she was before the Friday debate. She’s also had relatively little national media hype so far through this cycle, and it’s possible that a solid New Hampshire result could produce a “discovery” effect in which the national media focuses new, and largely positive, attention on her.I should add: Ramp all of this up even higher if any of these three candidates somehow finishes second. (Or more if one of them actually gets the most votes — but that seems highly unlikely).I should also add that a “win” of this type wouldn’t has equal results for Biden, Warren, and Klobuchar. If Biden gets a positive bounce out of New Hampshire, he’ll probably wind up back as the national frontrunner after surviving two states that didn’t appear to be his best. Warren wouldn’t have that going for her, but she has a significant campaign on the ground in the upcoming states, and if she’s judged to have done well in New Hampshire she’ll have the resources to keep that going. Klobuchar would have the toughest challenge going forward, given that she has less of a start elsewhere.To be sure: I’m not flat-out predicting that the third-place finisher will be the real winner. Just call it a guess based on the way the media goes about its job and how things have developed so far. And I’m not saying that it’s how things should be (although I could defend it, I suppose), or that it’s exactly fair. It’s just how the process probably works.(Disclaimer: Michael Bloomberg is also seeking the Democratic presidential nomination. He is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.) 1\. The always must-read Julia Azari at Mischiefs of Faction with an interpretation of a wild week in U.S. politics.2\. Dave Hopkins on the Friday New Hampshire debate.3\. Rick Hasen on preventing an election disaster.4\. Jennifer Victor on impeachment.5\. Boris Heersink and Jeffery A. Jenkins at the Monkey Cage on how the Republican Party evolved.6\. Maggie Koerth on electability. I’ll repeat my understanding of the political science literature: We don’t really know much about the differences between various candidates and overall the whole topic is overstated, because differences in how out-party challengers do is probably small. Each of the Democratic candidates have risks, but Bernie Sanders has the deepest risks and the most likely to matter. Certainly doesn’t mean he can’t win, and we can’t even know that he would definitely be the weakest general election candidate. But he is the riskiest for Democrats.7\. And Michelle Goldberg on the problem with the Democratic field.Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. Also subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close.To contact the author of this story: Jonathan Bernstein at jbernstein62@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Tracy Walsh at twalsh67@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Jonathan Bernstein is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering politics and policy. He taught political science at the University of Texas at San Antonio and DePauw University and wrote A Plain Blog About Politics.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.


Posted in Uncategorized

Schumer wants to protect whistleblowers amid Trump payback

Schumer wants to protect whistleblowers amid Trump paybackSenate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer is calling on the nation's 74 inspectors general to protect government whistleblowers amid President Donald Trump’s ouster of key government officials in the impeachment probe. Vindman, a White House national security council official when he testified before the House impeachment inquiry, was removed Friday and reassigned.


Posted in Uncategorized

Amy Klobuchar Is Having a Mini-Surge in New Hampshire: ‘We’ve Gone Up to No. 3!’

Amy Klobuchar Is Having a Mini-Surge in New Hampshire: ‘We’ve Gone Up to No. 3!’NASHUA, New Hampshire—As the two apparent winners of the Iowa caucuses quibbled over who narrowly edged the other out of the top slot, Amy Klobuchar was already eyeing the next state.“Somehow, someway, I’m going to get on a plane tonight to New Hampshire,” the Minnesota senator said from her neighboring state last Monday night. “We are bringing this ticket to New Hampshire.”Now, just two days out from the primary, Klobuchar appears to be hitting several indicators of success here. After what aides contend was her strongest debate performance yet, the senator attracted her largest crowds of the primary cycle and enjoyed a cash bump that comes with it, $3 million in donations in 48 hours. And, as she touted at several stops in the southern part of the state on Sunday, she got a polling boost.“We’ve gone up to No. 3!” Klobuchar said to raucous applause on a chilly afternoon in Nashua.Indeed, Klobuchar has managed to turn what would ordinarily be an embarrassing showing for most candidates—finishing in fifth place in her neighboring state’s contest—into a rallying cry. And it appears to be working. As voters hundreds of miles away continue to ponder the caucuses that offered no decisive answer for the Democratic Party’s ideological direction—with former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) each declaring victory—some admitted to taking an eleventh-hour look at Klobuchar. Addressing an overflowed middle school gymnasium whose green painted doors matched the circular “Amy” stickers handed out to attendees, Klobuchar effused about one newly released poll from Emerson College that placed her a hair above Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), for third place. Sanders and Buttigieg still led Klobuchar substantially, earning 30 percent and 20 percent of support, respectively, but her campaign largely sees upside. Relegated to a polling asterisk for months, the senator’s heightened retailing across the state (“we went to four diners this morning” she said at one stop on Sunday, and “somehow ended up at a speakeasy” at another) has contributed to her status as a serious contender for a strong finish on Tuesday.“I just did that to impress New Hampshire,” she joked in Nashua about launching her campaign exactly one year ago in the middle of a snowstorm in Minneapolis. The parallel wasn’t perfect. But it didn’t seem to matter. With just a few flurries on the ground here, voters appeared to appreciate the sentiment, part of her dialed-up rhetoric that indicates a top New Hampshire showing is vital. At one point, live in front of millions of viewers during Friday night’s debate at Saint Anselm University, she appeared to court endorsements from the state’s two popular female senators, Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan, by praising them multiple times. “Her best debate of the eight,” an aide texted in reference to that moment. With nearly half of voters still undecided, Klobuchar is also making an overt play for the largest bloc in New Hampshire: independents, who comprise 42 percent of the electorate.“We better not screw this up,” Klobuchar said in Nashua. “I cannot think of a better state that gets this than New Hampshire, with your big tradition of independent voters,” she added, tweaking her stump speech to the state.In a brief interview with The Daily Beast, Klobuchar further detailed her pitch to the consequential voting segment, listing off several parts of her candidacy that appeal uniquely to them, including “hooking our economy into the education system” and “expanding into things that they care about like long-term care, mental health, and addiction,” she said. “Lots in her stump speaks to them,” one source directly familiar with Klobuchar’s thinking said about her strategy. “The fact that she pays for everything she proposes, like her opioid and mental health plan… it’s common sense, it’s practical, and the numbers add up.”“New Hampshire independents like that kind of honest talk and fiscal clarity,” the source said. That straight talk approach appeals to some voters eyeing Klobuchar now. “People in New Hampshire are very pragmatic. They don’t want their lives made worse by politicians,” Louise Eastman, a voter from Nashua, said. “They don’t want to be taxed to the point where they can’t even afford stuff. Certain candidates, and I won’t name names, are too liberal to the point where they scare people.”The idea that some Democratic aspirants are “too liberal” and might alienate certain populations was picked up in interviews with a dozen New Hampshire voters across three cities. In that, the rationale for Klobuchar is easy: She’s decidedly more moderate than Sanders and Warren. In essence, her proposals are “workable things that she can get through the system,” Krishna Mangipudi, a Nashua Democratic voter, put it. And then there’s her background. While some voters acknowledge qualities they like in Buttigieg, several contend his status as a national neophyte, the mayor of a medium-sized Midwestern city, is too much of a gamble against President Donald Trump. And most weren’t expecting former Vice President Joe Biden to decline so swiftly.“She obviously has more experience than Pete, and Biden’s age is a little bit of a concern for me,” said Audrey Broyer, a Democratic voter from Merrimack. Annette Ricci, a registered independent from Windham who leans conservative, agreed. “Biden, in my opinion, seems like a nice man but I don’t think he has it. It’s a little too late for him and he’s got too much baggage.”A general reluctance to embrace Biden, whose campaign as the national frontrunner has leaned heavily on extending the Obama legacy, appears to be benefiting Klobuchar. After coming in fourth place in Iowa, the former VP all but conceded on the debate stage that he would not win the primary a week later, throwing the electability argument that he has built much of his candidacy around into question. “I guess I don’t believe that,” Elizabeth Witmer, a Democratic voter from Merrimack, said about Biden’s contention that he is the best positioned to rival Trump. Witmer said she made up her mind to support Klobuchar on Sunday night. While also using parts of the Obama-Biden accomplishments to her advantage on the trail, promising she’s “not going to blow up the Affordable Care Act,” for example, Klobuchar offers voters something different. While Biden recalls working to pass bipartisan legislation in years past, Klobuchar’s a sitting senator in the thick of the action, and one who was notably absent from the campaign trail, or, as she put it, “bolted to that desk” in Washington as a juror in Trump’s impeachment trial, which ended for Democrats in a disappointing acquittal. Still, throughout the day, the president’s presence loomed large. At one point, Klobuchar evoked Mitt Romney, a household name in New Hampshire before he won the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, as a beacon of courage for being the sole GOP senator to vote to impeach Trump. “There’s not one negative reaction,” Klobuchar told The Daily Beast about mentioning Romney’s name at her campaign rallies. “I actually think that is so cool about our democracy right now. That people get what courage and strength is.” Political courage is factored into her thinking with voters, too. That is, if she can convince former Trump supporters to join her side, Democrats will have a greater path to victory in November. “For some of them, that I acknowledge that they did or some of their friends might have either voted for Trump or stayed home,” Klobuchar told The Daily Beast. “It’s kind of like, OK, let’s step back and think about what a different world could be. And the decency issue is huge for them.”Denise Marden, an independent from Hooksett, fits squarely into that camp. “She’s not Trump,” Marden said. “And I voted for Trump,” adding she’s now looking at Democratic contenders.“I feel like Amy could be my friend.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.


Posted in Uncategorized

Lindsey Graham says Attorney General Barr has 'created a process' for Giuliani to give Barr dirt from Ukraine

Lindsey Graham says Attorney General Barr has 'created a process' for Giuliani to give Barr dirt from UkraineSen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation that nobody should believe unverified information Rudy Giuliani brings back from Ukraine about former Vice President Joe Biden because it could be Russian disinformation, that Attorney General William Barr has created a special "process" through which Giuliani — President Trump's personal lawyer — can feed the Justice Department his Ukraine information, and that Biden should be investigated for possible corruption in Ukraine. Host Margaret Brennan tried to keep up."Has the Department of Justice been ordered to investigate the Bidens?" Brennan asked. Graham said no, but earlier Sunday, Barr "told me that they've created a process that Rudy could give information and they would see if it's verified."Brennan tried again a few minutes later: "When you're talking about being asked to do these things in a channel being open between Rudy Giuliani and the Justice Department, this sounds a lot like this is in some ways a taxpayer-funded oppo-research operation against Joe Biden. Isn't this exactly what was at the heart of the impeachment probe to begin with?" "No, not at all," Graham said. "There are plenty of people being contacted by folks from the Ukraine." He mentioned Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) inviting Giuliani's former business partner Lev Parnas to watch Trump's impeachment trial and a 2017 prank call to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) in which Russian entertainers — who later duped Graham — offered "compromising" nude photos of Trump. "So Democrats are being played and I'm not going to be played," Graham said."There would be so many things wrong with Barr granting VIP direct access to Giuliani that it's hard to know where to start," writes CNN legal analyst Elie Honig. For example, what Giuliani is doing is likely illegal, he argued, and such an arrangement would clearly show Barr "to be a spineless partisan, serving Trump's every political and personal desire."More stories from theweek.com American democracy is dying For better pasta sauce, throw away your garlic Elizabeth Warren zings Mike Pence in answer about running mates, dogs


Posted in Uncategorized

Trump carrying out ‘campaign of intimidation’ after impeachment acquittal as politicians stay silent, says ousted colonel’s lawyer

Trump carrying out ‘campaign of intimidation’ after impeachment acquittal as politicians stay silent, says ousted colonel’s lawyerLt Col Alexander Vindman - the decorated veteran ousted by the president after implicating Donald Trump in a quid pro quo to smear political rivals - is the victim of a ‘campaign of intimidation’ according to his lawyer.Mr Trump claimed the impeachment witness’ ouster was due to insubordination and the leaking of information.


Posted in Uncategorized