Some Democrats want Pelosi out now, win or lose House in midterms

Some House Democrats wanted Nancy Pelosi out as their leader after they failed to win a string of 2017 special elections. And now some want the House minority leader out because they appear to have won a special election.
What gives with the paradox? It doesn’t make sense, except that some House Democrats are prepared to move on from Pelosi -- and some aren’t.
“The watch” is on again on Capitol Hill when it comes to Pelosi, how has been the House’s top Democrat for more than a decade.
Democrat Conor Lamb is on track to vanquish Republican Rick Saccone in a historically GOP district in southwest Pennsylvania that President Trump won by nearly 20 points.
Lamb distanced himself from Pelosi and ran as a moderate Democrat. And now Democrats are eager to replicate Lamb’s prototype in their quest to capture the House in November.
Republicans contend Pelosi is radioactive, considering how critics have branded her as a West Coast liberal losing touch with the party base.  And the plan to use the leader to put other moderate Democratic candidates on the spot this year. In other words, will you support Pelosi for House speaker should Democrats win the House? And it’s moderate to conservative Democrats who must win -- in districts Trump carried -- if Democrats are going to have a shot at winning the House.
Pelosi faced a firestorm of criticism in November 2016 after Democrats barely dented the Republican House majority. Democrats gained six seats when they needed 30 to control the House. Few expected Democrats to win the House,  but lots of political handicappers projected an anti-Trump backlash could help Democrats win at least 15 to 20 seats.
They never got close. Some Democrats tore into Pelosi. She drew a challenge for her leadership post from Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio. Pelosi prevailed in the end, but an eye-popping 63 Democrats cast ballots for Ryan.
Ohio Rep. John Boehner in 2015 was forced out as House speaker, the chamber’s leader and top Republican, is a similar intra-caucus revolt.
Pelosi’s weathered the internecine tempest so far. But for how long?
Many political prognosticators suggest a Democratic wave is building this fall. If that’s the case, Democrats will swipe seats from Republicans in rural areas in the Midwest and perhaps the south where Pelosi isn’t popular. Could Democrats follow Lamb’s lead and disavow Pelosi?
That could be a sound electoral tactic. But it could cause a problem for Pelosi in her quest to return to the speaker’s suite.
The question is whether Pelosi could command the votes to again become Speaker.
This could be one of the great political incongruities of all time: Democrats win the House and simultaneously deny Pelosi the right to again clasp the speaker’s gavel. There’s a reason why Democrats were willing to re-elect Pelosi as minority leader for two years, despite 63 defections: give her another shot to lead Democrats out of the wilderness.
It may seem strange to potentially have Pelosi return to the Speakership after an eight-year exodus in the minority. But it’s far from unprecedented for house speakers to have broken service.
The first, Frederick Muhlenberg, of Pennsylvania, served as speaker in two different Congresses, interrupted by Speaker Jonathan Trumbull of Connecticut. Same with Henry Clay, of Kentucky, who enjoyed three different turns at speaker.
Speaker Thomas Reed, R-Maine, led the House in the 51st Congress, then  again in the 54th and 55th congresses. The best examples of lawmakers returning to the speakership after exile in the minority are Speakers Sam Rayburn, D-Texas, and Joseph Martin, R-Mass. Rayburn became speaker in September 1940.
Martin took the reins in 1947. Rayburn came back in 1949. Martin and the Republicans rallied in 1953. Finally, Rayburn began his last tour as speaker in 1955.
Pelosi keeps close counsel on her future plans. Her confidantes point out it’s against her DNA to bow to pressure or not go without a fight. By the same token, Pelosi is an exceptional vote counter.
She knows how to gauge her caucus and if she has the votes to prevail, accurately predicting she’d get two-thirds of the vote in the Ryan challenge. If Pelosi doesn’t, she will likely exit.
It will boil down to simple mathematics.
Chatter is percolating throughout the Capitol that Pelosi may attempt a cunning departure in an attempt to bolster Democrats in their quest for the House and simultaneously hose Republicans.
House Republican leaders continued making their case this week that votes for Democratic candidates could again elevate Pelosi to speaker.
There’s a theory (and it’s just a theory) that Pelosi could time an exit later this year -- just after Republicans spend millions producing commercials and buying airtime that attempt to link Democratic candidates to her.
Such a scenario could leave Republicans on the hook with lots of outdated ad buys. They will have squandered millions of dollars making a case against someone who is no longer a factor.
Some Republicans may publicly rejoice that that they finally dispatched Pelosi. But sober GOPers know Pelosi taking her leave is bad news for them. It robs Republicans of a foil -- especially if the party is trying to link Democrats to Pelosi.
But these scenarios are just that: scenarios. And few believe Pelosi would bow out early.
Republicans successfully deployed Pelosi against Democrats when they won the House in 2010. Pelosi is certainly radioactive in certain districts. But it’s unclear if the Pelosi maneuver still works.
“This is part of the bankruptcy of the Republican Party,” Pelosi said. “They’re devoid of ideas about how they’re going to meet the needs of the American people. So it’s an ad hominem. They can’t win on the issues. So they go after a person.”
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley says of the Pelosi attacks: “I think they need to get a new game book. The attempts to use Nancy Pelosi, it’s failing them at this point. And I think, quite frankly, it’s sexist.”
Some quarters on Capitol Hill view Crowley as best situated to succeed Pelosi. Another possibility is her longtime rival, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat.
Ryan repeatedly says he won’t challenge Pelosi again. But he says she must go and that there’s merit in Lamb’s approach.
“Every candidate’s locally got to make that determination as to how in their own heart, how they feel about Democratic leadership in Washington, D.C., fits into their own agenda and their own election and how their people feel locally,” Ryan said.
Did Lamb’s distance from Pelosi make a difference in the race?
“I don’t think that your opponent should choose your party’s leaders,” said Pelosi, who’s represented San Francisco since 1986. “They’re coming after me because of my city. And they’re against LGBT and they’re against poor children. That’s been my mantra. The poor children of America, I’m here to support. Yes. I am a liberal.”
It’s those “liberal” credentials that work against Pelosi, even inside her party. Can conservative Democrats support liberal for Speaker again?
Unclear.
Lamb’s possible win may portend good things for Democrats in November. But they likely need to win about 25 seats to retake the House. The precise number is unclear because there are a number of vacancies.
The Lamb-Saccone race still isn’t official, and the district will be redrawn for November. And the death this week of Rep. Louise Slaughter, D.N.Y., has now put that seat in play. So, it’s unknown if Democrats will win the House and face a dilemma over who to elect as speaker.
But Pelosi watch is on again on Capitol Hill.

Russia retaliates, expels 23 British diplomats amid tensions over ex-spy poisoning

Russia retaliated against the United Kingdom Saturday morning, announcing it would also be expelling 23 British diplomats amid the growing tensions between the two nations over the nerve agent attack on a former Kremlin spy.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said it was ordering the closure of the British Council – a government organization for cultural and scientific cooperation – as well as ending an agreement to reopen the British consulate in St. Petersburg.
British diplomats have to leave within a week.
EX-RUSSIAN SPY SERGEI SKRIPAL POISONED: WHAT TO KNOW
The statement said the government could take further measures if Britain takes any more "unfriendly" moves toward Russia.
A spokesman for the British foreign ministry said in a statement Saturday they expected a reaction from the Kremlin and are assisting their staff members who have been expelled.
"Russia’s response doesn’t change the facts of the matter - the attempted assassination of two people on British soil, for which there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian State was culpable," the statement said.
Russia’s retaliation comes days after British Prime Minister announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats following the suspicious poisoning of ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia on March 4. The two remain in critical condition and in the hospital.
May said on Monday that it was “highly likely” the Kremlin is responsible for the attack, while Britain’s Foreign Minister Boris Johnson directly put the blame on Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“Our quarrel is with Putin’s Kremlin, and with this decision, and we think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the U.K., on the streets of Europe, for the first time since the Second World War,” he told reporters on Friday. “That is why we are at odds with Russia.”
While Russia has vigorously denied any involvement in the attack, Western leaders banded together earlier this week and called out the Kremlin for meddling abroad.
In a rare joint statement, the leaders of the U.S., France and Germany joined May in accusing Russia of being behind the attack.
"It is an assault on U.K. sovereignty and any such use by a State party is a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a breach of international law. It threatens the security of us all,” the statement said.
The quartet wrote “there is no plausible alternative explanation” except Russian responsibility for the attack on British soil, and the Kremlin’s failure to respond to a “legitimate request” for an explanation “further underlines its responsibility.”
“We call on Russia to live up to its responsibilities as a member of the UN Security Council to uphold international peace and security,” the statement said.
IN JOINT STATEMENT, WORLD LEADERS AGREE RUSSIA BEHIND NERVE AGENT ATTACK ON FORMER SPY
The tensions threaten to overshadow Putin's expected re-election Sunday for another six-year presidential term.
Meanwhile, adding further strain, British police have opened a murder investigation into the suspicious death of London-based Russian businessman, Nikolai Glushkov. Authorities said Friday that he died from compression to the neck.
Russia also suspects foul play in Glushkov's death and opened its own inquiry Friday.
British police said there is no apparent link between the attack on Glushkov and the poisoning of the Skripals, but both have raised alarm in the West at a time when Russia is increasingly assertive on the global stage and facing investigations over alleged interference in the Donald Trump's election as U.S. president.
The source of the nerve agent — which Britain says is Soviet-made Novichok — is unclear, as is the way it was administered. Russia has demanded that Britain share samples collected by investigators.
Top EU diplomats were expected to discuss next steps at a meeting Monday, with some calling for a boycott of the upcoming World Cup in Russia. British Prime Minister Theresa May is seeking a global coalition of countries to punish Moscow.

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe fired

The Justice Department dealt a stunning blow to former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe on Friday night, firing him just days before he would have been eligible for a lifetime pension after determining that he lied to investigators reviewing the bureau’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.
"Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.

"I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately."

"After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR)," Sessions said.

Former FBI official Andrew McCabe.  (Associated Press)

"The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe.  Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.
"The FBI expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. As the OPR proposal stated, 'all FBI employees know that lacking candor under oath results in dismissal and that our integrity is our brand.'"
McCabe hit back in a fiery response of his own.
"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally," McCabe said. "It is part of this Administration’s ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel’s work.
"For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country," McCabe continued. "Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us. The President’s tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about us. No more."

"For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country. ... The President’s tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all."
- Andrew McCabe

Just after midnight Saturday, President Donald Trump reacted to the news in a Twitter message:
"Andrew McCabe FIRED, a great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI - A great day for Democracy," the president wrote, "Sanctimonious James Comey was his boss and made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!"
McCabe's firing marked a stunning fall for a man who was No. 2 at the bureau for a time under former FBI Director James Comey, ran it and even was reportedly on President Donald Trump’s short list for the directorship.
But McCabe has also been mired in controversy in recent years.
Sessions’ decision to fire McCabe came as Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded a bureau oversight investigation, with a report expected to be critical of McCabe’s handling of the Clinton email probe, his handling of the bureau during the early months of the Russia investigation, and his ties to the Democratic Party.
Horowitz determined that McCabe hadn't been forthcoming in regard to the handling of the FBI’s probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state in the Obama administration.
The inspector general’s finding sparked an FBI disciplinary process that recommended McCabe’s firing.
ANDREW MCCABE CONTROVERSIES, FROM THE TRUMP TEXT SCANDAL TO HIS WIFE'S FAILED CAMPAIGN 
Sources told Fox News that the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility made the recommendation to fire McCabe. Sessions had the option to either accept the recommendation, or step in to stop the firing process.

FBI Director Christopher Wray.  (Associated Press)

Horowitz’s investigation, which landed McCabe in hot water, faults the former deputy director for the way he answered questions about his approval for interactions between an FBI official and a reporter about the bureau’s investigation into the nonprofit Clinton Foundation.
McCabe was “removed” from his post as deputy to FBI Director Christopher Wray in January, setting in motion a plan to leave the bureau after months of conflict-of-interest complaints from Republicans — including President Trump.
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Thursday that the decision was entirely up to Sessions, but that McCabe was a "bad actor."
"That's a determination we [left] up to Attorney General Sessions, but we do think that it is well documented that he has had some very troubling behavior and has been a bad actor," Sanders said.
IG COULD SOON RELEASE EXPLOSIVE REPORT ON FBI'S CLINTON PROBE, AS SESSIONS WEIGHS FIRING MCCABE 
“FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!” Trump tweeted in December, before McCabe’s removal.
McCabe became acting director of the FBI after Trump fired Comey on May 9, 2017. McCabe led the bureau, independently, until Aug. 2, 2017 — during the early months of the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates.
Republicans have also long criticized McCabe for his ties to the Democratic Party — his wife received donations during a failed 2015 Virginia Senate run from a group tied to a Clinton ally, former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe — all while the Clinton email probe was underway.
“How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?” the president tweeted in December.
The president was “not a part of the decisionmaking process,” when McCabe was removed from the bureau in January, press secretary Sanders said.
McCabe returned to the white-hot spotlight when Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee released its memo on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuses in connection with the Russia probe, saying that McCabe signed a FISA warrant targeting former Trump campaign volunteer adviser Carter Page.
“McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the [FISA court] without the Steele dossier information,” the memo read. The Steele dossier was unverified, and financed as opposition research by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.
And recently uncovered text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page revealed a new timeline in the Clinton email probe, apparently showing McCabe’s knowledge of the investigation.
The text messages suggest that as of Sept. 28, 2016, Strzok, Page and McCabe were aware of new Clinton emails found on the laptop of disgraced former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, spouse of Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.
“Got called up to Andy’s earlier … hundreds of thousands of emails turned over by Weiner’s atty to sdny, includes a ton of material from spouse. Sending team up tomorrow to review…this will never end …” Strzok wrote in a text message to Page.
SENATOR SEEKS ANSWERS ON WHY FBI WAITED WEEKS TO ACT ON WEINER LAPTOP IN CLINTON CASE
But it wasn’t until Oct. 27, 2016 that Comey was briefed on the newly discovered emails — meaning McCabe kept the director in the dark for a month.
Horowitz is specifically investigating McCabe and whether he wanted to avoid taking action on the laptop findings until after the presidential election, in which Clinton lost to Trump.
According to testimony obtained by Fox News from an Office of Special Counsel interview with former Comey Chief of Staff James Rybicki, McCabe’s office did not notify him until the night of Oct. 26, 2016.
The OSC also interviewed FBI Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson, who testified that Comey was first briefed on the material found on Weiner’s laptop on Oct. 27, 2016.
Anderson noted that the director’s office decided to “urgently” address the situation.
“Given the significance of the matter, um, uh, that we had to proceed quickly,” Anderson told investigators. “It was just too, too explosive for us to sit on.”
So it wasn’t until Oct. 28, 2016, that Comey sent a letter to Congress announcing the “recent developments” of the discovery of the Clinton and Abedin communications found on the laptop —which he had just been briefed on a day before. That letter reopened the Clinton email probe just a week before the election. The inspector general is investigating McCabe’s involvement in this timeline.
Several Republicans also have pointed with alarm to the Strzok-Page texts and their references to McCabe in relation to an “insurance policy” to prevent Trump from being elected president, and a “secret society” within the bureau.

Los Angeles Judge Cartoons

Nobody knows anything: Why White House shakeup stories are, well, shaky

Kurtz: Trump firing more aides- unless he isn't

'MediaBuzz' host Howard Kurtz weighs in on why the media really knows nothing in relation to the tidal wave of speculation about who the president will evict next from the administration.

It's one of the most honest headlines I’ve seen in quite a while:
"In Trumpworld, nobody knows anything."
Axios slapped that line on a piece by round-the-clock reporter Jonathan Swan, who was dealing with the tidal wave of speculation about who the president will evict next from the administration.
This, in my view, was a refreshing contrast to all the pundits saying we hear that H.R. McMaster or John Kelly or David Shulkin or Ryan Zinke could be out by the end of the day. It's not that those aren't fair journalistic pursuits—and not that I haven't done similar stories like that in my career—but in this White House, it's like nailing Jell-O to the wall.
Here's what Swan wrote: "We can tell you that Trump has been putting on a heck of an act privately in the past two days, if he really does have all these elaborate plans that are being attributed to him.
"Here's all we really know: Trump is in the mood for change, and there's a long list of people he's been fed up with for a while."
"That's it. As far as when they might go, and who might replace them, serious people are in the dark. Trump floats ideas all the time, and often nothing comes of them."
In an interview, Swan told me the Trump operation is incredibly difficult to cover because he speaks to "the top level of the White House, people in the president's inner circle, and they don't know what’s going on.
"Whether it's tariffs, the surprise on North Korea or staffing, it's very hard to confirm anything or definitively shoot anything down. They know they could be embarrassed in the next two hours because their boss is so mercurial."
Swan says he tries to be "hyper-cautious" and, as a scoop artist himself, "I don't pretend I'm some bastion of glory. But there's only so many times you can write that H.R. McMaster is leaving the White House; at some point the story will be correct. I'd have to get it from Donald J. Trump himself.
"People have read that story 15 times. What's the reader to think when he reads it for the 16th time?"
That, of course, doesn't stop journalists from trying.
It’s easy to dismiss all this as palace intrigue, and there is a media fixation on who's up and who's down. But in a very short time, Hope Hicks and Gary Cohn quit the White House, Trump fired Rex Tillerson and nominated Mike Pompeo as his successor, and tapped CNBC’s Larry Kudlow to replace Cohn as chief economic adviser.
And while it's true that the press sometimes gives short shrift to policy, that is inextricably bound up with who’s giving the president advice and speaking on his behalf. Tillerson was ousted in part because of disagreements on Iran, Korea, Russia and Jerusalem, and Cohn resigned in part because of disagreements on steel and aluminum tariffs.
With so much chatter, journalists are scrambling on several fronts.
The Washington Post reported flatly last night that Trump "has decided to remove H.R. McMaster," according to "five people with knowledge of his plans."
CBS's Major Garrett reported yesterday that "a purge is coming" and that chief of staff Kelly "may also be on the way out," along with "up to three Cabinet secretaries."
Fox's chief White House correspondent John Roberts reported, starting Wednesday night: "We don't know if these are going to happen, but we are told there could be a bloodbath" by Thursday or Friday. That, he said would include:
"H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, to be replaced by Ambassador John Bolton.
"Another potential change coming up, VA Secretary David Shulkin out, to be replaced by Energy Secretary Rick Perry.
"Another possible departure, it's rumored, this one may be further off, John Kelly, to potentially be replaced by OMB Director Mick Mulvaney."
At a photo op yesterday, the president was asked about upcoming staff changes.
"Well, the story was very false," Trump said. "I mean, they wrote a story about staff changes today that was very false." He did not specify which story he had in mind.
But if it's true that "in Trumpworld, nobody knows anything," all shakeup stories should be taken with many teaspoons of salt. That’s especially true since the president, who once called the Tillerson-is-leaving stories fake news, may simply not have made up his mind.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth." Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

IG could soon release explosive report on FBI's Clinton probe, as Sessions weighs firing McCabe

The Department of Justice’s inspector general could soon release his expected explosive report detailing a more than yearlong review of the FBI and DOJ’s Hillary Clinton investigation – an effort that has already put top FBI official Andrew McCabe and his pension in jeopardy.
Over the last year, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz has been reviewing the FBI and DOJ’s actions related to its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
Horowitz has told lawmakers he is aiming to release the report in the “March, April time period.”
On Wednesday, fresh evidence emerged that Horowitz may be winding down his efforts. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is considering firing McCabe over the findings in Horowitz’s review, sources said.
According to the New York Times, Horowitz concludes in his report that McCabe was not forthcoming during the review, which included an examination of McCabe allowing FBI officials to speak with reporters about the investigation into the Clintons.
The FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility recommended that Sessions fire McCabe. If McCabe is fired this week, it could deprive the outgoing deputy director of pension benefits.
McCabe’s pension kicks in on Sunday, his 50th birthday, so the termination would have to be done by close of business on Friday to stop it.
“The Department follows a prescribed process by which an employee may be terminated,” DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement. “That process includes recommendations from career employees and no termination decision is final until the conclusion of that process.”
SESSIONS MULLING FIRING FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR ANDREW MCCABE BEFORE HE RETIRES
Horowitz’s investigation is looking at a variety of allegations, including whether it was improper for former FBI Director James Comey to make a public announcement about not recommending prosecution over the Clinton email arrangement.
Horowitz also is reviewing whether McCabe should have recused himself from the probe early because of his family’s ties to the Democratic Party. (He did not do so until a week before the election.)
McCabe’s wife ran as a Democrat for a Virginia state Senate seat in 2015, and she received donations from the super PAC of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a close Clinton ally.
In November, Horowitz said his team has interviewed dozens of people and had reviewed about 1.2 million records in the course of its investigation. But he acknowledged during a congressional hearing last year the classified information involved and necessary security clearances have slowed the process.
Horowitz said his team would look at whether “certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.”
The review is also looking at whether the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for legislative affairs “improperly disclosed non-public information to the Clinton campaign” and should have been recused. That’s in reference to official Peter Kadzik, who had been an attorney in the past for Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
Horowitz said the review is looking at whether any DOJ or FBI employees improperly disclosed non-public information.

Over the last year, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz has been reviewing the FBI and DOJ’s actions related to its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

The review has already made a splash.
The inspector general’s review uncovered the anti-Trump texts from FBI official Peter Strzok, who called Trump an “idiot” and texted about an “insurance policy” against a Trump presidency.
Strzok had been assigned to Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe, but has since been reassigned.

Hillary Clinton fractures wrist after slipping in India resort bathtub, report says

Hillary Clinton arrives in Jodphur, India on Tuesday.  (AP Photo/Sunil Verma)

Hillary Clinton's visit to India suffered another setback this week as the former secretary of state fractured her wrist after slipping in the bathtub at the five-star resort where she was staying, according to a report by DNA India.
The website reported that Clinton was taken to a hospital in the city of Jodphur at around 5 a.m. local time Wednesday. Clinton underwent an X-ray and a CT scan that confirmed a hairline fracture of her right wrist.
The Times of India reported that Clinton had been given a plaster bandage and advised to go for another checkup in three days. The injury does not impact Clinton's ability to travel.
The Times of India and DNA India both reported that Clinton had been treated for pain in her right hand since she arrived in Jodphur Tuesday afternoon. The pain forced her to cancel a planned visit to the 15th-century Mehrangarh Fort Tuesday evening.
Earlier in the week, video showed Clinton slipping on stairs twice as she visited the Jahaz Mahal in the ancient city of Mandu. Clinton appeared to use her right had to catch herself on the stairs, but it was not immediately clear whether this fall was the source of her injury.
At the time of her injury, Clinton was staying at the Umaid Bhawan Palace, which houses the onetime ruling family of Jodphur and also functions as a hotel -- offering rooms from $700 per night.
Clinton attracted controversy earlier in her visit to India. At a conference in Mumbai over the weekend, she again suggested that racism and misogyny were explanations for her loss in the 2016 presidential election.
"I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's gross domestic product," Clinton said. "So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward. And [President Trump's] whole campaign, 'Make America Great Again,' was looking backwards."
"You know, you didn't like black people getting rights, you don't like women, you know, getting jobs," she went on. "You don't want, you know, to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are."
Clinton also claimed that white women voted for Trump because they succumbed to "a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should."

Calif. judge bars LA from enforcing gang restrictions that authorities credited with reducing crime

Los Angeles has been precluded from enforcing most of its '90s-era, contentious gang injunctions, a federal judge has ruled.  (Reuters)

The city of Los Angeles has been barred from enforcing the vast majority of its gang injunctions, which applied restrictions on gang associations that authorities have long credited with reducing crime.
The ruling Thursday by U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union that the injunctions were likely to be unconstitutionally broad, and affect people who did not have adequate opportunity to challenge them in court.
The gang injunctions are civil court orders that have applied to nearly 9,000 people and 79 gang sets since 2000, the Los Angeles Times reported.
The orders can effectively prevent individuals from legally associating with people in gang-ridden neighborhoods or networks.
WHAT IS MS-13, THE VIOLENT GANG TRUMP PROMISES TO TARGET?
The ACLU challenged the constitutionality of the injunctions because the city could obtain them against gangs, rather than individuals.

"This ruling marks the end of gang injunctions as they worked in the city of Los Angeles."

That meant someone could become the subject of an injunction without ever being specifically named in a court document, or given enough notice to object.
"The court clearly recognizes the way the city of Los Angeles has been enforcing gang injunctions over decades violates due process in a way that makes it likely they will place people on gang injunctions who may not be gang members," ACLU attorney Peter Bibring said Thursday, according to the Los Angeles Times. "This ruling marks the end of gang injunctions as they worked in the city of Los Angeles."
A handful of the gang injunctions that did name individuals will reportedly remain in effect.
A Los Angeles police union condemned the ruling in a statement.
"Appropriately applied, gang injunctions are a valuable law enforcement tool intended to improve the safety of Los Angeles neighborhoods and stem the tide of drug dealing, assaults, and other violent crimes associated with gangs," the Los Angeles Police Protective League said.
"It's unfortunate that a judge would eliminate this important crime fighting tool instead of working to resolve any issues with its application," the union's statement added. "We urge the city to appeal this shortsighted ruling."
The ACLU had won a ruling last year for an Echo Park resident who alleged that he was unconstitutionally swept up in a gang injunction.
Thursday's ruling broadens the effect of that decision to those subject to gang injunctions prior to this year, when the city modified its gang injunction procedures.

Hillary Cartoons

The new 'deplorables': Democrats duck as Hillary hits 'backward' voters

The Democrats are gearing up for the midterms, emboldened by the apparent razor-thin win by Conor Lamb in a Pittsburgh-area district that Donald Trump carried by 20 points.
And they are starting to maneuver for 2020, with the likes of Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Terry McAuliffe and others maneuvering to take the party past Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden.
And yet, again, here comes Hillary Clinton.
And some Democratic lawmakers are distancing themselves from her latest remarks.
Which, not to put too fine a point on it, takes us back to one of the worst moments of her campaign, going after the deplorables.
It's one thing to attack Trump, the man who beat her in the Electoral College. It's another to denigrate his voters.
Here she is at a conference in Mumbai, talking about how she won the coasts but lost the "middle" of the country:
"I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward," Clinton said. "And his whole campaign — 'Make America Great Again' — was looking backward. You know, you didn't like black people getting rights, you don't like women, you know, getting jobs, you don't want, you know, to see that Indian-American succeeding more than you are. Whatever your problem is, I'm going to solve it."
Let's unpack that for a minute. Trump voters were looking backward. They don't want black people to have rights. They don't want women getting jobs.
Really? Does Clinton not have a sense of how condescendingly awful that sounds?
Does she believe that's why she lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania? Not that Trump appealed to struggling working-class voters, but that his supporters resent women, blacks and legal immigrants?
There was more. Clinton suggested white women voted for Trump because of "ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should."
Seriously? While that may have happened in certain instances, does the first female presidential nominee of a major party believe that women are that ... subservient? I sure don't.
Hillary's party is not happy with this latest flashback.
"Even the staunchest Clinton allies as well as longtime advisers say the comments were cringeworthy and ultimately detrimental to Democrats," says The Hill.
Missouri’s Claire McCaskill told the Washington Post these were "fighting words":
"I think they were expressing their frustration with the status quo. I may not have agreed with their choice, but I certainly respect them. And I don’t think that's the way you should talk about any voter, especially ones in my state."
Ohio's Sherrod Brown told the Huffington Post: "I don't really care what she said. I just think that that's not helpful."
Hillary Clinton is entitled to say whatever she wants. She doesn't have to quiet down just because she’s frustrating other Democrats.
But this is an unfortunate throwback to the comments she made in the fall of 2016:
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it."
That led some Trump backers to proudly identify themselves as deplorables.
Hillary Clinton blew a winnable election, but she did win the popular vote. Does she want to be remembered for disdaining the middle of the country?
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth." Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

Kaya Jones goes off on gun control protesters in fiery Twitter rant

Chrystal Neria, better known by her stage name, Kaya Jones, shared some pretty frank thoughts about the gun control debate with her followers on Twitter during the pre-planned National School Walkout protests.
Jones, best known for her work performing with the Pussycat Dolls, has been a solo act since 2004. In 2017, she joined the National Diversity Coalition for Trump as its Native American Ambassador. Her public persona isn’t shy about voicing her conservative beliefs, which she did in a series of posts on Wednesday in reaction to the walkouts.
“They have their right to walk out & I have my right to bear arms. I’m not giving up my rights because a crazy man killed people. I’m holding on right to my rights so if a crazy man tries to kill me he’s got another thing coming. It’s called freedom,” she said in response to a post about the protests.
Two hours later, she continued her Twitter rant, this time going after the argument that gun advocates don’t care about children.
“This whole walk out on guns is a joke. You realize that in order to protect kids we need guns. The signs that read protect kids not guns are so unaware. You need a gun to fight a gun. It’s not a want it’s a fact. And it’s my right to be able to protect myself. #ItsCalledFreedom,” she wrote.
“Stop attacking the weapon. Remember there’s a brain and a body behind each choice. You can use a hammer as a weapon. What’s a weapon? Anything between you and whoever you want to harm. You are trained this is fighting classes. Anything is a weapon. A gun is just a faster one,” she continued.
The singer went on to note that victims of violence should feel empowered to study self defense in the wake of the tragedy.
“If you’ve ever been attacked in your life and didn’t want to learn everything about attackers or weapons you are being foolish. It’s therapeutic and empowering to know how to fight back. It’s better to have, and not need, than to need, and not have. #ItsCalledFreedom.”
She then launched into a pair of tweets challenging the notion that guns are the problem and not those who misuse them.
“Bad people kill people. Bad people use whatever they fancy to inflict harm. Bad people. Now don’t punish good people who want to protect themselves for the actions of Bad people. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people and just happen to use a gun,” she posted over two images. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people and just happen to use a gun.”
She concluded her Twitter tirade by noting that famed mass murderers Jim Jones and Adolf Hitler.
“Jim Jones used fear and words to influence 900 people to kill themselves drinking Koolaid, Adolph [sic] Hitler used words to influence millions to create genocide. How powerful the mind is. But hey the wars on guns.”

CNN slashes Anderson Cooper’s program as network hopes to make room for anti-Trump Chris Cuomo

In an embarrassing setback for Vanderbilt family scion Anderson Cooper, CNN announced Thursday that Cooper’s in-house rival, Chris Cuomo, will be taking over its ratings challenged 9 p.m. hour.

The shake up -- coming as CNN struggles badly in its ratings war with MSNBC -- cuts Cooper’s airtime in half. Cooper will now only host between 8 and 9 p.m. ET.

“This move is likely hard for Anderson Cooper to accept. He is the face of CNN and is now being downsized while CNN brass looks for a magic solution,” Media analyst Jeff McCall told Fox News.

Cooper and Cuomo, who intersected as undergraduates at ultra-exclusive Yale University and later as anchors at ABC News, are both children of enormous privilege and fame. Cooper is the son of socialite Gloria Vanderbilt and part heir to the family’s colossal fortune. Cuomo is the son of Democrat icon Mario Cuomo and younger brother of New York’s powerful governor, Andrew. Both men made the jump to CNN after their careers had foundered at ABC.

CNN will slash Cooper’s “AC 360” into a one-hour program, as opposed to airing from 8-10 p.m. Cuomo will shift from CNN’s struggling morning show “New Day” to the 9 p.m. slot where he will go head-to-head with liberal ratings behemoth Rachel Maddow on MSNBC.

CNN hasn’t made changes to its prime-time lineup since 2014 despite regularly finishing behind MSNBC by most measures. CNN finished the month of February as the 12th most-watched cable network, averaging 979,000 prime-time viewers. Fox News finished atop the list averaging 2.8 million and MSNBC finished second with an average prime-time viewership of 1.8 million. “AC 360” was CNN’s only show to finish Feb. among the Top 10 most-watched cable news programs among the key demographic of adults ages 25-54, while MSNBC had three and Fox News had six.

When it comes to total viewers, CNN finished even worse with only "AC 360" cracking the Top 25 most-watched cable news shows last month.

Cooper’s defenders claim the millionaire star is not irked by his demotion.

“He is not unhappy at all,” a CNN insider told Fox News of Cooper, pointing to the fact that the 9 p.m. hour of “AC 360” is frequently bumped for special events and original series.

Mediaite columnist Joseph Wulfsohn told Fox News that cutting into Cooper’s two-hour block “makes sense” and it “shocking they didn’t do it sooner” as Maddow regularly dominates the time slot in terms of liberal cable news shows.

“This move is basically an acknowledgement by CNN that its highest profile personality, Anderson Cooper, just can't compete at the 9 p.m. time slot with MSNBC or Fox,” McCall said. “CNN had to do something to shake things up or settle for drifting along in a distant third place for the foreseeable future. It is a bit surprising, however, that CNN is betting on Cuomo, who has failed to generate solid ratings in his morning time slot.”

Their privileged backgrounds aren’t the only things Cooper and Cuomo have in common. They’re also two of the most anti-Trump personalities on television.

Cuomo, 47, has fully embraced CNN boss Jeff Zucker’s anti-Trump programming strategy and his older brother Andrew is known to harbor presidential aspirations.

“CNN might believe Cuomo can attract serious news hound viewers who don't want the political advocacy that is so apparent with Maddow and Hannity at 9 p.m. That is unlikely, it would seem, because Cuomo himself is rather partisan in his news anchoring. Nobody will confuse him with Frank Reynolds in terms of being impartial,” McCall said, referring to the late and beloved ABC News anchor.

While Cooper is typically sophisticated in his anti-Trump rhetoric, Cuomo attacks the president with more zeal. While co-hosting “New Day,” Cuomo became known for his bizarre questions and frenetic interviewing style. The result has been frequent combative interviews with members of the Trump administration and its supporters. Cuomo is often accused of bullying Trump aide Kellyanne Conway, who has gamely continued to appear on “New Day” despite how Cuomo treats her.

Last August Conway even called him an “amateur climatologist” when Cuomo insisted on talking about climate change during an interview about Hurricane Harvey disaster relief.

Insiders say that behind the scenes at CNN, Cuomo’s eccentricities had become a major source of friction at the morning program. It’s hoped that things will be smoother in prime time where he has less airtime and no co-anchors to rankle.
In recent memory, Cuomo has also urged Americans to “get woke” while denouncing Trump’s border wall and referred to a viewer as a “lemming” during a nasty Twitter spat.

One big difference between Cooper and Cuomo may be salary. Cooper is believed to make more than $7 million a year, while Cuomo is believed to make far less.

At “New Day,” Cuomo will be replaced by John Berman, a levelheaded Harvard graduate (and also an ABC veteran) who, by all accounts, is easy to work with. A CNN insider described Berman as “the opposite of Chris Cuomo.”

“Why is CNN a retirement home for failed people from ABC News?” the insider added.

'Angel families' want to see Oakland mayor prosecuted for thwarting ICE raids

The parents of children killed by illegal immigrants are demanding that the Trump administration take a tough stance against a California mayor who thwarted a federal immigration raid this month -- urging that she face consequences and even jail time.
Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf sparked national outrage when she pre-empted the raid in Northern California by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials by announcing it on Twitter.
“How dare you!” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a speech last week in which he also announced a lawsuit against California for its "sanctuary" policies -- which limit local law enforcement officials from complying with federal immigration authorities' access to illegal immigrants.
“How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical, open borders agenda,” Sessions said.
Striking a similar tone of outrage, President Donald Trump said in California on Tuesday, "What happened in Oakland was a disgrace to our nation.”
While the raid picked up hundreds of illegal immigrants, ICE officials say hundreds more evaded capture -- including hardened criminals.
Since then, a number of California Democrats have backed Schaaf, while House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., slammed the raid as "unjust and cruel." The Department of Justice is reviewing Schaaf’s actions.
As for those who have lost children due to the actions of illegal immigrants -- so-called Angel Families' -- they say it’s vital that the administration do something.
Don Rosenberg, an "Angel Dad" whose 25-year-old son, Drew, was killed in San Francisco in 2010 when an illegal-immigrant driver from Honduras hit his motorbike, says that Sessions’ DOJ needs to have Schaaf prosecuted.
“Put her in jail, you’ll see this stuff stop,” Rosenberg told Fox News. “These people aren’t willing to sacrifice their lives and careers for people who are here illegally. They’ll be like cockroaches scattering when you turn the light on.”
Rosenberg said his son was killed after the driver attempted to flee the scene, driving over Drew again in the process. Although the driver entered the country illegally, he had been given Temporary Protective Status (TPS).
Schaaf and other liberal Democrats have claimed that they are working to make communities safer, partly by encouraging those here illegally to cooperate with authorities about more hardened criminals.
"It is Oakland’s legal right to be a sanctuary city and we have not broken any laws," Schaaf said in a statement last month. "We believe our community is safer when families stay together."
Rosenberg rejected that argument outright:
“It’s a great line, sounds good, but it’s total bull---t.”
Sabine Durden, whose son Dominic was killed in Moreno Valley, Calif., in 2012 when his motorbike was hit by an illegal immigrant with priors including two DUIs, echoed Rosenberg's sentiment, saying that something must be done about rogue Democratic lawmakers.
“When I first heard, I was beside myself, fuming, infuriated and completely outraged about the lawless, reckless and very dangerous behavior of that disrespectful mayor," she told Fox News. "Not only did she endanger ICE agents and law enforcement, but all the citizens not just in her community, but all over near and far."

“If the mayor of Oakland would have opened the back door to a prison or jail and let out dangerous felons, she would have been immediately arrested,” she added. “Why not in this case?”

While the loss of a child is the ultimate nightmare for any parent, in these families' cases the grief is compounded by anger at what they say are regular snubs by Democratic politicians. These politicians, the Angel Families say, ignore their stories and then push legislation that the families insist will only lead to more deaths of American citizens and residents at the hands of people who have no right to be in the country in the first place.
"I wonder if [Schaaf] would defend illegals if one of them had hurt or killed one of her loved ones," Durden said. "The self-serving, unlawful and very disturbing stance and actions of that mayor is a prime example why California is sliding down the edge of insanity."
Jamiel Shaw Sr., whose son Jamiel Jr. was murdered in 2008 in Los Angeles by a Mexican gang member living in the U.S. illegally, has repeatedly expressed his frustration with California. Last week he tweeted an image of a Democratic State Senate candidate's call to "Disobey Trump."
"This is what we have to put up with in California. The Dems' campaign platform is to disobey law and order," he tweeted.
Mary Ann Mendoza's 32-year-old son, Police Sgt. Brandon Mendoza, was killed in 2014 in Arizona by an illegal immigrant who was driving the wrong way while drunk. That driver, who was also killed in the crash, had been living illegally in the country for at least 20 years and had criminal convictions dating from 1994. She says that Democratic lawmakers have tried to ignore her advocacy.
“They don’t even want to look us in the face, they avoid us at all costs,” Mary Ann Mendoza told Fox News. “It would squash their agenda and what they are trying to achieve; they want to act like it doesn’t even exist and that’s why so many of us keep fighting.”

Rosenberg said he was a lifelong Democrat, but was abandoned by people in his party as he says they have become increasingly focused on prioritizing illegal immigrants.
“I was a Democrat my entire life, but they don’t follow Democratic principles, they’re just vote hoarders,” he said. “What message are you sending when you will shut down the entire government to protect DACA recipients?” he added, referring to the illegal immigrants brought to America as young children by their parents.
And by promoting so-called sanctuary policies, the families say they are not promoting safety, but rather allowing more threats onto the streets to put law-abiding families in danger.
“Where is the sanctuary for law-abiding citizens?” said Durden, herself an immigrant who arrived legally from Germany in the 1990s. “Where was the safe place for my only child?”

Laura Wilkerson has pushed for the U.S. to keep Americans safe from illegal immigrants after her 18-year-old son, Josh, was murdered by an illegal immigrant classmate in 2010 in Texas. Josh was tied up, tortured, strangled and beaten until he died, before his body was set on fire.
Wilkerson grilled Pelosi last year at a CNN town hall, where she asked Pelosi which one of her family members she would sacrifice for an illegal immigrant.
"If you need to go home tonight and line up your babies as you say, and your grandbabies, which one of them could you look in their eyes today, and tell them that they're expendable for another foreign person to have a nicer life?” a tearful Wilkerson asked. “Which one would you look to say, you, my child, are expendable for someone else to come over here and not follow the law and have a nicer life?"
Wilkerson told Fox News that Sessions and the DOJ need to act, noting that Schaaf’s actions also put law enforcement in danger, as well.
“Jeff Sessions has been very quiet and I am hoping that he does more than a war of words; it’s time to do something,” she said. “He’s a good man but we have to take action and show that we are going to stand up to lawbreakers.”
“It makes me angry and it’s time for us to fight now,” she said. “If we lose to this, what else is next?”
But while the families are angry at what they have seen, many of them said repeatedly that they are not motivated primarily by anger or vengeance, but instead to make sure that no mother or father has to endure the heartbreak and grief that they have had to go through.
“I don’t want anyone else to know what this 24/7 nightmare feels like,” Durden said.

Democrat Republican Cartoons

Openly atheist Dem trumped by Republican landslide in special election in Tennessee

Gayle Jordan, an openly atheist Democratic candidate lost in Tennessee's 14 district on Tuesday.

Openly atheist Democrat Gayle Jordan lost a special election on Tuesday to fill a vacant seat in the Tennessee Senate.
Republican Shane Reeves won in a landslide, according to unofficial results from the Tennessee secretary of state. He received 13,139 votes compared to 5,179 votes for Jordan.
Reeves will fill a seat vacated by Republican Jim Tracy after he resigned to serve as state director of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development office.
Jordan is executive director of Recovering from Religion, a group that supports people who wish to leave their faith behind. She is a former Southern Baptist who left the denomination 10 years ago “when her then-teenagers began asking questions she could not answer.”
WILL ATHEIST DEM HAVE A PRAYER IN DEEP-RED TENNESSEE’S SPECIAL ELECTION
Reeves, a Murfreesboro-based businessman, made Jordan’s open atheism an issue in the election, telling the Tennessean that her “views are radical” and “out of touch with the district."

Facebook  (Shane Reeves, a Republican candidate in the district, won in a landslide on Tuesday's special election.)

He argued that Jordan was unsuited for the state Senate because faith shapes one’s worldview and affects the decisions one makes.
“I'm a Christian and that is going to serve as a filter, serve as a moral compass and how I look at things, if I'm fortunate to get elected," Reeves said, adding that many people with whom he had spoken could not believe the Democratic candidate is an atheist.
At a campaign party Tuesday, Jordan admitted she hoped for a different outcome, despite running in a state that President Donald Trump won by 26 points in 2016.
"We're disappointed in the results but we couldn't be prouder of the campaign that we ran," she told the Daily News Journal in Murfreesboro.
Senate Speaker Randy McNally, who previously called Jordan a “dangerous” candidate, said in a statement Tuesday night that Reeves’ win showed that “any blue wave will hit a big, red seawall in Tennessee."
State Republican Party Chairman Scott Golden said the election "shows that voters see the results of Tennessee's Republican leadership — increased economic opportunity, expanded access to education, and record low unemployment rates."

Pelosi no longer sees Tillerson as 'friendly' with Russia now that he's been fired

Was ousted U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson “friendly” with the Kremlim, or was he a strong leader willing to stand “against Russian aggression”? House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi appears to think he was both.
In 2016, when Tillerson was first nominated to be America’s top diplomat, Pelosi branded him “an oil executive friendly to Vladimir Putin,” and said his nomination “sends a disturbing signal about President-elect Trump’s priorities.
“The Secretary of State should champion American values, American security and American interests,” the California Democrat said then. “Fawning over Putin is poor preparation for being the top diplomat of the United States of America.”
But now that President Donald Trump has shown Tillerson the door, Pelosi seems almost sorry to see him go.
“Secretary Tillerson’s firing sets a profoundly disturbing precedent in which standing up for our allies against Russian aggression is grounds for a humiliating dismissal,” Pelosi said Tuesday.
What changed in the interim?
Pelosi’s reaction to Tillerson’s firing may have been inspired by those who pointed out that the departure came just hours after he said the poisoning of an ex-Russian spy in Britain was “a really egregious act” that had “clearly” been ordered by Russia.
In other words, his recent criticism of Russia may have been more in line with the Democrats’ anti-Trump narrative.
Trouble is, Tillerson’s firing was the subject of speculation in the news for months.
And as for pointing the finger at Russia, Trump echoed Tillerson’s remarks about the spy’s death Tuesday, telling reporters that he agreed with British Prime Minister Theresa May that Russia was likely involved.
“It sounds to me like they believe it was Russia and I would certainly take that finding as fact,” Trump said.