Author Archives: See Below

John Boehner was a longtime opponent of marijuana reform. Here’s what changed his mind.

John A. Boehner, the former Republican speaker of the House who once said he was “unalterably opposed” to decriminalizing marijuana laws, has joined a board of directors for a cannabis company with an eye on rolling back federal regulations.

The former Ohio congressman, who led a party that was historically opposed to legalizing marijuana, has been appointed to the board of advisers of Acreage Holdings, Boehner said in a statement Wednesday. The company grows and sells legal weed and operates in 11 states.

“I have concluded descheduling the drug is needed so that we can do research and allow [the Department of Veterans Affairs] to offer it as a treatment option in the fight against the opioid epidemic that is ravaging our communities,” he said.

The move is a stark reversal for the former speaker, who in 2011 wrote a constituent that he was against “legalization of marijuana or any other FDA Schedule I drug,” adding that “I remain concerned that legalization will result in increased abuse of all varieties of drugs, including alcohol.”

Boehner reiterated his opposition to legalization as recently as September 2015. Nearly half a million people were arrested for selling weed during Boehner’s term as speaker from 2011-2015, Quartz reported.

Spokesman David Schnittger said Boehner’s evolving position has been the result of close study after leaving office.

Currently, nine states plus Washington, D.C. have legalized recreational use of the drug, while many others allow some sort of medical use. The Justice Department has been prohibited from using federal funds to target state-legal medical marijuana businesses since 2014.

Erik Altieri, executive director for the Washington-based marijuana advocacy group NORML, told The Washington Post that Boehner’s acceptance of marijuana tracks with rising American and even Republican lawmaker evolving beliefs about the drug and its uses.

Boehner is joined on the board of advisers by former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld, a Republican who left office in 1997 and was former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson’s running mate in 2016 on the libertarian party ticket. As governor, Weld advocated for medical marijuana legalization since 1992.

It is unknown if Boehner or Weld hold paid positions on the board. Acreage Holdings spokesman Lewis Goldberg declined to discuss salary or benefits of its executives. Weld told Bloomberg he was considering an investment in the company.

Weld, a former federal prosecutor, said the conventional wisdom about marijuana during the Reagan administration was that it acted as a “gateway drug” to more harmful substances. 

“Now there’s some evidence that it can become an exit drug” and an alternative to opioid addiction, which has become the primary public health concern in Massachusetts, he said in an interview with The Post.

Weld said his advocacy will likely find appeal among conservatives who champion state laws to regulate issues without federal interference.

In a joint statement, Boehner and Weld focused on a long-standing concern among veterans and advocacy groups — federal law classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug, the same as heroin and ecstasy.

Current prohibitions have stymied research at Veterans Affairs to evaluate the drug’s efficacy in treating post-traumatic stress and physical pain as the result of military service, then-VA Secretary David Shulkin said earlier this year. Critics of restrictions say a tangle of federal laws that regulate research and funding have confused VA and lawmakers on what it can evaluate.

Veterans advocating for decriminalizing marijuana have spoken with Boehner in the past, he said. “It was an argument he heard as a member, considered and never dismissed,” Schnittger said.

Descheduling cannabis would not legalize it nationally, but it would end federal marijuana enforcement and allow states to set their own marijuana policies without federal interference.

Polls show that over 60 percent of Americans favor legalizing marijuana completely, with well over 90 percent in favor of legal medical use. Democrats eyeing a 2020 presidential run have grown increasingly vocal about the shortcomings of current federal law.

Acreage Holdings, a main player in the increasingly white-collar marijuana trade, will expand its research initiatives among universities as it seeks to “demystify” cannabis, chief executive Kevin Murphy told The Post. The company cultivates, processes and distributes marijuana in the growing, billion-dollar industry, according to its site.

The company focused on veterans in its messaging because they are “passionate” about broadening marijuana options available to former troops, Murphy said.

The American Legion, the largest veterans group in the country, found in a 2017 survey that veterans overwhelmingly support marijuana use for medical reasons. About 22 percent of veteran households said they use weed for medical reasons.

Altieri, of NORML, said he hopes Boehner will use his influence within the GOP to extend acceptance of marijuana, which may lead to legalization laws for veterans and nonveterans alike.

But, he said, Boehner probably would have been more influential had he been a proponent of marijuana use for veterans while he was speaker. Altieri said an earlier intervention “could’ve reduced veteran suicide,” which VA estimates to claim the lives of 20 veterans a day.

“It would’ve been more helpful for him advocating for this 10 years ago,” he said.

Read more at PowerPost

Facebook’s Zuckerberg gets grilled by House in second day of hearings

[Keep checking this page throughout the day for updated news and analysis of Zuckerberg’s testimony to Congress.]

Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday clashed with a second panel of congressional lawmakers who attacked the Facebook chief executive on a litany of issues, from user privacy to Russian propaganda and illegal opioid sales.

The hearing — set before the House Energy and Commerce Committee — has proven more tense than the marathon session in the Senate a day earlier. Democrats and Republicans alike repeatedly cut off Zuckerberg, who appeared less composed than in the Tuesday hearing.

Lawmakers once again threatened regulation if Facebook failed to improve its business practices. At one point in the hearing, though, Zuckerberg acknowledged that his own information had been compromised as a result of the privacy controversy now looming over his company.

Opening the session, the House panel’s leader Republican Rep. Greg Walden (Ore.) called Facebook an “American success story.” But he added: “While Facebook has certainly grown, I worry it has not matured. I think it is time to ask whether Facebook may have moved too fast and broken too many things.”

Driving lawmakers’ scrutiny is the controversy around Cambridge Analytica, a political consultancy tapped by President Trump’s 2016 campaign that improperly accessed the names, “likes” and other personal information of millions of Facebook users. For the first time, Zuckerberg said that his data had been swept up by an app that fed data on 87 million users to Cambridge Analytica.

In the wake of its review of the firm’s activities, Facebook also has acknowledged that malicious actors scraped information from the public profiles of practically its entire base, more than 2 billion users. Such scraping heightens the odds that Facebook could be subject to major fines from the Federal Trade Commission, which is investigating the matter, and it drew sharp rebukes from lawmakers who felt Facebook should have spotted it sooner.

“Facebook knew about this in 2013 and 2015, but you didn’t turn the feature off until Wednesday of last week,” said Rep. Ben Lujan (D-N.M.) at one point during the hearing. “This is essentially a tool for these malicious actors to steal a person’s identity and put the finishing touches on it.”

Zuckerberg started the House hearing by repeating the same apology he gave to the Senate a day earlier. “It was my mistake, and I’m sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I’m responsible for what happens here,” he told House lawmakers.

Throughout the hearing, Zuckerberg’s demeanor vacillated between calm and frustrated as lawmakers challenged the 33-year-old billionaire on a host of issues.

Democratic Rep. G.K. Butterfield demanded that Zuckerberg improve the company’s hiring practices, pointing out that Facebook had no people of color in its highest executive ranks. Republican Rep. Joe Barton, meanwhile, pressed Zuckerberg on claims of conservative bias in the way his company handles content uploaded by its users.

Rep. David McKinley accused Zuckerberg and Facebook for “hurting people” by failing to combat users who try to sell opioids on the site. “I think there are a number of areas of content we need to do a better job of policing on our service,” Zuckerberg replied.

In one of the toughest exchanges on Wednesday, Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo — a lawmaker who represents a slice of Silicon Valley — repeatedly needled Zuckerberg for failing to explain its data collection practices to users in “clear and pedestrian language.”

Her Democratic colleague, Lujan, raised reports that Facebook collects data on those who aren’t even users — called “shadow profiles” by some. Zuckerberg, however, said he was “not specifically familiar with that.” Nevertheless, Lujan criticized Zuckerberg for a feature that allows web users who aren’t signed up to only learn more about the data collected by the social giant if they become users.

“You’re directing people who don’t even have a Facebook page to sign up a page to reach their data,” Lujan said.

Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn later remarked that Facebook looks “a whole lot like the Truman Show,” where users’ information is “made available to people they don’t know, and then that data is crunched and used and they are fully unaware of this.”

The Tennessee lawmaker cited laws that govern health data, financial transactions and other industries, before citing her bill that would require tech companies to obtain user permission before they can collect and sell user data. Facebook has long lobbied against the so-called Browser Act.

Repeatedly, though, lawmakers have said the Facebook leader must provide greater clarity as to exactly how Cambridge Analytica obtained data on 87 million users in the first place. They warned a suit-clad Zuckerberg that tough regulation and scrutiny might follow if Facebook failed once again to improve its business practices.

“If all we do is have a hearing and nothing happens, then that’s not accomplishing anything,” said New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

A day earlier, Senate lawmakers expressed the same fears.

“Unless there are specific rules and regulations enforced by an outside agency, I have no assurance that these kinds of vague commitments are going to produce action,” Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) said during the Tuesday Senate hearing.

“Mr. Zuckerberg, you’ve said you’re sorry. I appreciate the apologies,” added Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.) during later questioning. “But please stop apologizing and make the change.”

The knives come out for Rod Rosenstein as Trump’s most volatile instincts face little resistance

President Donald Trump has come unhinged after his personal lawyer’s office was raided.

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

  • President Donald Trump, furious over the Michael Cohen raids and surrounded by few moderating voices to control his instincts, appears to be on the cusp of firing deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein.
  • Trump has been simmering at Rosenstein for months, but he reportedly viewed the FBI’s raid of his longtime lawyer as a personal affront and a politically motivated hit job.
  • The president’s fury is compounded by his decision to surround himself with those who cater to his most rash impulses.

President Donald Trump has come unhinged after the FBI raided the offices and home of his longtime lawyer Michael Cohen.

The next person to likely face the chopping block: deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein.

The president’s frustration with Rosenstein, attorney general Jeff Sessions, and other top Department of Justice officials is not new. But his animosity toward Rosenstein, in particular, has taken on a new significance as Trump relies increasingly on loyalists, like the conservative firebrands Sean Hannity and Joseph diGenova, and shuns others who may guard against his worst instincts.

Trump was reportedly enraged after it surfaced that FBI agents working for the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York raided Cohen’s property Monday morning, seizing electronic devices, personal financial records, and attorney-client communications between Trump and Cohen.

The Southern District of New York reportedly initiated the Cohen raids upon receiving a referral from the special counsel Robert Mueller after he likely uncovered evidence of potential wrongdoing related to Cohen that fell outside the purview of his investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 US election and the Trump campaign’s possible involvement.

Cohen has been referred to at different times as Trump’s fixer, “pit bull,” and consigliere. In addition to facing legal scrutiny for possible bank fraud and campaign finance violations, Cohen is a subject of interest in at least four investigative threads related to Trump. As the president’s right-hand man, Cohen also has intimate knowledge of Trump’s most closely guarded secret: his personal finances.

Trump reacted to news of the raids on Monday by lashing out at top DOJ and FBI officials and described the investigations as a “TOTAL WITCH HUNT” in an early-morning tweet on Tuesday. In addition to publicly fuming about the news, Trump also privately began wondering whether he should fire Rosenstein, The New York Times reported.

The president’s fury ratcheted up another notch when it emerged that Rosenstein had personally signed off on the FBI’s decision to raid Cohen’s office.

“He takes the Russia stuff as a political hit job,” one source close to Trump told Axios. The Cohen raid “was a personal affront. This was the red line,” they added.

Some of Trump’s legal advisers have also argued that they have a strong case to support Rosenstein’s firing, CNN reported.

They apparently believe they can successfully prove Rosenstein has overstepped his authority and that he is conflicted because he is also a witness in the Russia investigation, given that he recommended Trump fire FBI director James Comey last year, per the report.

‘I’ve never seen him like this before’

Hope Hicks left the White House on March 29.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The already delicate atmosphere in the West Wing is complicated by the fact that many of the voices who previously served as bulwarks against Trump’s worst impulses have either left or been forced out of his orbit.

H.R. McMaster, the former national security adviser and a moderating influence in the White House, was ousted last month and replaced by former UN ambassador John Bolton.

Following reports that Bolton planned to “clean house” on the National Security Council, the White House homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, was forced out Tuesday.

John Dowd, the seasoned defense attorney who was leading Trump’s communications with Mueller’s office, resigned from his legal team last month, reportedly frustrated that Trump was not following his advice. Trump’s personal defense team is now spearheaded by Jay Sekulow, who has appeared frequently on Fox News and has little experience with high-profile criminal defense cases.

Trump is also said to be growing increasingly frustrated with the White House counsel Don McGahn, Axios reported on Wednesday. McGahn was critical in convincing Trump not to fire Mueller last year — according to The Times, Trump ordered McGahn to dismiss the special counsel last July but backed off when McGahn threatened to resign.

Perhaps the most consequential departure was that of Hope Hicks, the former communications director who left the administration last month after facing increased scrutiny over her role in the scandal surrounding former staff secretary Rob Porter.

Hicks has been described as the person Trump was closest to and most comfortable with outside of his family, and she was often able to help him control his anger when controversies hit.

The Cohen raid was “the first crisis post-Hope Hicks,” one source told Axios. “This was different: I’ve never seen him like this before.”

Leaning on more audacious voices

Sean Hannity upped his calls for Mueller and Rosenstein’s removal after the Cohen raid.

Getty Images

In addition to moving away from moderating forces, the president is also seeking the company of individuals who cater to his moods.

The Daily Beast reported that Trump dined with the Fox News pundit Jesse Watters and the controversial former White House aide Sebastian Gorka at the White House last month.

In recent weeks, Trump has also met or spoken with figures like former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and the Fox News host and ardent Trump defender Sean Hannity.

Following news of the Cohen raids on Monday, Hannity led his show with: “This is now officially an all-hands-on-deck effort to totally malign and, if possible, impeach the president of the United States.”

“Mueller and Rosenstein have declared what is a legal war on the president,” he added.

Meanwhile, Joseph diGenova, the controversial former federal prosecutor who was under consideration to join Trump’s legal team, told Fox News on Monday that Congress should move to impeach Rosenstein and FBI director Christopher Wray.

The next day, House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes told the conservative commentator Laura Ingraham he was prepared to impeach Rosenstein and Wray if they did not hand over documents he was seeking related to the Russia probe.

Trump picked up the thread Wednesday morning.

“No Collusion or Obstruction (other than I fight back), so now they do the Unthinkable, and RAID a lawyers office for information! BAD!” he tweeted.

The president added that the US’s deteriorating relationship with Russia was caused by the Russia probe, “headed up by the all Democrat loyalists, or people that worked for [former President Barack] Obama.”

Trump then slammed Mueller for being the “most conflicted of all.”

The only person more conflicted than Mueller, the president said, was Rosenstein.

Trump Promises Strike on Syria and Warns Russia Against Backing Assad

The attack on Saturday in the Damascus suburb of Douma has not been confirmed to be the result of a chemical weapon.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Wednesday that the United States is still assessing the intelligence on the suspected chemical attack, but that military planning was proceeding.

“We stand ready to provide military options if they’re appropriate, as the president determined,” he said.

The World Health Organization said on Wednesday that there were reports of about 500 people in the Damascus suburb of Douma who have symptoms similar to people exposed to toxic chemicals. It said about 70 people had died while taking shelter in basements and 43 of them had signs of being exposed to “highly toxic chemicals.”

The United Nations Security Council, on Tuesday, considered but did not approve rival resolutions from the United States and Russia regarding how to determine who is responsible for the attack.

Mr. Trump’s comments about poor relations with Russia echoed what the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said recently in response to the wave of diplomatic expulsions of Russians from the United States and other countries, according to a Reuters report. The expulsions were a coordinated response to the poisoning in Britain of a former Russian spy and his daughter. Since then, analysts have said the Balkans could become a battleground for a new Cold War.

The tough talk on Russia, when it comes to Syria, is a strikingly different tone for Mr. Trump, who has long pushed for improved relations with the Kremlin. Recently, Mr. Trump praised Mr. Putin for his re-election and even invited him to the White House.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Later on Wednesday morning, Mr. Trump clarified his assessment of the poor relations with Russia in another tweet, blaming the decline in Washington-Moscow ties on the ongoing investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election.

Russia has been a dominant theme during Mr. Trump’s entire presidency, particularly with the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Russia’s election interference.

The president repeated his frustrations about the ongoing inquiry, which he said was led by Democrats or others who worked for former President Barack Obama.

Earlier this week, the F.B.I. raided the offices and hotel room of Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, Michael D. Cohen, enraging the president, who called it an “attack on our country in a true sense.” Mr. Trump, however, has not used similarly strong language about Russia’s election activities which started as early as 2014.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

When it comes to Syria, however, Mr. Trump has blamed Mr. Putin for supporting the Syrian regime. Mr. Trump called the suspected chemical attack a “barbaric act” and suggested Mr. Putin bears some responsibility. “He may, and if he does, it’s going to be very tough, very tough,” Mr. Trump said on Monday. “Everybody’s going to pay a price. He will, everybody will.”

After Mr. Trump’s series of tweets Wednesday morning, Mr. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said, “We don’t participate in Twitter diplomacy. We advocate serious approaches.” Mr. Peskov’s comments were reported by the Interfax news agency.

Mr. Trump canceled a planned trip to Latin America later this week in order to oversee an American response to Syria, the White House said. And the president met with his military commanders on Monday to discuss options.

But publicly discussing American military plans is in contrast to how he has said he would conduct himself as commander in chief.

During tensions with North Korea in April of 2017, he said in an interview on “Fox Friends” that he would not say whether he would order a strike if the rogue nation continued conducting missile tests.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“I don’t want to telegraph what I am doing or what I am thinking,” Mr. Trump said. “I am not like other administrations, where they say, ‘We are going to do this in four weeks.’ It doesn’t work that way. We’ll see what happens.”

That was the kind of message that Mr. Trump repeatedly delivered as a presidential candidate, mocking former President Barack Obama for giving adversaries too much information by setting timelines for withdrawal from combat zones.

And, indeed, while he has not set a public withdrawal deadline for American forces in Syria the way Mr. Obama did for other combat zones, just last week Mr. Trump set a private one that quickly became public when he told military commanders that ideally he wanted to pull troops out of Syria within a few months.

While Mr. Trump’s tweet did not disclose the exact date and time of an American missile strike, Mr. Assad’s allies are lining up to back the Syrian regime.

The top adviser to Iran’s supreme leader said on Wednesday that Tehran would support Damascus against any foreign aggression, Iran’s state television reported.

“Iran backs Syria in its fight against America and the Zionist regime,” Ali Akbar Velayati, the supreme leader’s adviser, told state television during a visit to eastern Ghouta in Syria. Iranian officials call Israel “the Zionist regime.” Mr. Velayati said of the United States, “Their habit is to threaten constantly and the only thing they know how to do is bombing, haven’t Syria and Iran been bombed before?”

Reporting was contributed by Oleg Matsnev in Moscow, Nick Cumming-Bruce in Geneva, Prashant S. Rao in London, Thomas Erdbrink in Tehran, Sewell Chan in New York and Peter Baker and Helene Cooper in Washington.


Continue reading the main story

Trump says missiles ‘will be coming’ to Syria, taunts Russia for vowing to block them

President Trump warned Wednesday that U.S. airstrikes on Syria “will be coming” in retaliation for a suspected chemical attack, although he did not say when, and he taunted Syrian ally Russia for a pledge to shoot down American missiles.

Both the United States and Russia escalated a war of words over claims of indiscriminate attacks on civilians in Syria, raising the possibility of open military conflict between the old Cold War adversaries.

“Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart!’” Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to missile strikes that have appeared likely since the weekend deaths of more than 40 Syrian civilians, including children.

It was the first explicit U.S. statement that a military response is in the offing, and it marked a turnabout for a president who ridiculed his predecessor, Barack Obama, for allegedly telegraphing military strategy.

By addressing his warning to Russia, Trump effectively acknowledged that Syria could become a proxy battleground. Russia is Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s strongest military defender. The United States conducts counterterrorism operations in Syria and backs some anti-Assad rebels.

“You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!” Trump wrote, in one of his most direct criticisms of Moscow.

Russian President Vladi­mir Putin did not directly respond to Trump’s tweets when he appeared at the Kremlin several hours later, at a ceremony welcoming new foreign ambassadors to Moscow. But he told the assembled diplomats that “the state of things in the world cannot but provoke concern.”

“The situation in the world is increasingly chaotic,” Putin said. “Nevertheless, we hope that common sense will prevail in the end and that international relations will become more constructive — that the whole global system will become more stable and predictable.”

Earlier this week, Trump said his administration was working on a response to the suspected chemical attack on Saturday, including military options. He said Monday that a decision would come in 24 to 48 hours, a time frame that has now elapsed and has been complicated by the advent of an international inspection of the attack area.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia did not plan to respond in kind to Trump’s tweeted taunt.

“We do not participate in Twitter diplomacy,” Peskov said, according to Russian news reports. “We are supporters of serious approaches. We continue to believe that it is important not to take steps that could harm an already fragile situation.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that a missile strike could undermine the work of international inspectors who will examine the site of the suspected chemical attack.

“Smart missiles should be fired at terrorists and not at the legitimate government which has been fighting terrorists,” Zakharova wrote on Facebook. “Or is the trick to destroy all the traces with a smart missile strike and then there will be no evidence for international inspectors to look for?”

Trump appeared to be referring to a comment from Russia’s ambassador to Lebanon, who was quoted by a Lebanese news outlet Tuesday as saying that Russia would confront a U.S. strike on Syria by shooting down missiles and striking their launchpads or points of origin.

The missiles most likely to be used in a U.S. attack would probably be launched from U.S. warships, opening the possibility that the Russian diplomat was threatening open warfare.

Two Navy destroyers were used to launch more than 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base in April 2017 in response to a nerve-agent attack that Trump blamed on Assad. The destroyers were underway in the Mediterranean Sea when the missiles were launched from hundreds of miles away. That position was beyond the range of Syrian air defenses, but within range of potential Russian defenses.

The 2017 U.S. assault is probably the best guide for what Trump may do now, but he could choose other launch options . The strike a year ago made good on Trump’s vow not to let the use of chemical weapons go unpunished, but it failed to deter Assad from using them again.

The United States has been building a circumstantial case, based largely on videos and photographs, that a chemical attack by Syrian forces took place in the rebel-held town of Douma in the Eastern Ghouta region near Damascus.

Such a finding of fault would be the justification for a U.S. or allied military response that Syria and Russia would surely call a violation of international law. The finding would also help British and French leaders justify military participation with the unpopular American president.

Syria and Russia have insisted that no chemical attack occurred and that only the opposition groups they call “terrorists” possess chemical weapons.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was asked Wednesday whether he has seen sufficient evidence to blame the Assad government for the attack.

“We’re still assessing the intelligence, ourselves and our allies,” Mattis replied.

“We stand ready to provide military options if they are appropriate, as the president determined.”

Gen. Valery Gerasimov, chief of the General Staff of the Russian armed forces, has said the military would hit back if U.S. airstrikes endangered Russian servicemen in Syria.

“Regarding the question of what will happen in the event of this or that strike, one still wants to hope that all sides will avoid steps that (a) are not provoked by anything in reality and (b) could significantly destabilize the already fragile situation in the region,” Peskov said Wednesday.

A top Russian military official said Russian military police would enter Douma on Friday. He continued to dispute U.S. claims that a chemical attack took place in the town.

The official, Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, deputy chief of operations of the Russian General Staff , said the United States should instead pay attention to the humanitarian situation in the city of Raqqa, which Kurdish-led forces and their American allies captured from the Islamic State last year.

“Rather than declare its readiness to strike Syria with missiles, the United States should work on rebuilding the destroyed city and offer comprehensive help to the population,” Poznikhir said.

In a later tweet Wednesday morning, Trump asserted that “our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War.”

“There is no reason for this,” Trump wrote. “Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together. Stop the arms race?”

He later wrote that “much of the bad blood” with Russia was the result of an ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. He called the investigation “Fake Corrupt.”

Trump charged that the investigation is “headed up by all Democrat loyalists.” He cited special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, whom he called the “most conflicted of all,” and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the probe.

Both Mueller and Rosenstein are Republicans.

With his series of tweets, Trump did precisely what he vowed he would never to do: telegraph his moves.

During his 2016 campaign, Trump regularly attacked Obama for previewing U.S. military strategy, which he argued gave the enemy an advantage by allowing it to fortify itself for the coming attack.

“I have often said that General MacArthur and General Patton would be in a state of shock if they were alive today to see the way President Obama and Hillary Clinton try to recklessly announce their every move before it happens — like they did in Iraq — so that the enemy can prepare and adapt,” Trump said in an August 2016 speech on terrorism.

As president, Trump has boasted that he does not disclose his plans ahead of time. In April 2017, as he contemplated a strike in Syria, Trump said, “One of the things I think you’ve noticed about me is: Militarily, I don’t like to say where I’m going and what I’m doing.”

In Geneva, the World Health Organization said Wednesday that it was “deeply alarmed” by the reports that chemical weapons were used in Syria. At least 43 people were killed Saturday night from suspected exposure, while some 500 patients poured into medical facilities that had been also been bombed, the organization said.

“We should all be outraged at these horrific reports and images from Douma,” said Peter Salama, the WHO deputy director general of emergency preparedness and response.

On Tuesday, a network of local flight monitors in Syria said they had tracked several helicopters heading southwest from a government air base Saturday. The same models of aircraft were later detected circling over Douma at 7:26 p.m. to 7:38 p.m. Reports of a suspected gas attack began circulating minutes later.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a global watchdog, said Tuesday that its inspectors were preparing to deploy to Syria and that Assad’s government has been approached for permission to enter Douma.

But the scope of its mandate remained unclear. The organization is not responsible for naming the perpetrators of any chemical attack, and previous inspectors have said their missions were hampered by government restrictions.

Troianovski reported from Moscow. Philip Rucker in Washington and Louisa Loveluck in Istanbul contributed to this report.

The biggest Black Lives Matter page on Facebook is fake


For at least a year, the biggest page on Facebook purporting to be part of the Black Lives Matter movement was a scam with ties to a middle-aged white man in Australia, a review of the page and associated accounts and websites conducted by CNN shows.

The page, titled simply “Black Lives Matter,” had almost 700,000 followers on Facebook, more than twice as many as the official Black Lives Matter page. It was tied to online fundraisers that brought in at least $100,000 that supposedly went to Black Lives Matter causes in the U.S. At least some of the money, however, was transferred to Australian bank accounts, CNN has learned.

Fundraising campaigns associated with the Facebook page were suspended by PayPal and Patreon after CNN contacted each of the companies for comment. Donorbox and Classy had already removed the campaigns.

The discovery raises new questions about the integrity of Facebook’s platform and the content hosted there. In the run-up to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony before Congress this week, Facebook has announced plans to make the people running large pages verify their identity and location. But it’s not clear that the change would affect this page: Facebook has not said what information about page owners it will disclose to the public — and, presented with CNN’s findings, Facebook initially said the page didn’t violate its “Community Standards.”

Only after almost a week of emails and calls between CNN and Facebook about this story did Facebook suspend the page, and then only because it had suspended a user account that administrated the page.

The discovery also raises questions about Facebook’s commitment to change, and to policing its platform, even in the midst of its PR offensive leading up to Zuckerberg’s testimony. Not for the first time, Facebook took action against a major bad actor on its site not on its own but because journalists made inquiries.

Indeed, Facebook was told of concerns about the page some time ago. Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement, told CNN that Black Lives Matter had, suspecting the page was a scam, contacted Facebook about removing it a few months ago.

Almost 700,000 users followed the page, which was not disabled by Facebook until several days after CNN brought it to the company’s attention.

The Facebook page was — separate from Facebook’s suspension of it — apparently taken down by a person who administrated the page shortly after CNN contacted one of the Australian men who may be associated with it. “Black Lives Matter” appears to have been set up some time in 2016.

The people behind the page also ran a hugely popular Facebook Group also titled “Black Lives Matter.” With almost 40,000 members, it appears to be the biggest group on the platform professing to be supporting Black Lives Matter. Facebook Groups are similar to traditional discussion forums, and unlike pages, people normally need to request to join.

Related: Facebook’s new rules for Pages are a big deal, but there are major questions

The page consistently linked to websites tied to Ian Mackay, a National Union of Workers official in Australia. The union represents thousands of workers across various industries.

A spokesperson for the National Union of Workers said Tuesday that it has suspended Mackay and one other official while it investigates the situation.

The union “is not involved in and has not authorized any activities with reference to claims made in CNN’s story,” National Secretary Tim Kennedy said in a statement.

Mackay has registered dozens of websites, many on issues tied to black rights. In April 2015, Mackay registered blackpowerfist.com. Mackay’s name, email address, phone number and other details appeared in the registration records for the site until July 2015, when the website enabled a feature that allows site owners to hide their identities and contact information.

The Facebook page continually drove traffic to websites associated with blackpowerfist.com, which was eventually turned into a Reddit-like discussion forum. One of the websites included blacklivesmatter.media, for which Mackay is listed as the administrative and technical contact in at least one archived internet record.

A few days after Mackay registered blackpowerfist.com, an anonymous Facebook profile under the name “BP Parker” shared a link to the website. This same profile was an administrator of the “Black Lives Matter” Facebook page until the page was suspended, a Facebook spokesperson has told CNN.

Another anonymous account, under the name “Steve Parks,” linked to another site first registered by Mackay — again, just a few days after internet records indicate he registered it.

As recently as last month, both BP Parker and Steve Parks were listed as administrators on the Black Lives Matter Facebook group tied to the Facebook page.

The people behind the websites and the Facebook page also encouraged people to donate through various online fundraising platforms, including Donorbox.

“Our mission is to raise awareness about racism, bigotry, police brutality and hate crimes by exposing through social media locally and internationally stories that mainstream media don’t,” a message on the group’s Donorbox page read.

“We have built a following through hard work, dedication and the generosity of supporters like you that pitch in a what they can to help us promote or share our page and also pay to boost the stories the mainstream media try to suppress through paid ads,” it added.

Facebook did not comment when asked if ads were purchased to boost the page on its platform.

Related: What Mark Zuckerberg will tell Congress

Another fundraiser removed by Donorbox, which the company confirmed was run by the same people, billed itself as an “Education And Training Portal Sponsorship Fund” that promised “online courses that educate people about the struggle of civil rights leaders and activists.”

Fundraisers also ran on PayPal, Patreon, and Classy.

A source familiar with some of the payments processed said at least one of the accounts was tied to an Australian IP address and bank account. At least one fundraising account was tied to Ian Mackay by name, according to the source.

Another source also familiar with some of the payments processed told CNN that the group had raised around $100,000 that they were aware of. The source also said the fundraisers were linked to Australia.

Both sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because their companies’ policies prohibit the sharing of some information about fundraisers.

The websites associated with the group are currently registered using common features that keep the identity and contact information for the people behind the website private.

CNN reached out to Mackay last month to ask about his involvement with the “Black Lives Matter,” Facebook page. He denied running it. “I once bought the domain name only and sold it,” he told CNN when asked about a Black Lives Matter website that was once registered to his name.

Within a few hours, the Facebook page had been deactivated.

It wasn’t the first time the Facebook page changed after Mackay was asked about his involvement in it.

In December, after a freelance investigator, Jeremy Massler, who was the first person to publicly note Mackay’s apparent links to the page, wrote a blog post about Mackay, the page was taken down for a brief period before re-emerging.

Massler reached out to CNN about the Facebook page following CNN’s reporting on fake Black Lives Matter pages run by a Russian government-linked troll group. Massler pointed CNN to the internet records for websites linked to by the page.

After an investigation of its own, CNN presented its findings to Facebook last week. Despite CNN outlining the page’s links to fundraising accounts that had by then been suspended on other platforms, Facebook initially said its investigation into the page “didn’t show anything that violated our Community Standards.”

On Monday morning, Facebook disabled the BP Parker profile for violating its community standards. The company disabled the page as a result, a spokesperson told CNN.

The campaign’s accounts on Donorbox, PayPal, Classy, and Patreon have all been suspended.

Donorbox told CNN in an email, “This is an organization that we banned months ago. They signed up as the operator of a popular FB page and a BLM social news platform.”

“We banned the account after a couple of donors complained that they thought they donated to the grassroots organization.”

The company added that most of the donations came from people clicking links on Facebook and on websites run by the people behind the campaign.

One of the Donorbox campaigns that was active as recently as February of this year included an email address for Black Lives Matter Memphis. P. Moses, a spokesperson for Black Lives Matter Memphis, said her group had nothing to do with the fundraiser. Donorbox removed the campaign, the company told CNN.

Patreon and PayPal suspended the accounts after CNN asked the companies about them. Classy had already suspended the account on its platform as it didn’t make it through its approval process.

PayPal and Donorbox would not specify how much money was raised using their platforms. Patreon said only $194 was raised through their site.

Classy said that the campaign did not make it through its final approval process and no money raised was transferred to the people behind the campaign.

Mackay did not provide answers to multiple questions from CNN about his apparent links to the scheme. “My domain name buying and selling is a personal hobby,” he told CNN.

He declined multiple opportunities to clarify his role. “What is the point in speaking to you given that you are going to run your story either way,” he wrote in one message to CNN.

Cullors said she found CNN’s findings disturbing. She said fake fundraisers diminish the real work the movement does. “We rely on donors who believe in our work and our cause and that money will be used in a way that is respectful,” Cullors said.

“It’s important to remember the movement was organic and no organizations started the protests that spread across the country,” DeRay Mckesson, a prominent black activist, told CNN. “The consequences of that is it hasn’t been easy to think about authenticity in the digital space.”

— Carly Walsh contributed to this report.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Donorbox and Classy removed the fundraising accounts after CNN brought them to their attention. In fact, the accounts were removed before CNN brought them to the companies’ attention. Additionally, an earlier version of this story misidentified the person who answered questions about the fundraiser purporting to support Black Lives Matter Memphis. P. Moses spoke to CNN on behalf of Black Lives Matter Memphis, but is not its spokesperson.

China Talks Stalled Over Trump’s Demands on High-Tech Industries, Source Says

Trade talks between the world’s biggest economies broke down last week after the Trump administration demanded that China curtail support for high-technology industries, a person familiar with the situation said, signaling that a resolution may be some ways off.

Liu He, a vice premier overseeing economics and finance, told a group of officials Thursday that Beijing had rejected a U.S. request to stop subsidizing industries related to its “Made in China 2025” initiative, the person said. The U.S. has accused China of using the policy to force companies into transferring technology in areas like robotics, aerospace and artificial intelligence.

Liu He

The U.S. demands came after Beijing offered to narrow the trade deficit by $50 billion, including by importing more liquefied natural gas, agricultural products, semiconductors and luxury goods, according to the person. The plans also included opening the financial sector at a faster rate and giving U.S. companies more access to China’s booming e-commerce market, the person added.

Liu said President Xi Jinping was ready to fight back hard if U.S. counterpart Donald Trump wanted a trade war, said the person, who asked for anonymity to speak about confidential discussions. China was open to talks with the U.S., but wouldn’t initiate them under the current conditions, the person said, citing Liu.

The dust-up suggests that the trade dispute won’t be resolved quickly, despite Trump’s optimistic tweets and Xi’s conciliatory address to a regional economic forum Tuesday. In recent days, Chinese officials have expressed increased frustration with the U.S., with the foreign ministry on Monday calling talks “impossible” under current conditions.

A senior White House trade adviser on Tuesday said the U.S. is moving in a “measured” way through the process of evaluating whether to follow through with the tariffs on Chinese products. The tariffs proposal is still in a 60-day period for public input and the U.S. Treasury is preparing recommended curbs on Chinese investment due by late May.

“There are doors to discussions, and we are having those,” Peter Navarro, White House director of trade and industrial policy, said in an interview with National Public Radio. The U.S. wants a rebalancing of trade flows between the two countries, and for China to stop “stealing” American intellectual property, he said.

On Monday, Trump signaled that a deal with China was within reach, saying his administration would “probably” resolve a dispute that has roiled financial markets and raised fears of a major clash between the world’s biggest economies. Xi’s speech Tuesday lifted stocks in Asia and U.S. equity futures.

China’s Xi Pledges Greater Openness Amid Trump Trade Dispute

At the Boao Xi pledged a “new phase of opening up.” He reiterated plans to allow more foreign participation in sectors like automobile manufacturing and banking, and said China would strengthen measures to protect intellectual property rights.

Xi also called on countries to export high-technology goods to China, which has been a point of contention with the U.S. A commentary in the official People’s Daily after the speech said Beijing would never open at the expense of its interests — a signal that it would continue supporting “Made in China 2025.”

Technology Transfer

A White House official who watched Xi’s speech welcomed his remarks on intellectual property while saying that actions speak louder than words. Trump’s administration was unified in the view that U.S. jobs were endangered by what it called China’s forced technology transfers and state-directed intellectual property theft, the official said.

The State Council Information Office, which represents China’s central government, didn’t reply to faxed questions Monday on U.S. trade talks. The White House had no comment on specifics of the discussions, but an administration official said China should change its behavior and take action to change the trajectory of its trading relationship with the U.S.

Laura Ingraham’s Back After Mocking David Hogg & Her Monologue Hints She’s Not So Sorry After All

Monday night marked the television return of Fox News host Laura Ingraham after she mocked David Hogg, a Parkland shooting survivor, and then took a week-long vacation. In her monologue on The Ingraham Angle, the host suggested that conservative opinions are facing censorship in the United States. Because of this, Ingraham suggested, those who hold these opinions are facing a host of consequences, including being fired or being “boycotted.” Ingraham’s comment regarding boycotting appeared to make veiled reference to advertisers’ decisions to boycott her show after she mocked Hogg last month.

On March 28, Ingraham tweeted an article reporting that Hogg had been rejected from four colleges to which he had applied. Ingraham commented on the article, “David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it. (Dinged by UCLA with a 4.1 GPA…totally predictable given acceptance rates.).”

In response, Hogg tweeted a list of Ingraham’s top 12 advertisers, requesting that people contact them to complain about Ingraham’s comments. Later that day, Ingraham apologized to Hogg, saying on Twitter, “Any student should be proud of a 4.2 GPA —incl. @DavidHogg111. On reflection, in the spirit of Holy Week, I apologize for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of Parkland.” The host also decided to take a pre-planned one week vacation.

USA Today reported that Hogg’s appeal to advertisers was quite effective — and Ingraham lost around half of her show’s advertisers following the Twitter exchange. When she returned to the air on Monday, Ingraham did not directly address the issue with Hogg or the boycott. However, she did express that she felt like conservative voices were being suppressed in the United States.

As the Hollywood Reporter noted, on her show Ingraham repeatedly chastised the “the bullies on the left aiming to silence conservatives.” She also accused progressives of being hypocritical, saying, “For all their talk of inclusion, the left doesn’t invite more voices to enter the public discussion … Instead, they drive out any dissenting voice …”

The Reporter did indicate that Ingraham did not specifically say she represented a conservative individual whose voice is being suppressed. However, her comments appeared to give the impression that she was at least in part referring to her recent feud with Hogg and her advertisers’ withdrawal.

Indeed, at one point in her monologue, Ingraham asserted,

Toward the end of her monologue, Ingraham announced that she will be featuring a new segment on her show called “Defending the First,” which will explore what she believes are threats to the First Amendment. As the host noted, she plans to use her show to expose “the perpetrators [of First Amendment threats], their tactics, their major players, and their funders.” She also did not mince words when characterizing how she believes some progressives are threatening free speech, saying, “Their efforts are Stalinist, pure and simple. Their objective is a total transformation of American society, not through rational discourse and open debate, but through personal demonization and silencing.”

Overall, while Ingraham’s monologue did not mention her Twitter exchange with Hogg or her advertisers’ exits, she certainly indicated that she strongly believes that conservative voices are being unfairly suppressed, including through boycotts. Time will tell whether Ingraham ever mentions her issues with Hogg and her advertisers on her show, particularly on her new First Amendment analysis segment.