Kamala Harris’ DOJ received misconduct claim involving aide months before she left: report

Sen. Kamala Harris insisted earlier this month that she was “unaware” of the harassment allegations against her top aide during her time as California’s Attorney General, but the agency that she oversaw: California's Department of Justice was informed about the complaint three months before she exited in early 2017, according to the Sacramento Bee.
Larry Wallace, the longtime aide who went to Washington with Harris, resigned earlier this month after the newspaper asked about the 2017 settlement with Danielle Hartley, a woman who made the accusations. Harris’ senate office said the senator had no knowledge of the alleged harassment.

"We were unaware of this issue and take accusations of harassment extremely seriously. This evening, Mr. Wallace offered his resignation to the senator, and she accepted it."
— Sen. Kamala Harris spokeswoman Lily Adams

“We were unaware of this issue and take accusations of harassment extremely seriously,” Harris spokeswoman Lily Adams said. “This evening, Mr. Wallace offered his resignation to the senator, and she accepted it.”
KAMALA HARRIS AIDE RESIGNS OVER $400G HARASSMENT SETTLEMENT
On Friday, Harris – who’s mulling her 2020 presidential run – told the newspaper that she took “full responsibility for what happened in my office.”
She went on to reiterate that she wasn’t aware of the allegations against Wallace and said she was “frustrated” by the “breakdown” in the system.
“That’s what makes me upset about this. There’s no question I should have been informed about this. There’s no question. And there were ample opportunities when I could have been informed,” she added.

"That’s what makes me upset about this. There’s no question I should have been informed about this. There’s no question. And there were ample opportunities when I could have been informed."
— Sen. Kamala Harris

But some expressed skepticism that Harris had no idea of the harassment caused by Wallace. GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel wrote in a tweet that the senator was either “lying or grossly incompetent.”
“No one is buying Kamala Harris’s claim she didn’t know her top aide of 14 yrs was accused of sexual harassment, resulting in a $400K settlement,” she wrote.
According to the report, an intake form from the Equal Employment Rights and Resolution Office, which administers the issues concerning discrimination at the state DOJ, reveals that the department was alerted on Oct. 3, 2016 that Hartley will pursue legal action.
Hartley had also already requested the right to sue from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Bee reported. Her complaint, filed a month earlier, detailed the allegations of sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation – naming Wallace and “those who worked for him” as the culprit.
KAMALA HARRIS TO KEEP SEAT ON SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, BOOSTING POTENTIAL 2020 BID
The lawsuit filed by the woman alleged that Wallace demeaned her based on her gender while she worked for him as his assistant.
She said Wallace placed his computer printer under his desk and often asked her to crawl under and refill it with paper as he sat and watched, sometimes with other men in the room. Wallace refused to move the printer to another location when Hartley asked him to do so, according to the suit.
The lawsuit also claims Wallace instructed Hartley to run his personal errands such as booking flights for his children and washing and performing maintenance on his car. When she would return from the assigned tasks, the lawsuit states, “co-workers would make hostile comments to her including, ‘Are you walking the walk of shame?’”
Hartley claims she tried to solve the matter internally, reporting the harassment allegations in 2011, but this only prompted retaliations against her. She was involuntarily transferred to another office at the state Department of Justice at the end of 2014, the suit said.
The lawsuit was settled for $400,000 in May 2017, just two months after Wallace went to work for Harris as her senior adviser.

Out Of Control FBI Cartoons

Alleged Russian Spy Cooperating Ahead of Hearing, U.S. Officials Say

In this courtroom sketch, Maria Butina, left, is shown next to her attorney Robert Driscoll, before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, during a court hearing at the U.S. District Court in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 13, 2018. Maria Butina, a Russian accused of being a secret agent for the Russian government, has pleaded guilty to a conspiracy charge in federal court in Washington. (Dana Verkouteren via AP)

Alleged Russian Spy, Maria Butina, pleads guilty to one-count of conspiracy against the U.S. on behalf of a Russian Official as apart of a plea deal.
The 30-year-old Russian National made the admission in federal court on Thursday, claiming she inflitrated U.S. political circles under the orders of Alexander Torshin, according to CNN. She initially plead not guility to the charges.
Prosecutors accused Butina of infilitrating groups like the National Rifle Association to establish informal lines of communications with powerful Americans and push Russian interests.
She is being held in solitary confinement in a nothern Virginia jail, where she has been held since her arrest in July.
Cooperation from an accused Russian Spy is highly unusual. U.S. prosecutors say Butina has been offering information about her American boyfriend and the Republican political operative who helped her network with conservative groups. However, it is unclear how much information she can offer on Russian influence operations.
Her attorney said her guilty plea was voluntary and she is happy with her legal representation.

Chris Christie, Trump meet to discuss chief of staff job, report says

Chris Christie, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, and President Trump reportedly discussed the open chief of staff job at a face-to-face meeting in Washington on Thursday. (Getty Images)

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and President Trump had a face-to-face meeting in Washington on Thursday to discuss the possibility of Christie replacing John Kelly as White House chief of staff, a report said.
Trump called Christie a “top contender” for the role, a source told Axios.
“He’s tough; he’s an attorney; he’s politically savvy, and one of Trump’s early supporters," the source added, referring to Christie, 56, who is also a former federal prosecutor.
Christie endorsed Trump after dropping out of the 2016 presidential campaign and also oversaw the transition process before the president took office.
A longtime friend of the president’s, Christie’s name was floated earlier this week as several rumors surfaced as to who could potentially replace Kelly.
“I am in the process of interviewing some really great people for the position of White House Chief of Staff,” Trump wrote Sunday in a tweet. “Fake News has been saying with certainty it was Nick Ayers, a spectacular person who will always be with our [Make America Great Again] agenda. I will be making a decision soon!”
But their relationship has been complicated by the fact that Christie, while a U.S. attorney in New Jersey from 2002 to 2008, convinced real estate developer Charles Kushner to accept a plea deal on corruption charges in 2004. Kushner, now 64, is the father of the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
The younger Kushner, who is married to Trump's daughter Ivanka and is already a White House adviser, met with the president on Wednesday to talk about his own candidacy for the chief of staff job, the Huffington Post first reported.
Christie’s name has previously come up as a possible attorney general before the president said last week that he will nominate William Barr, who led the Justice Department under former President George H.W. Bush.
Christie served two terms as governor of New Jersey, from January 2010 to January 2018. He left the office because of the state's term-limit laws.

FBI misses deadline to provide docs to Judiciary Committee probing whistleblower raid

The Justice Department and FBI have missed a Wednesday deadline to provide information about the government's mysterious raid on a former FBI contractor-turned-whistleblower's home last month.
Sixteen FBI agents on Nov. 19 raided the home of Dennis Nathan Cain, who reportedly gave the Justice Department's Inspector General (IG) documents related to the Uranium One controversy and potential wrongdoing by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The documents in question allegedly showed that federal officials failed to investigate possible criminal activity related to Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, a Russian nuclear company. Its subsidiary purchased Canadian mining company Uranium One in 2013.
OBAMA-ERA URANIUM ONE DEAL: WHAT TO KNOW
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, whose panel has oversight of the Justice Department, penned a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Justice Department IG General Michael Horowitz, requesting information on the justification for the raid. Grassley gave Wray and Horowitz until Dec. 12 to respond to his request.
That deadline has come and gone, and neither the FBI nor DOJ has produced any documents or response.
"We have not yet received answers to the chairman's questions on this matter," a Judiciary Commitee spokesperson told Fox News late Thursday.
The FBI consistently has refused Fox News' request for comment on the whistleblower raid and the Judiciary Committee's requests. On Thursday, an FBI spokesperson told Fox News the agency would respond only to inquiries from the entity that requested the documents -- in this case, the Judiciary Committee.
Questioning whether “we now live in a secret police state,” Cain took his frustration about the situation to Twitter earlier this week.
“So I blow the whistle on the FBI, get raided by the same FBI, and now they want to keep the FBI’s reasons secret? Do we now live in a secret police state? Feels a little like 1984,” Cain tweeted late Monday. The tweet eventually was deleted.
The Daily Caller requested that a court unseal the relevant search warrant materials, but the U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland, in a court filing, said: “the request should be denied.”
“Public disclosure of any search warrant materials would seriously jeopardize the integrity of the ongoing investigation,” the filing by the U.S. Attorney’s Office said. “Continued sealing is essential in order to guard against possible tampering of witnesses and destruction of evidence, to maintain the ability of the grand jury to investigate this matter, and to prevent the disclosure of sensitive investigative techniques and methods.”
A spokesperson for U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur declined to comment.
Cain's lawyer, Michael Socarras, told The Daily Caller the agent who led the raid accused his client of possessing stolen federal property. In response, Cain reportedly claimed he was a protected whistleblower under federal law, and said he was recognized as such by Horowitz.
Socarras also claimed Horowitz had transmitted information on the sale of Uranium One to a Russian firm’s subsidiary to both the House and Senate intelligence committees.
A spokesperson for the inspector general declined to comment.
“As frustrating and violating as this feels to me and my family. I will continue to put my trust in God. Some day this life will pass away. I will stand before my maker with a clean concience[sic] and Jesus as my defender. Until then I continue to fight the good fight with God’s help,” Cain tweeted Monday night.
ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENTS' PHONES COMPLETELY WIPED AS DOJ WATCHDOG LOOKS FOR THEIR TEXT MESSAGES
On Tuesday, he added: “Thank you for the outpouring of encouragement. You all are awesome. A boxer goes into his corner to rest for a minute, refocus, and get some sideline coaching. Then the bell rings and he’s ready to go another round. This fight is spiritual and God is in our corner. Ding! Rom 8:31.”
Fox News has previously reported that Douglas Campbell, an FBI informant involved in the Uranium One deal, has testified to lawmakers that Moscow paid millions to American lobbying firm APCO Worldwide to influence Clinton and the Obama administration.
“The contract called for four payments of $750,000 over 12 months,” Campbell said in his statement this past February. “APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the US-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement.”
STATE DEPT PROVIDED 'CLEARLY FALSE' DOCS TO DERAIL CLINTON PROBE, 'SHOCKED' FEDERAL JUDGE SAYS
APCO has denied Campbell's claims while Clinton called any claims of wrongdoing related to the Uranium One deal "the same baloney they’ve been peddling for years, and there’s been no credible evidence by anyone.
"In fact," Clinton told C-SPAN in October 2017, "it’s been debunked repeatedly and will continue to be debunked.”
Separately, the DOJ and Special Counsel Robert Mueller face a Friday afternoon deadline to turn over documents related to their questioning of fired National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn's team has alleged the FBI pressured him not to have a lawyer at the White House meeting in January 2017, after which Flynn was charged on one count of lying to federal authorities.
Flynn -- who had to sell his house this year amid mounting legal bills -- later pleaded guilty to lying to agents about a conversation he had with the Russian ambassador in December 2016 about sanctions that had recently been imposed by then-President Barack Obama. Flynn has since acknowledged seeking to convince Russia not to retaliate for those sanctions during the presidential transition period.
But Flynn's lawyers, in an explosive Tuesday court filing that threatens to upend his pending sentencing, charged that the FBI had not finalized their pivotal, and only, account of Flynn's statements until August 2017 -- nearly eight months after their interview with him. Fired FBI Director James Comey has since admitted the Flynn meeting broke normal agency protocol.

Government Shutdown Cartoons

Trump may own the shutdown, but it's unlikely despite TV drama Howard Kurtz By Howard Kurtz | Fox News Facebook Twitter Flipboard Comments Print Email

For all the drama of the televised confrontation in the Oval Office, the odds are overwhelming that there won't be a government shutdown. The plain fact is that neither party wants one.
So what happened between Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer during those tense 17 minutes on Tuesday was more about political theater and blame-shifting.
The amount of money — Trump wants $4 billion more for his wall than the Democrats are willing to provide — is almost negligible. And the House Democrats aren't going to budge when they take over next month. What's at stake is the symbolism surrounding the president's signature issue.
The media verdict is that Pelosi and Schumer embarrassed Trump and boxed him into a damaging declaration: He now owns any shutdown.
As The New York Times put it, "The trick in Washington has always been to make sure a government shutdown is pinned on the other guy. President Trump is the first to ever pin one on himself."
With the Times saying Pelosi and Schumer "essentially goaded" the president into saying he'd proudly close the government for border security, The Washington Post says the Democratic duo "called out Trump's falsehoods. They exposed him as malleable about his promised border wall. They lectured him about the legislative process and reiterated to him that he lacked the votes to secure the $5 billion he seeks for the wall."
But there's another view, as these and other accounts acknowledged.
The border wall, and the broader issue of illegal immigration, is immensely important to Trump's core supporters. He wanted to send them an unmistakable signal that he's fighting for them and understands their concerns. And then, if he falls short, he can blame the Dems. Or, with his recent comments that some of the wall is already being built, Trump can try to cobble something together and claim victory.
The incoming House speaker seized upon Trump's tactic of brutally personal insults. Democratic allies leaked to reporters that Pelosi later told party colleagues that she felt like she'd been in a "tinkle contest with a skunk," adding: "It's a manhood thing for him. As if manhood could ever be associated with him." So much for the high road.
What the president may not have fully appreciated is that the party seen as triggering a partial government shutdown always pays a stiff price. The Republicans were hurt when they tried the tactic during the Clinton years and again during the Obama administration. But when Democrats were seen as precipitating a shutdown at the end of last year, they quickly backed off and made a deal within hours.
When real people are hurt — furloughs, delayed paychecks, national parks and monuments closed — the underlying issues get lost in the backlash. Of course, that may not be a factor if Trump doesn't really plan to take things past the brink.
I think it's great to watch our leaders debating serious issues on TV. Trump did that with lawmakers last year on gun control but never followed through, leading to criticism it was all about the show.
But let's face it, the process only goes so far. Pelosi and Schumer were right when they told Trump that a deal needed to be made behind closed doors. There's too much posturing, by everyone, when the cameras are on.
The frenzy over the meeting will quickly fade unless there's actually a Christmas-season shutdown. But the one clear loser was Mike Pence. The media mockery of a stiff and stone-faced vice president may have been unfair, but the images will stick to him like tarpaper.

California Dem Ted Lieu say he would 'love to regulate' speech, bemoans US Constitution that prohibits him

California Democrat Ted Lieu bemoaned on Wednesday that though he would “love to be able to regulate the content of speech,” including that on Fox News, he can’t do it because of the U.S. Constitution.
Lieu made the comments during an interview about the testimony of Google CEO Sundar Pichai at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, where he dismissed the allegations that the tech giant amplifies negative stories about Republican lawmakers, saying “if you want positive search results, do positive things."
CNN host Brianna Keilar praised Lieu for his performance but asked whether other Democrats should have used the committee to press Google on conspiracy theories that spread on their platforms.
“It's a very good point you make. I would love if I could have more than five minutes to question witnesses. Unfortunately, I don't get that opportunity,” Lieu said of the committee hearings.
“However, I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so, and that's simply a function of the First Amendment, but I think over the long run, it's better the government does not regulate the content of speech,” he continued.

"I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so, and that's simply a function of the First Amendment, but I think over the long run, it's better the government does not regulate the content of speech."
— California Democrat Ted Lieu

Lieu added that private companies should self-regulate their platforms and said the government shouldn’t interfere.
After his remarks aired, Lieu came under fire on social media, prompting him to go on a Twitter spree to clarify his views, including that he would like to regulate Fox News.
One Twitter user had accused him of being “a poster child for the tyranny.”
Lieu insisted that he’s actually defending the First Amendment rather than showing his desire to regulate speech.
“My whole point is that government officials always want to regulate speech, see e.g. the Republican Judiciary hearing alleging Google is biased against Republicans,” he wrote in another tweet. “But thank goodness the First Amendment prevents me, @POTUS and Republicans from doing so.”
“I agree there are serious issues, but the speech issues are protected by the First Amendment,” the Democrat added. “Would I like to regulate Fox News? Yes, but I can't because the First Amendment stops me. And that's ultimately a good thing in the long run.”
Lieu has become somewhat a foe of President Trump following his election, often taking to social media to throw jabs at the president.
He’s among the Democrats who’s been flirting with the idea of impeaching Trump over the perceived collusion between Russia and the campaign. He also tried to kick-start earlier this year the impeachment process of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
CA DEM: TRUMP 'TRULY AN EVIL MAN' WHO LIKELY VIOLATED HIS OATH OF OFFICE
Lieu also raised eyebrows in summer after playing on House floor an audio recording of the crying migrant children separated from their families as part of the Trump administration’s “zero-tolerance policy.”
Last year, Lieu was slammed for walking out of a moment of silence for victims of a mass shooting at a Texas church.