Anonymous ID: bca445 Nov. 12, 2018, 10:56 a.m. No.3869560   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3869432 (pb)

>>3869495 (pb)

She has a vested interest in this state, she owns voting machines there, which were probably rigged, just as mentioned in Podesta emails, 2016. I wondered how long she would wait to raise her voice.

Anonymous ID: bca445 Nov. 12, 2018, 10:58 a.m. No.3869595   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9861 >>9894 >>0167

Sherrod Brown 'seriously' thinking about running for president in 2020

 

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, is considering a run for the White House in 2020. Brown, who cruised to re-election last week in a state President Trump won by 8 points in 2016, told the Columbus Dispatch he’s heard “sort of a crescendo” in suggestions that he run for president. “We’re hearing it increase, so we’re thinking about it as a result,” he said. “We’re not close to saying yes.”

 

During an appearance earlier Monday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Brown said he was able to clinch a third term in the red-leaning state because he respects “the dignity of work.” “That’s what Washington forgets about,” he said, adding, “My campaign was about workers and about the direction where we go.” Brown said some urged him to run for president during his re-election campaign, and the calls have only become more "overwhelming" since then.

 

“My first mission is to encourage people to start talking about [American workers] more, reaching out to people in the industrial Midwest,” he told the Dispatch. “We’ll see later on about the presidential race. But we are thinking about it for the first time seriously.” "We're thinking about it," Connie Schultz, Brown's wife tweeted in response to the Dispatch story.

 

Brown would face a crowded Democratic primary field if he decided to run. A scrum of would-be aspirants are currently considering or actively planning campaigns for the right to oppose Trump in the 2020 general election.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/sherrod-brown-seriously-thinking-about-running-for-president-in-2020

Anonymous ID: bca445 Nov. 12, 2018, 11:07 a.m. No.3869743   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9998

Congressional Democrats keep pressure on Matt Whitaker

 

Top Congressional Democrats are keeping the pressure on Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, most recently by asking the Justice Department if any top ethics officials have advised him to recuse himself from oversight of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. The lawmakers want to know “immediately” from Lee Lofthus, the assistant attorney general for administration at the Justice Department, if he has advised Whitaker to rescue himself. Lofthus is also the department’s chief ethics officer. Citing Whitaker’s public criticism of the special counsel investigation, the Democrats say in a letter to Lofthus that he has “troubling conflicts of interest,” which include his relationship with Sam Clovis, who supervised George Papadopoulos.

 

Papadopoulos worked on the Trump campaign in 2016, and pleaded guilty in October as part of Mueller's investigation. “The official supervising the special counsel investigation must be — in both fact and appearance — independent and impartial. Regrettably, Mr. Whitaker's statements indicate a clear bias against the investigation that would cause a reasonable person to question his impartiality,” the Democrats wrote in the Sunday letter. “Allowing a vocal opponent of the investigation to oversee it will severely undermine public confidence in the Justice Department's work on this critically important matter.”

 

The letter is signed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein, House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jerrold Nadler, Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner, House Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam Schiff, and Ranking Oversight Committee ranking member Elijah Cummings.

 

Pelosi is making a bid for House speaker, while Nadler, Schiff, and Cummings are in line to chair their respective committees. Due to both Whitaker's 2017 remarks and his relationship with Clovis — who is a grand jury witness in Mueller’s investigation — as well as what the lawmakers say are “other entanglements,” the Democratic lawmakers want to know if Lofthus or any other ethics officials at the Justice Department has advised Whitaker to recuse himself, as well as “the basis for that recommendation." “We also request that you provide us all ethics guidance the department has provided to Mr. Whitaker to date,” they wrote.

 

Whitaker was appointed acting attorney general on Wednesday after the forced resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Because Sessions had recused himself from the Russia investigation in March 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein took control of oversight, and appointed Mueller in May 2017. With Sessions out, Whitaker — Sessions’ former chief of staff — took over control of Mueller’s investigation, and ignited worries about what he would do, due to both his close relationship to the White House and because of his prior comments about the special counsel.

 

On June 9, 2017, Whitaker stated on a radio show: “There is no criminal obstruction of justice charge to be had here. The evidence is weak. No reasonable prosecutor would bring a case.” A month later in July, Whitaker stated that he “could see a scenario where Jeff Sessions is replaced with a recess appointment and that attorney general doesn't fire Bob Mueller, but he just reduces his budget so low that his investigations grinds to almost a halt.” Whitaker has also called the special counsel investigation “a mere witch hunt” and published an op-ed titled “Mueller’s investigation of Trump is going too far,” in which he argued that Rosenstein should place limits on the scope of the investigation.

 

On Sunday, House Democrats made it clear that if Whitaker doesn’t recuse himself from Mueller’s investigation, he will be brought in for a grilling when Democrats take control of the House majority in January. "Our very first witness after Jan. 3, we will subpoena — or we will summon, not necessarily subpoena — Mr. Whitaker," Nadler, D-N.Y., said on CNN’s “State of the Union" on Sunday. “He’s totally unqualified." Nadler added: "And his only qualification seems to be that he wants to be — that the president wants him to be the hatchet man to destroy the Mueller investigation.”

 

Schiff, D-Calif., said that “any role that [Whitaker] plays will be exposed to the public.” “If he has any involvement whatsoever in this Russia probe, we are going to find out whether he made commitments to the president about the probe, whether he is serving as a back channel to the president or his lawyers about the probe, whether he’s doing anything to interfere with the probe,” Schiff told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

 

But the White House is standing by Whitaker.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congressional-democrats-keep-pressure-on-matt-whitaker

Anonymous ID: bca445 Nov. 12, 2018, 11:30 a.m. No.3870126   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Fed Board Run By Obama Holdovers Is ‘Hemorrhaging’ Taxpayer Money On Legal Fees

 

A federal board tasked with investigating chemical accidents is “hemorrhaging” taxpayer money on a years-long personnel case that has not yet gone to trial, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). PEER attorneys are representing Daniel Horowitz, former managing director of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), in a legal challenge against the agency for firing Horowitz.

 

Members of the CSB are scheduled to attend a closed-door meeting Tuesday to discuss a “legal services support contract” worth $300,000. The new contract would be with the law firm Shaw, Bransford & Roth and be worth nearly double a 2015 retainer with the law firm worth $157,000, according to PEER. “This law firm has found a cash cow in this tiny troubled agency,” PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said in a statement. “For an agency charged with responding to chemical disasters to divert its limited resources for legal expenses in a needless personnel dispute shows how badly misplaced its current priorities are.”

 

Former CSB Chair Vanessa Sutherland placed Horowitz on paid administrative leave in June 2015. Horowitz continued to receive his full salary of $161,000 a year while his case remained in limbo for three years. Sutherland fired Horowitz on June 22, 2018, a day before Sutherland left office herself. Horowitz was removed based on allegations brought by CSB board member Kristen Kulinowski, now the board’s interim chair. Kulinowski said Horowitz engaged in “conduct unbecoming” of a civil servant, according to the letter Sutherland sent Horowitz after making the decision to fire him.

 

All actions that Horowitz engaged in and was later fired for were lawful and done at the direction of former CSB Chair Rafael Moure-Eraso, PEER says. “Given the ethical and legal obligations applicable to federal employees to preserve the public trust, it cannot stand as a conclusion that a civil servant is immune from discipline for following the orders of a presidential appointee,” Sutherland’s letter said. Moure-Eraso, who directed Horowitz, was fired by former President Barack Obama on March 26, 2015, after being subject to multiple congressional and inspector general investigations and accusations that he mistreated CSB whistleblowers. President Donald Trump has attempted to abolish the agency twice, cutting it entirely from the White House 2018 and 2019 budget proposals, but Congress has ultimately decided to keep funding the board. CSB declined to comment.

 

https://www.dailycaller.com/2018/11/12/chemical-safety-board-hemorrhaging-taxpayer-money/