Sunday, August 14, 2016
Clinton camp: Mills potential conflict of interest 'absurd'
![]() |
| The Untouchables. |
Then-Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills took an Amtrak train from Washington to New York City in June 2012 to interview two executives to potentially become the foundation’s next leader, sources told CNN, which first reported the story.
Clinton purportedly accepted the secretary of state post in 2009 in part on the condition that any foundation activity would neither “create conflicts nor the appearance of conflicts” of interest for her.
The CNN report doesn’t state Mills broke any rules but suggested her interviewing trip has added to the “blurred lines” between Clinton’s government work and non-government activities, which have long created problems for her and husband President Bill Clinton.
Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server as secretary of state to send and receive official emails has also added to that perception.
The Clinton campaign said Friday that Mills “volunteered her personal time” and paid for her own travel to New York City.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Mills' attorney also purportedly said such work was voluntary.
The foundation did not immediately respond to a FoxNews.com request Saturday for comment.
The CNN report comes the same week as a new batch of Clinton emails seemed to show foundation donors got preferential treatment during Clinton’s tenure at the State Department.
Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch released the 44 new email exchanges, which the group says were not in the original 30,000 handed over to the State Department. Clinton has repeatedly claimed she turned over all work-related emails during the now-closed probe into her private server use.
The documents challenge Clinton's insistence that there was "no connection" between the foundation and her work at the State Department.
In one email exchange, Doug Band, an executive at the Clinton Foundation, tried to put billionaire donor Gilbert Chagoury -- a convicted money launderer -- in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.
And a report this week by The Daily Caller says that several investigations are being launched, including one led by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Civil Frauds Unit that will focus on the foundation's dealings in New York. The agency has declined to comment.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, led by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has also tried to get answers about Mills' New York trip. Grassley sent Secretary of State John Kerry a letter in January about the issue.
Pelosi says already getting 'obscene and sick' messages after cell phone number, email address released
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Saturday that she has received “obscene and sick” calls, voicemails and text messages after a hacker posted the private cell phone numbers and email addresses of roughly 200 current and former congressional Democrats.
“Please be careful not to allow your children or family members to answer your phone or read incoming text messages,” Pelosi wrote in a letter to colleagues. “This morning, I am changing my phone number and I advise you to do so as well.”
The contact information was part of a large computer-content dump Friday and the most recent in a series of cyberattacks on Democratic Party organizations, including the Democratic National Committee, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Pelosi said she was flying from Florida to California on Friday when she heard that the information had been posted by the hacker or hackers known as "Guccifer 2.0."
She also confirmed that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has hired a cybersecurity firm to conduct an investigation of the breach, purportedly part of a Russian cyber-attack that Pelosi has termed “an electronic Watergate break-in.”
Pelosi added that the chief information security officer of the House, in coordination with Capitol Police, has sent communications to those people whose email addresses have been made public about how to address the problem. The chief administrative officer of the House has also sent an email stating that the House computer system has not been compromised, but urged members and staff to be vigilant about opening emails and websites.
The DCCC is also issuing similar guidance.
Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., was also holding a conference call with lawmakers on Saturday evening along with cybersecurity experts who have been investigating and responding to the breach.
"This is a sad course of events, not only for us, but more importantly for our country," Pelosi said in urging lawmakers to join the conference call with Lujan.
Saturday, August 13, 2016
The 5 Kinds of Republicans Who Are Defecting From the Party of Trump
The
political news this week is being dominated by reports of elephants
breaking away from the herd: Republicans who are not supporting Donald
Trump for president. They are most often being differentiated by exactly
what they are saying or not saying: Some are simply refraining from
opportunities to endorse their nominee; some are publicly refusing to
endorse their nominee; a few are going to vote for the Libertarian or a
last-minute conservative independent or write-in candidate; and a
steadily increasing number are going over the brink to support Hillary
Clinton, as one might expect with Election Day fast approaching.
There’s no telling when the exodus will end; the latest Trump outrage, about “Second Amendment people” having some plans for HRC, is creating a fresh bout of heartburn for exasperated Republicans, and could send a new batch toward the exit ramp.
But in understanding this phenomenon and weighing its importance (or the lack thereof), it’s helpful to look
at the non-endorsees and their backgrounds and motives. To that end,
here’s a classification system of the five different kinds of
Republicans who have broken ranks over Trump:
1. Nominal Republicans who are out of synch with their party:
While they are not as plentiful as they were in the days when liberal
Republicans and conservative Democrats walked the Earth, there are
always some nominal partisans available, often long in the tooth, who
object to the general direction of “their” party and can be rounded up
to show their displeasure with a statement of dissent or a
cross-endorsement. This used to be a particular cross to bear for
Democrats, from the days of John Connally’s Democrats for Nixon in 1972
to Joe Lieberman’s active support for John McCain in 2008 — but
Republicans are catching up.
Former
South Dakota senator Larry Pressler is a good example of this breed of
errant pachyderm. He endorsed Barack Obama twice, attempted a Senate
comeback as an independent in 2014, and has now endorsed Hillary.
But
my favorite defector of the cycle has got to be former Michigan
governor William Milliken, who endorsed Clinton as a protest against
Trump’s candidacy. Like Pressler, he’s a serial defector; he endorsed
John Kerry in 2004, and de-endorsed John McCain late in the 2008 cycle.
But to grasp how out of touch the 94-year-old Milliken is with the
contemporary GOP, consider that he became governor of Michigan when George Romney resigned to join Richard Nixon’s cabinet. Enough said.
2. Lame ducks. As James Hohmann notes in the Washington Post,
the willingness of current Republican elected officials to stray from
party discipline is more or less in inverse relationship to their
vulnerability to punishment by Republican leaders and/or angry “base”
voters. So, unsurprisingly, the two most prominent defectors in the
House Republican Conference — Richard Hanna,
a New Yorker who has endorsed Clinton, and Scott Rigell, a Virginian
who will vote Libertarian — had already announced their retirements. A
Democratic precedent was Senator Zell Miller in 2004, who endorsed and
spoke for George W. Bush a few months before he left Washington for
good. Two years later Miller headed up something called Democrats for
Santorum on behalf of the soon-to-be-defeated Pennsylvania senator; it
seemed to be composed of Miller himself and his image in the mirror. But
I digress …
3. Political realists.
There are also Republican defectors who seem to be motivated by cold
political calculation. Most obviously, Illinois senator Mark Kirk’s
slim odds of reelection almost certainly depend on winning a lot of
votes from people who loathe Trump. But even his Senate colleague Susan
Collins, who is being treated today as a brave woman of principle for
refusing to get on the Trump Train, could be thinking about her
political future in Maine, where according to Hohmann she could be
contemplating a gubernatorial run as an independent.
More
famously, Ted Cruz is clearly calculating his “vote your conscience”
statement at the Republican convention will look infinitely better if
and when Trump goes down to a catastrophic defeat, leaving his own self
as the front-runner for 2020. John Kasich and Ben Sasse could be making
similar calculations about their political futures.
4. Redundants.
In many respects the most sympathetic group of Republican defectors are
former environmental, immigration, and trade-policy officials who
obviously have no place in a party led by Donald Trump. I mean, really:
Let’s say you are Robert Zoellick, once George W. Bush’s United States
Trade Representative. Trump is accusing you and people just like you of
deliberately selling American workers down the river and destroying the
country in close concert with the godless Clinton administration
globalists in the other party (on top of that, Zoellick ran the World
Bank and worked for Goldman Sachs!). Are you going to blandly endorse
him or fight to win “your” party back? It’s a pretty easy call. The same
is true of Republicans closely identified with comprehensive
immigration reform and strong environmental regulation (e.g., former EPA director Christine Todd Whitman, who has indicated she will vote for Clinton).
5. Assorted elites. For most of the rest of the elite
defectors, the emphasis should be on the word “elite.” They are mostly former
appointed officials in Republican administrations who have since moved on to
life in that floating stratosphere of policy mavens, think tankers, lobbyists,
and Cabinets-in-waiting. They are
heavily found on that list of 50 Republican foreign-policy experts calling for
Trump’s defeat.
Some
are actually “redundants” associated with past Republican
policies Trump has denounced (you can add the Iraq War to the list
above).
Others know there is no way they will have a place in, or even access
to, a Trump administration. Still others simply have a reciprocal
assessment of
Trump as a loser. They are mostly sincerely angry about what is
happening to their party, and plan to have a future role in the GOP when the “fever” has broken. What they all have in common is that they will never, ever
have to deal with Republican primary voters, other than at a safe distance.
The
key question to ask with all five groups of Republican defectors is
whether they represent a significant group of rank-and-file Republican
voters, who have for the most part been more likely to stick with Trump
than elected officials and other elites have been. That’s not the only
measurement of the value of defectors; sometimes independent voters can
be swayed by these kind of negative testimonials for a major-party
candidate, and there are financial considerations as well, since wealthy
donors prefer some cover before abandoning a party nominee. But it will
be interesting to find out whether the party has truly left the
defectors behind, or if instead they are simply a party-in-exile that
will hold the reins long after Donald Trump has left politics like a bad
circus leaving town. Donald Trump’s Other Campaign Foe: The ‘Lowest Form of Life’ News Media
Donald J. Trump
was on the defensive all week, battered from all sides for his heated
statements hailing the Second Amendment and linking political opponents
to the Islamic State.
But on Friday morning, Mr. Trump rose early to strike back at his favorite adversary.
“Ratings challenged @CNN reports so seriously that I call President Obama (and Clinton) ‘the founder’ of ISIS,” Mr. Trump fumed on Twitter shortly after dawn. “THEY DON’T GET SARCASM?”
He
soon fired off another gibe. “I love watching these poor, pathetic
people (pundits) on television working so hard and so seriously to try
and figure me out,” Mr. Trump taunted. “They can’t!”
Hacker posts contact information for almost 200 congressional Democrats
A hacker or group of hackers using the name "Guccifer 2.0" posted the private email addresses and cell phone numbers of almost 200 current and former Democratic members of Congress Friday.
The disclosure is the latest dump of information stolen in recent cyberattacks on a number of Democratic Party organizations, including the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).
Guccifer 2.0 posted a spreadsheet containing the contact information of 193 current and former Democratic House members as part of a larger document dump on his personal blog. In an accompanying blog post, Guccifer said accessing the DCCC server "was even easier than in the case of the DNC breach."
Included in the spreadsheet were the cell phone numbers of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md.
The Wall Street Journal reported that it was able to reach Hoyer at the cell phone number listed on the spreadsheet. Hoyer said he was not aware that the information had been stolen or posted online.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
The spreadsheet also included contact information for members of various House national security committees, including the House Intelligence Committee, the House Armed Services Committee and the House Foreign Relations Committee.
"This is sensitive information and it could be used in a very detrimental way by a foreign government," Hoyer told the Journal.
The DCCC said in a statement that it was aware that the documents had been released and were "investigating their authenticity."
There was no immediate comment from Pelosi's office or the White House.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, said late Friday that he had "every confidence that law enforcement will get to the bottom of this, and identify the responsible parties. And when they do, I hope the Administration will disclose who is attempting to interfere with the American political process, and levy strong consequences against those responsible."
Intelligence officials believe that the cyberattacks on the DNC and DCCC were likely carried out by hackers affiliated with the Russian government. The Journal reported that at least one cybersecurity company has said there appear to be links between the Kremlin and the entity identifying itself as Guccifer 2.0, though the hacker or hackers have denied this claim.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
-
The problem with the courts is the same as the problem with many of our other institutions. Called the Skins...















