As Russia case unfolds, Trump and Republicans go to battle with Clinton and Democrats

Tensions between Republicans and Democrats over the investigation of Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election intensified Sunday, with President Trump demanding to know why his campaign is under federal scrutiny while his former opponent Hillary Clinton is not.

The president’s latest outburst over the inquiry led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III surfaced on Twitter as his administration braced for the possibility that the first batch of charges in the case could be publicly announced as soon as Monday. CNN reported that a federal grand jury had approved an indictment, although details of the possible charges and the name of a defendant remained unclear.

Trump issued four tweets over 24 minutes, attacking the Mueller probe as unfair and citing various Clinton controversies that he said warranted investigation.

“Instead they look at phony Trump/Russia, ‘collusion,’ which doesn’t exist,” the president said. “The Dems are using this terrible (and bad for our country) Witch Hunt for evil politics, but the R’s are now fighting back like never before. There is so much GUILT by Democrats/Clinton, and now the facts are pouring out. DO SOMETHING!”

Later in the morning, Trump added: “All of this ‘Russia’ talk right when the Republicans are making their big push for historic Tax Cuts Reform. Is this coincidental? NOT!”

On Sunday talk shows, Republicans rallied around Trump and questioned how CNN could have received information about secret grand jury proceedings.

“There are very, very strict laws on grand jury secrecy, so depending on who leaked this to CNN, that’s a criminal violation, potentially,” New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), a longtime friend of Trump’s, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. “For us to have confidence in this process, we’ve got to make sure that the grand jury process remains confidential, remains secret, so that the special counsel can work effectively to be able to get to the bottom of all that he’s looking into.”

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) cast doubt on the objectivity of Mueller’s team, noting that the prosecutor’s staff includes “a lot of individuals, attorneys who played in politics, who’ve given money on the Democratic side.” Of the eight attorneys on the team who have been publicly identified, four made donations to Democrats, including President Barack Obama and Clinton.

“This president won the election solely on the idea that he connected with the American people. No other influence involved,” McCarthy said on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures.” “But the idea of what I’ve watched, of what the Democrats have been doing, it sure raises a lot of questions.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, came to Mueller’s defense and said that he doesn’t agree with Republicans who are calling for Mueller to resign or stop his investigation.

“I would encourage my Republican friends — give the guy a chance to do his job,” Gowdy said on Fox News Sunday. “The result will be known by the facts, by what he uncovers. . . . I would say give the guy a chance to do his job.”

Democratic lawmakers mostly stayed out of the Sunday fray after a week in which Clinton’s 2016 campaign came under fresh scrutiny. The campaign funded political opposition research into Trump that helped create a highly publicized “dossier” on the Republican candidate and fueled some allegations now under scrutiny by Mueller.

The 35-page dossier is composed of 17 memos containing raw intelligence, some of it highly salacious and not independently confirmed. It relies on Kremlin-linked sources and alleges that the Russian government had been trying to support Trump’s candidacy while gathering compromising information that could be used as blackmail. The dossier was published in full by BuzzFeed in January.

It’s unclear how much the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee paid for the opposition research by Fusion GPS, a Washington firm that conducts investigations for private clients. The Clinton campaign paid $5.6 million in legal fees to a law firm from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since November 2015. It’s impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.

Trump tweeted Sunday morning that the dossier, which he called “Clinton made Fake Dossier,” could have cost as much as $12 million, although he did not explain how he reached that number.

Compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, the dossier mirrors a separate conclusion reached by U.S. intelligence agencies that the Russian government intervened in the U.S. election in an effort to bolster Trump and harm Clinton, such as through hacking the DNC and distributing materials to WikiLeaks to publish at key moments.

Fusion GPS, which hired Steele to gather information, was first employed to investigate Trump during the Republican primaries by the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication that receives financial support from billionaire GOP donor Paul Singer, according to two people familiar with Singer. The Beacon said in a statement that its research ended before Fusion GPS hired Steele and that none of the research that it commissioned is included in the dossier.

In April 2016, an attorney representing Clinton’s presidential campaign and the DNC hired Fusion GPS, which then hired Steele. Brian Fallon, a former spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said he learned about Steele and the dossier after the election. People familiar with the matter told The Washington Post that the Clinton campaign and the DNC did not direct Steele’s activities.

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Sunday that “a lot” of the information in the dossier has been corroborated.

“I certainly would have liked to know who paid for it earlier, but nonetheless, that’s just one factor to be considered,” Schiff said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday. “It doesn’t answer the ultimate question, which is: How much of the work is accurate? How much of it is true? And my colleagues don’t seem particularly interested in that question, but that is really the most important question for the American people.”

Schiff said he has not been told anything about any impending indictments in Mueller’s investigation, noting that such notification would not have been appropriate.

Trump also tweeted Sunday about Clinton’s involvement in what he called the “Uranium to Russia deal,” demanding that the matter receive greater scrutiny.

The 2010 deal approved by the Obama administration while Clinton was secretary of state allowed a Russian nuclear energy agency to acquire a controlling stake in a Canadian-based company that had mining licenses for about 20 percent of U.S. uranium extraction capacity. The company cannot export the uranium.

Earlier this month, House and Senate Republican leaders announced they would investigate the uranium deal, and the House Oversight Committee launched a probe into how the FBI investigated Clinton during the campaign. In the latter investigation, Republicans say they want to know why then-FBI Director James B. Comey publicly announced that the bureau was investigating Clinton but waited months before making a similar announcement about its inquiries into the Trump campaign.

Ed O’Keefe and Karoun Demirjian contributed to this report.

Citizen Obama, welcome to jury duty


Former president Barack Obama speaks at a rally in support of Phil Murphy, the Democratic candidate for governor of New Jersey in Newark on Oct. 19. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Since leaving the White House in January, former president Barack Obama has turned heads, images of him slipping into a Broadway play with his elder daughter, Malia, and kitesurfing with billionaire Richard Branson in the British Virgin Islands were shared on social media sites.

His next stop: jury duty in Cook County, Ill.

Obama, a constitutional scholar who frequently invokes messages of civic engagement, plans to serve next month, the county’s chief judge told the Chicago Tribune on Friday. Obama owns homes in Washington, D.C., as well as Chicago. He’ll follow in the footsteps of presidential predecessors George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, both of whom appeared for jury selection after leaving the White House.

 Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans first shared the news with county commissioners during a budget hearing. He later told the Tribune that necessary precautions would be taken to accommodate security and scheduling needs. He did not specify the date or courthouse location Obama will report to in November.

“He made it crystal-clear to me through his representative that he would carry out his public duty as a citizen and resident of this community,” Evans told the Tribune.

A spokesman declined to comment on the former president’s private schedule.

The Tribune reported that other high-profile figures, like Oprah Winfrey, have also reported for jury duty in Cook County. Jurors can be summoned for civil or criminal pools and can be called to any of the county’s courthouses.

“Although it’s not a place where the public can earn a lot of money, it is highly appreciated,” Evans told the Tribune of Obama’s choice to serve. “It’s crucial that our society get the benefit of that kind of commitment.”

Obama skipped jury duty at least once before when in 2010 he was pre-booked with the State of the Union. According to CBS News, the summons were sent to Obama’s former home on the South Side of Chicago, but the president told the county court that he wouldn’t be able to make it.

Obama would not be the first former president to report for jury duty after leaving the Oval Office.

In August 2015, more than six years after the end of his presidency, George W. Bush received his jury duty summon and reported to the George Allen Dallas County Civil Court building. Bush sat through the jury selection panel and, though not picked to serve as a juror, spent about three hours at the court and posed for photos with his fellow jury candidates.

“If the former President can show up for jury duty what excuse do you have? #civicduty” tweeted a spectator.

In March 2003, Bill Clinton became Prospective Juror No. 142 in federal court in Manhattan. The New York Times reported that Clinton, whose name was avoided in the court hearing, was eventually dismissed in the jury selection in a case involving a gang shooting in the Bronx.

While serving as vice president, Joe Biden was called for jury duty in Delaware in January 2011. He too was not chosen as a juror.

Even members of the judicial branch don’t always make the cut.

In April 2015, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. reported for jury duty in Montgomery County, Md., and was being considered for a civil trial in a case involving a car crash. The Washington Post reported that Roberts answered questions about relatives — that his sister was a nurse and his brother-in-law was with Indiana State Police — but said nothing about his day job, which would be listed on a form.

“Roberts was not selected, and left court without comment,” The Post reported.

Read more:

All of the women who have accused Trump of sexual harassment are lying, the White House says

Strippers, surveillance and assassination plots: The wildest JFK Files

Tropical Storm Philippe named as weather system strengthens en route to South Florida

And now all this nasty weather has a name.

The National Hurricane Center released its 5 p.m. advisory about 25 minutes early Saturday to call it Tropical Storm Philippe. The depression that has been soaking central and western Cuba and spreading rain and thunderstorms northward across the Florida Keys and South Florida, now has sustained winds of 40 mph.

The storm is moving north at 29 mph and the forecast cone has shifted a bit west, putting South Florida into the cone of concern. On the forecast track, the center of Philippe is predicted to move off of the northern coast of Cuba and into the Florida Straits this evening. The storm will then move across the Florida Keys or the southern tip of the Florida peninsula overnight, and across the northwestern Bahamas Sunday morning, the center said in its advisory.

The tropical storm force winds are on the east end of the storm.

While the system was still a depression Saturday afternoon, it spawned a small, brief tornado that touched down just northeast of the intersection of Bird Road and Southwest 97th Avenue in Miami.

More Videos

Tropical Storm watch for parts of coastal South Florida as unnamed storm approaches0:28

Potential tropical storm headed for South Florida on Saturday0:36

Damage assessment shows aerials of Puerto Rico devastation after Hurricane Maria11:02

Man recounts being washed onto Miami home during Hurricane Irma1:46

Defense Attorney Rick Kammen at a 2016 post-hearing news conference at Guantanamo0:21

Zoo animals are having a smashing good time with pumpkins this Halloween1:36

Malik Rosier discusses UM's next opponent0:47

Hurricanes defensive end Joe Jackson, left, and safety Jaquan Johnson address the media after victory over UNC.2:57

Dolphins Cheerleaders Swimsuit Fashion Show2:34

Guitar-shaped hotel will double the size of Seminole Hard Rock Hotel  Casino1:32

Tropical Storm watch for parts of coastal South Florida as unnamed storm approaches

The coastal area from Golden Beach at the Miami-Dade/Broward county line all the way down to Craig Key was placed under Tropical Storm Watch as Tropical Depression No. 18 remains on its path to Cuba, South Florida and the Bahamas.

NOAA

Yuli Gurriel suspended five games, in 2018, for actions in World Series Game 3

Yuli Gurriel, one of the key hitters for the Houston Astros, was suspended for five games after television cameras caught him making a gesture and mouthing a word with racial overtones during Friday’s Game 3 of the World Series.

The unpaid suspension will be served at the start of the 2018 season, and Gurriel will not appeal. He will not miss any games in the Series, with the Astros and Dodgers scheduled to play Game 4 on Saturday.

In announcing the suspension, Commissioner Rob Manfred said that “there is no place in our game” for Gurriel’s behavior. He then was asked whether baseball had passed on a chance to make its biggest statement to that effect by choosing not to suspend Gurriel during the World Series.

“I used my best judgment as to where the appropriate disciplinary level fell,” Manfred said.

North Korea Rouses Neighbors to Reconsider Nuclear Weapons

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has campaigned for a military buildup against the threat from the North, and Japan sits on a stockpile of nuclear material that could power an arsenal of 6,000 weapons. Last Sunday, he won a commanding majority in parliamentary elections, fueling his hopes of revising the nation’s pacifist Constitution.

This brutal calculus over how to respond to North Korea is taking place in a region where several nations have the material, the technology, the expertise and the money to produce nuclear weapons.

Beyond South Korea and Japan, there is already talk in Australia, Myanmar, Taiwan and Vietnam about whether it makes sense to remain nuclear-free if others arm themselves — heightening fears that North Korea could set off a chain reaction in which one nation after another feels threatened and builds the bomb.

In a recent interview, Henry A. Kissinger, one of the few nuclear strategists from the early days of the Cold War still living, said he had little doubt where things were headed.

“If they continue to have nuclear weapons,” he said of North Korea, “nuclear weapons must spread in the rest of Asia.”

“It cannot be that North Korea is the only Korean country in the world that has nuclear weapons, without the South Koreans trying to match it. Nor can it be that Japan will sit there,” he added. “So therefore we’re talking about nuclear proliferation.”

Photo

The launch of a Hwasong-12 missile by North Korea in September.

Credit
Korean Central News Agency

Such fears have been raised before, in Asia and elsewhere, without materializing, and the global consensus against the spread of nuclear weapons is arguably stronger than ever.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

But North Korea is testing America’s nuclear umbrella — its commitment to defend its allies with nuclear weapons if necessary — in a way no nation has in decades. Similar fears of abandonment in the face of the Soviet Union’s growing arsenal helped lead Britain and France to go nuclear in the 1950s.

President Trump, who leaves Nov. 3 for a visit to Asia, has intensified these insecurities in the region. During his presidential campaign, he spoke openly of letting Japan and South Korea build nuclear arms even as he argued they should pay more to support the American military bases there.

“There is going to be a point at which we just can’t do this anymore,” he told The New York Times in March 2016. Events, he insisted, were pushing both nations toward their own nuclear arsenals anyway.

Mr. Trump has not raised that possibility in public since taking office. But he has rattled the region by engaging in bellicose rhetoric against North Korea and dismissing talks as a “waste of time.”

In Seoul and Tokyo, many have already concluded that North Korea will keep its nuclear arsenal, because the cost of stopping it will be too great — and they are weighing their options.

Photo

A nuclear power plant in Ikata, Japan. The country has a stockpile of nuclear material that could power an arsenal of 6,000 weapons.

Credit
The Asahi Shimbun, via Getty Images

Capability to Build the Bomb

Long before North Korea detonated its first nuclear device, several of its neighbors secretly explored going nuclear themselves.

Japan briefly considered building a “defensive” nuclear arsenal in the 1960s despite its pacifist Constitution. South Korea twice pursued the bomb in the 1970s and 1980s, and twice backed down under American pressure. Even Taiwan ran a covert nuclear program before the United States shut it down.

Today, there is no question that both South Korea and Japan have the material and expertise to build a weapon.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

All that is stopping them is political sentiment and the risk of international sanctions. Both nations signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but it is unclear how severely other countries would punish two of the world’s largest economies for violating the agreement.

South Korea has 24 nuclear reactors and a huge stockpile of spent fuel from which it can extract plutonium — enough for more than 4,300 bombs, according to a 2015 paper by Charles D. Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists.

Japan once pledged never to stockpile more nuclear fuel than it can burn off. But it has never completed the necessary recycling and has 10 tons of plutonium stored domestically and another 37 tons overseas.

“We keep reminding the Japanese of their pledge,” said Ernest J. Moniz, chief executive of the Nuclear Threat Initiative and an energy secretary in the Obama administration, noting that it would take years if not decades for Japan to consume its fissile material because almost all its nuclear plants have remained offline since the 2011 Fukushima accident.

China, in particular, has objected to Japan’s stockpile, warning that its traditional rival is so advanced technologically that it could use the material to quickly build a large arsenal.

Analysts often describe Japan as a “de facto” nuclear state, capable of building a weapon within a year or two. “Building a physical device is not that difficult anymore,” said Tatsujiro Suzuki, former deputy chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission.

Japan already possesses long-range missile technology, he added, but would need some time to develop more sophisticated communications and control systems.

South Korea may be even further along, with a fleet of advanced missiles that carry conventional warheads. In 2004, the government disclosed that its scientists had dabbled in reprocessing and enriching nuclear material without first informing the International Atomic Energy Agency as required by treaty.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“If we decide to stand on our own feet and put our resources together, we can build nuclear weapons in six months,” said Suh Kune-yull, a professor of nuclear engineering at Seoul National University. “The question is whether the president has the political will.”

Photo

President Moon Jae-in of South Korea has been firm in his opposition to nuclear weapons. But his is increasingly a minority view.

Credit
Yonhap/European Pressphoto Agency

In Seoul, a Rising Call for Arms

President Moon Jae-in has been firm in his opposition to nuclear weapons. He insists that building them or reintroducing American ones to South Korea would make it even more difficult to persuade North Korea to scrap its own.

Though Mr. Moon has received high approval ratings since his election in May, his view is increasingly a minority one.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Calls for nuclear armament used to be dismissed as chatter from South Korea’s nationalist fringe. Not anymore. Now people often complain that South Korea cannot depend on the United States, its protector of seven decades.

The opposition Liberty Korea party called on the United States to reintroduce tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea in August after the North tested an intercontinental ballistic missile that appeared capable of reaching the mainland United States.

“If the U.N. Security Council can’t rein in North Korea with its sanctions, we will have no option but to withdraw from the Nonproliferation Treaty,” Won Yoo-chul, a party leader, said in September.

Given the failure of sanctions, threats and negotiations to stop North Korea, South Koreans are increasingly convinced the North will never give up its nuclear weapons. But they also oppose risking a war with a military solution.

Most believe the Trump administration, despite its tough talk, will ultimately acquiesce, perhaps settling for a freeze that allows the North to keep a small arsenal. And many fear that would mean giving the North the ultimate blackmail tool — and a way to keep the United States at bay.

“The reason North Korea is developing a hydrogen bomb and intercontinental ballistic missiles is not to go to war with the United States,” said Cheong Seong-chang, an analyst at the Sejong Institute near Seoul. “It’s to stop the Americans from intervening in armed skirmishes or full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The closer the North gets to showing it can strike the United States, the more nervous South Koreans become about being abandoned. Some have asked whether Washington will risk the destruction of an American city by intervening, for example, if the North attempts to occupy a border island, as its soldiers have practiced.

For many in South Korea, the solution is a homegrown nuclear deterrent.

“If we don’t respond with our own nuclear deterrence of some kind, our people will live like nuclear hostages of North Korea,” said Cheon Seong-whun, a former presidential secretary for security strategy.

With nuclear weapons of its own, the South would gain leverage and could force North Korea back to the bargaining table, where the two sides could whittle down their arsenals through negotiations, some hawks argue.

But given the risks of going nuclear, others say Seoul should focus on persuading Washington to redeploy tactical nuclear weapons.

“The redeployment of American tactical nuclear weapons would be the surest way” to deter North Korea, Defense Minister Song Young-moo said last month, but he added that it would be difficult to get Washington to agree to that.

Photo

A training exercise in August by the Japanese Self-Defense Forces.

Credit
Issei Kato/Reuters

In Tokyo, Cautious Debate

The discussion in Japan has been more subdued than in South Korea, no surprise after 70 years of public education about the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But Japan has periodically considered developing nuclear weapons every decade since the 1960s.

In 2002, a top aide to Junichiro Koizumi, the prime minister then, caused a furor by suggesting Japan might one day break with its policy of never building, possessing or allowing nuclear arms on its territory.

North Korea has reopened that question.

Shigeru Ishiba, a former defense minister seen as a potential challenger to Prime Minister Abe, has argued that Japan needs to debate its nuclear policy given the threat from North Korea.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Mr. Abe has stopped short of calling for a re-evaluation of the country’s position on nuclear weapons. But he has increased military spending and echoed Mr. Trump’s hawkish position against the North.

Mr. Abe’s administration has already determined that nuclear weapons would not be prohibited under the Constitution if maintained only for self-defense.

The Japanese public is largely opposed to nuclear weapons with polls indicating fewer than one in 10 support nuclear armament.

But Japan’s relations with South Korea have long been strained, and if Seoul armed itself, those numbers could shift.

Some analysts say the discussion is aimed at getting additional reassurance from Washington. “We always do that when we become a little upset about the credibility of the extended U.S. deterrence,” said Narushige Michishita, a professor at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo.

Tobias Harris, a Japan analyst at Teneo Intelligence, a political risk consultancy, said Japan would rethink its position on nuclear weapons if it suspects the United States would let it down.

“We’re kind of in uncharted waters as far as this goes,” he said. “It’s hard to know exactly what the threshold is that will lead the Japanese public’s switch to flip.”

Correction: October 28, 2017

An earlier version of this article misstated the amount of plutonium Japan stores overseas. It is 37 tons, not 37 million tons.

Continue reading the main story

‘White Lives Matter’ organizers cancel second rally after taunts from counterprotesters

Crowds of protesters began gathering at 8 a.m. on a cold, cloudy Saturday. They’d come to see Nazis. But, two hours later, there were still no Nazis.

Around 10:30 a.m., one of the organizers of the counterprotest grabbed a microphone and began taunting the handful of rallygoers who had just shown up across the street.

“Some master race,” he snickered. “Can’t even show up on time.”

Local residents and leaders spent most of the week anxiously wondering how many would travel the rural highway that snakes south from Nashville over Christmas Creek into Shelbyville for a “White Lives Matter” rally planned by several national white supremacist groups.

Such rallies have turned violent, even deadly, in recent months, sparking fears that the Shelbyville gathering could, as well. Once the white supremacists showed up — the rally started about an hour late — there was yelling, but no violence.

Rally organizers had anticipated about 175 people, while Tennessee’s racial justice and liberal groups were unsure of how many of their members would attend. Ultimately it appeared that about 300 people attended — about 100 “White Lives Matter” attendees and twice as many counterprotesters.

An elaborate set of police barricades kept the white supremacists and protesters on opposite sides of the street. Police formed a line between the groups, as other officers with large weapons perched on nearby rooftops.

“This right here is what it’s all about!” declared Scott Lacey, who has spoken at White Lives Matter rallies across the country.” “It’s all about the color of our skin!”

Organizers included the Nationalist Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi group; the Traditionalist Worker Party, which wants a separate white ethno-state; Anti-Communist Action, a right-wing group that believes America is being threatened by communists; and Vanguard America, a white supremacist group that believes America is inherently a white nation that must be preserved. This rally, they said, was specifically about immigration and refugee policies.

The plan was for speakers to address the assembled white supremacists, some of whom carried shields and Confederate flags, before the group would depart to nearby Murfreesboro for another rally.

At moments, the rally speakers spouted verbose diatribes about a “genocide” they claim is being perpetrated against “the white race” and “white southern culture.” At other times, the speeches seemed to be a grab-bag of talking points. One speaker complained that black Americans often say the n-word, but when he does, people are offended. The speaker after him railed against Black History Month.

“What about me? Me and my children have a right to exist,” screamed another speaker, his voice cracking as it wailed into a microphone. “White lives matter!”

Local residents spent two weeks preparing their opposition to the rally, holding vigils and prayer services and practicing their chants.

“We don’t want these people here, trying to recruit our neighbors to this disgusting cause,” said David Clark, who helped organize Shelbyville LOVES, the primary counterprotest group.

Throughout the morning, the counterprotest oscillated between mocking the rally and drowning it out with music. At various points, they played the “Ghostbusters” song, Michael Jackson’s “Black or White” and the theme song to “Jeopardy.” When the rally’s speakers tried to address the crowd they were drown out by “black lives matter” chants. In between speakers, organizers teased the white supremacists.

“Yo Nazis!” a counterprotester with a megaphone shouted. “How does it feel knowing your daughters are probably all at home listening to rap music and hanging out with their black boyfriends right now?”

“It was an effective show of force,” said Kubby Barry, 39, who traveled from nearby DeKalb County with her roommate and sheepdog, Molly, who was wearing a sign that declared “farm dogs against fascism.”

“It was important to show up and show people that we don’t stand for their message,” Barry said.

Promptly at 1 p.m., the assembled ralliers bowed their heads in prayer and, after being told that boxed lunches were available on the bus, departed.

In Murfreesboro, about 20 minutes away, a second set of counterprotesters lined the roadway, ready to challenge attendees of the second rally. But the rally didn’t happen; the bus of white supremacists never showed up.

Trump Unworried About What Former Aides Will Tell Mueller, Lawyer Says

“He likes and respects Mr. Manafort and appreciates the work he did for him during the three months he was with the campaign. He likes General Flynn personally, but understands that they have their own path with the special counsel,” Mr. Cobb said. “I think he would be sad for them, as a friend and a former colleague, if the process results in punishment or indictments. But to the extent that that happens, that’s beyond his control.”

Mr. Mueller is investigating whether Mr. Manafort violated federal tax laws or lobbied on behalf of foreign officials without registering. His team is also investigating Mr. Manafort for possible money laundering, a line of inquiry he took over this spring from federal prosecutors in Manhattan, according to lawyers and federal officials. Many of the activities Mr. Mueller is scrutinizing date back years, well before Mr. Manafort joined the Trump campaign.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“Mr. Manafort has said from the beginning neither he nor anyone else in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to undermine the 2016 election,” said Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Mr. Manafort. “Finally, everyone seems to be coming to that same conclusion.”

The special counsel is also examining Mr. Flynn’s financial ties to Russia and whether he concealed lobbying he did last year for Turkey.

The White House has given Mr. Muller’s team documents related to Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn, as well as the firing of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and other topics. Mr. Trump has instructed all White House staff members to cooperate with investigators, Mr. Cobb said.

Mr. Mueller has begun interviewing White House staff members, but he has not yet asked to speak with Mr. Trump. “We’d have to address that in the future if they see a need to talk to him,” Mr. Cobb said.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Mr. Cobb said none of the White House documents turned over to Mr. Mueller showed evidence that that anyone colluded with Russia, or that Mr. Trump tried to obstruct justice. The president is fully cooperating with the special counsel, he said.

“I think the path that he chose of trying to minimize conflict and maximize cooperation is one that benefits the country as he tries to erase this cloud,” Mr. Cobb said. “Which I think he will ultimately achieve.”

He did not say when he believed that would happen, but he predicted the end of the investigation was nearing.

“I don’t think that it’s far away,” he said.

____________

How do I listen?

On your iPhone or iPad:

Open the preloaded app called Podcasts; it has a purple icon. If you’re reading this from your phone, tap this link, which will take you straight there. (You can also use the magnifying glass icon to search; type “The New Washington.”)

Once you’re on the series page, you can tap on the episode title to play it, and tap on the “subscribe” button to have new episodes sent to your phone free.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Or if you prefer another podcast player, you can find “The New Washington” there. (Here’s the RSS feed.)

On your Android phone or tablet:

You can listen and subscribe using the free app RadioPublic, which is available worldwide. If you’re reading this from your phone, tap this link to play the latest episode and learn more about the app.

Or if you prefer another podcast player, you can find “The New Washington” there. (Here’s the RSS feed.)

From a desktop or laptop:

Click the “play” button above to start the show. Make sure to keep that window open on your browser if you’re doing other things, or the audio will stop.


Continue reading the main story

Sharks and lost hope: 2 American women rescued after 5 months at sea

The planned voyage from Hawaii to Tahiti aboard a 50-foot sailboat didn’t start off well for two Honolulu women. One of their cellphones was washed overboard and sank to the bottom on their first day at sea.

From there, things got worse. Much worse.

About a month into their trip, flooding from a storm crippled their engine. The 57-foot mast was damaged. And then, as they drifted thousands of miles in what turned out to be a five-month ordeal in the middle of Pacific, the water purifier conked out and sharks started attacking the boat.

Every day for 98 days straight, the women sent out a distress call to no avail.

PR gov. threatens ‘hell to pay’ as probes of Whitefish contract begin

Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rossello said there will be “hell to pay” if any wronging is uncovered in the awarding of multi-million dollar contracts after Hurricane Maria devastated the island.

With more than 75 percent of Puerto Rico still without electricity in Maria’s wake, U.S. lawmakers are calling for an investigation into why the island turned to a small, for-profit company instead of the mutual-aid network of public utilities usually called upon to coordinate power restoration after disasters.

Rossello made the warning on Thursday amid mounting controversy. On Wednesday, he asked the DHS inspector general to complete a review of the Whitefish contract by next week to answer questions, though he noted in his letter that the contract appeared to comply with FEMA regulations.

A spokesperson for the DHS inspector general’s office confirmed that they have started an inquiry into the contract and will look for any “inappropriate relationships.”

Eight congressional Democrats wrote to the Interior Dept. inspector general asking for a separate investigation, specifically mentioning concerns about any possible Whitefish connection to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke — who is from Whitefish, Mont., the same town where the company is based — or any other ties to the Trump administration.

PHOTO: Workers from Montana-based Whitefish Energy Holdings help fix the islands power grid, damaged during Hurricane Maria in September, in Manati, Puerto Rico, Oct. 25, 2017.Alvin Baez/Reuters
Workers from Montana-based Whitefish Energy Holdings help fix the island’s power grid, damaged during Hurricane Maria in September, in Manati, Puerto Rico, Oct. 25, 2017.

“Whitefish is primarily financed by a private equity firm that is run by a contributor to the presidential campaign of Donald Trump. We’re concerned that Whitefish might have overstated its connections with the Trump administration to obtain the contract,” the Democrats wrote in the letter sent Wednesday afternoon.

Complicating matters are concerns over the relationship between Whitefish founder Andy Techmanski and Interior Secretary Zinke.

Zinke and Whitefish have confirmed the families know one another — in their small hometown, “everyone knows everyone,” the Interior Department said.

Both parties also insist that Zinke did not advocate on Whitefish’s behalf.

Whitefish Energy lists Dallas-based HBC Investments as one of its investors on its website. One partner in that company, Joe Colonnetta, along with his wife, has donated to the Republican party and Republican campaigns over the years, according to FEC filings. In 2016 Colonnetta donated at least $25,000 to committees supporting Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

A spokesman for Whitefish Energy and Colonnetta said Thursday that his donations had “no influence whatsoever to impact the contract.”

PHOTO: Workers from Montana-based Whitefish Energy Holdings help fix the islands power grid, damaged during Hurricane Maria in September, in Manati, Puerto Rico, Oct. 25, 2017.Alvin Baez/Reuters
Workers from Montana-based Whitefish Energy Holdings help fix the island’s power grid, damaged during Hurricane Maria in September, in Manati, Puerto Rico, Oct. 25, 2017.

Montana-based Whitefish Energy was awarded a $300 million Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) contract to repair downed transmission lines crisscrossing the mountains, the company confirmed to ABC News.

Founded in 2015, Whitefish — which had just two full-time employees when the contract was signed — says it has mobilized a team of nearly 300 subcontractors in Puerto Rico, with more on the way.

“Our rates are competitive and our work is top rate,” spokesperson Chris Chiames told ABC News, adding that the company is uniquely qualified to tackle the situation in Puerto Rico due to the CEO’s experience in “rugged and remote terrain.”

But officials are questioning why PREPA chose to work with Whitefish instead of reaching out to the American Public Power Association (APPA), which normally matches states hit by disasters with nearby public power utilities who offer up crews and equipment to assist.

“To date, PREPA has not requested aid from the association,” the association confirmed. “The entire electric utility industry is standing by to send help as requested.”

PREPA Executive Director Ricardo Ramos said Tuesday he ruled out APPA assistance because it would have required the agency, which is currently bankrupt, to handle logistics for crew lodging and food.

Other power restoration companies were ruled out because they required a large upfront deposit, which PREPA cannot afford to pay, he said.

PHOTO: Whitefish Energy Holdings workers restore power lines damaged by Hurricane Maria in Barceloneta, Puerto Rico, Oct. 15, 2017. Ramon Espinosa/AP
Whitefish Energy Holdings workers restore power lines damaged by Hurricane Maria in Barceloneta, Puerto Rico, Oct. 15, 2017.

Under the Whitefish contract, the agency paid $3.7 million for initial “mobilization of personnel and equipment,” with further advance payments not being required.

“Whitefish was the only company — it was the first that could be mobilized to Puerto Rico. It did not ask us to be paid soon or a guarantee to pay,” Ramos told reporters in Spanish. “For some reason, someone in the United States has to be upset, because they aren’t here, that I have hired Whitefish — but that is their problem.”

The company says it called Puerto Rico before Maria hit to pitch its own services.

Whitefish “showed up at the right place at the right time and that’s how they got the contract,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., told ABC News. “We want to see restoration pick up. Every day that they’re without power is a day that economy isn’t functioning and it’s another day people are suffering.”

Hiring a company like Whitefish, which relies on subcontractors rather than a staff of trained personnel “didn’t make a lot of sense,” Sergio Marxuach, policy director at the nonpartisan Center for a New Economy, told ABC News. “This is one of the reasons people down here really hate PREPA — they do business behind closed doors and it ends up costing a lot of money.”

How Whitefish rates compare with competitors remains unclear.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency says it was not involved in the selection and the White House said Friday that the decision to award the contract to Whitefish came from “local authorities.”

“[The awarding of the contract was] not something that the federal government played a role in,” said White House press secretary Sarah Sanders at Friday’s press briefing. “But as we understand, there is an ongoing audit and we’ll look forward to seeing the results of that later.”

FEMA has “significant concerns” how PREPA procured the Whitefish contract and it “has not confirmed whether the contract prices are reasonable,” the agency said in a statement.

FEMA said it has not reimbursed PREPA for any money spent on the Whitefish contract, and that it will verify that PREPA followed regulations “to ensure that federal money is well spent” before handing over any payment.

Directly contradicting a clause in the Whitefish contract that reads, “PREPA hereby represents and warrants that FEMA has reviewed and approved of this Contract, and confirms that this Contract is an acceptable form to qualify for funding from FEMA,” FEMA insists the agency was not involved in PREPA’s decision and that the clause is inaccurate.

FEMA issued the following statement:

The decision to award a contract to Whitefish Energy was made exclusively by the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA). FEMA was not involved in the selection. Questions regarding the awarding of the contract should be directed to PREPA.

Any language in any contract between PREPA and Whitefish that states FEMA approved that contract is inaccurate.

FEMA has not provided any reimbursement to Puerto Rico to date for the PREPA contract with Whitefish Energy. Regardless, FEMA will verify that the applicant (in this case PREPA) has, in fact, followed applicable regulations to ensure that federal money is properly spent.

Based on initial review and information from PREPA, FEMA has significant concerns with how PREPA procured this contract and has not confirmed whether the contract prices are reasonable. FEMA is presently engaged with PREPA and its legal counsel to obtain information about the contract and contracting process, including how the contract was procured and how PREPA determined the contract prices were reasonable.

It is important for all applicants for FEMA Public Assistance to understand and abide by Federal requirements for grantee procurement. Applicants who fail to abide by these requirements risk not being reimbursed by FEMA for their disaster costs.

FEMA continues to focus on the expedited restoration of essential services in support of the Governor’s recovery goals.

ABC’s Jennifer Metz and Joshua Hoyos contributed to this report.

Mueller facing new Republican pressure to resign in Russia probe


Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta now being investigated by Mueller

Jordan Sekulow, executive director for the American Center for Law and Justice, on Robert Mueller’s investigation into Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is facing a fresh round of calls from conservative critics for his resignation from the Russia collusion probe, amid revelations that have called into question the FBI’s own actions and potentially Mueller’s independence.

This week’s bombshell that a controversial anti-Trump dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign has Republicans asking to what extent the FBI – which received some of the findings and briefly agreed to pay the same researcher to gather intelligence on Trump and Russia – used the politically connected material.

Hill investigators also are looking into a Russian firm’s uranium deal that was approved by the Obama administration in 2010 despite reports that the FBI – then led by Mueller – had evidence of bribery involving a subsidiary of that firm.

Critics question whether Mueller’s own ties to the bureau as well as fired FBI director James Comey now render him compromised as he investigates allegations of Russian meddling and collusion with Trump officials in the 2016 race.

“The federal code could not be clearer – Mueller is compromised by his apparent conflict of interest in being close with James Comey,” Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., who first called for Mueller to step down over the summer, said in a statement to Fox News on Friday. “The appearance of a conflict is enough to put Mueller in violation of the code. … All of the revelations in recent weeks make the case stronger.”

Outgoing New Jersey GOP Gov. Chris Christie, a former federal prosecutor and Trump ally, also suggested Friday that Mueller consider stepping aside.

“If the facts that you just laid out are true, then somebody with Bob Mueller’s integrity will step aside and should — if in fact those facts, as you laid them out, are true,” Christie said on “Fox Friends,” in response to various conflict-of-interest allegations.

Video

The special counsel’s office declined Fox News’ request for comment.

This is not the first time Mueller has faced calls to step down.

Congressional Republicans over the summer raised concerns over Mueller’s relationship with Comey, whom Trump ousted from the FBI in May. Reps. Franks and Andy Biggs, both Republicans from Arizona, had called for Mueller’s resignation for that reason.

President Trump has called Mueller’s relationship with Comey “bothersome,” though hasn’t said much about Mueller’s role lately even as he seizes on the latest revelations about the Fusion GPS dossier to try and turn the tables on Democrats in the Russia scandal.

“It is now commonly agreed, after many months of COSTLY looking, that there was NO collusion between Russia and Trump. Was collusion with HC!” he tweeted Friday.

Congressional Republicans over the summer raised concerns over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s, at left, relationship with former FBI Director James Comey, at right.

 (AP)

But the Wall Street Journal editorial board cited the dossier development in calling for Mueller’s resignation on Thursday, saying the “troubling question is whether the FBI played a role” in aiding a “Russian disinformation campaign.”

“Two pertinent questions: Did the dossier trigger the FBI probe of the Trump campaign, and did Mr. Comey or his agents use it as evidence to seek wiretapping approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Trump campaign aides?” the editorial board wrote, before turning to Mueller’s role: 

“The Fusion news means the FBI’s role in Russia’s election interference must now be investigated—even as the FBI and Justice insist that Mr. Mueller’s probe prevents them from cooperating with Congressional investigators. Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.”

Another potential issue is Mueller’s supervision of a bribery probe involving a subsidiary of Russia’s Rosatom, which eventually got approval from the U.S. to buy a Canadian mining company that controlled a swath of American uranium reserves. At the time of the probe, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller as special counsel, was a U.S. attorney and Mueller was FBI director. Republicans want to know how that deal was approved despite the evidence gathered in the bribery probe.

“The whole reason for independent counsels is to have the public trust, the professionalism and the diligence of the investigation, but they have to guard against actual conflicts of interest and apparent conflicts of interest,” said former high-ranking Justice Department official James Trusty, who served under the Bush and Obama administrations. “There may be some tipping point, though, separating facts from rumors, and we may be close to the tipping point.”

Special Counsel Robert Mueller with security guards in June 2017.

 (Reuters)

Earlier this week, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, called for a separate special counsel to investigate the Uranium One deal.

GRASSLEY CALLS FOR SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE URANIUM ONE DEAL 

Grassley, however, stopped short of suggesting he didn’t trust Mueller.

Video

“There might be reasons to wonder his involvement because of his involvement with the previous administration during this period of time. There’s no way that I can make any accusations against Mr. Mueller because he is a man of high ethical standards,” Grassley told “Fox Friends” on Thursday.

Other Republicans have sought to protect Mueller from interference.

There are currently two pieces of legislation in the Senate, with bipartisan sponsorship, that would ensure a judicial check on the executive branch’s ability to remove a special counsel. Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., are behind the bills, along with Democratic senators.

SENATORS INTRODUCE BILL TO PROTECT SPECIAL COUNSEL FROM FIRING

Comey’s attorney, David Kelley, also has disputed the characterizations of the Mueller-Comey relationship interviews in the past.

“Bob and Jim have a congenial relationship as former colleagues. Both served long legal careers that involved overlapping time spent within the Department of Justice, and that’s pretty well documented. But beyond that, they’re not close, personal friends,” Kelley told the Washington Post this summer. “They’re friends in the sense that co-workers are friends. They don’t really have a personal relationship.”

Kelley told Fox News on Friday that he stands by those comments.

Mueller, meanwhile, has been criticized by Republicans for the makeup of his investigative team, which includes several Democratic donors.

“As these various Russian related allegations swirl, I think Mueller increasingly regrets his decision to pick a staff in which half of the prosecutors had either given to, or participated, in Democratic causes,” Trusty said. “That was an unforced error.”

Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.