Anonymous ID: 096b07 Dec. 14, 2018, 7:39 p.m. No.4317011   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Investigation incoming: Adam Schiff says House Intelligence Committee will look into Trump inauguration funding

 

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said the House Intelligence Committee plans to investigate whether there was “illicit foreign funding or involvement in the inauguration” of President Trump. “Whenever a foreign nation uses its financial wealth to violate the laws of our country, it undermines our democracy,” Schiff said in a statement, according to the Washington Post. “When another country does so in concert with U.S. persons, it carries the additional risk of compromising them and presents a particularly acute counterintelligence risk.” Schiff, who will take over as chairman of the committee next year, has been fiercely critical of the president and has previously expressed interest in investigating Trump’s finances.

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller has investigated whether any foreign money flowed into Trump’s inaugural fund as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. That investigation has already notched one guilty plea, when in late August American political consultant W. Samuel Patten pleaded guilty to failing to register as a foreign lobbyist after donating $50,000 from a Ukrainian politician to the inaugural committee through a straw donor. Mueller has also questioned Tom Barrack, a friend of Trump’s who chaired the committee. The committee said in a statement that it was “in full compliance with all applicable laws and disclosure obligations” and “donors were vetted in accordance with the law and no improprieties have been found regarding the vetting of those donors.” The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether the inaugural committee misspent some of it funds.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigation-incoming-adam-schiff-says-house-intelligence-committee-will-look-into-trump-inauguration-funding

Anonymous ID: 096b07 Dec. 14, 2018, 7:44 p.m. No.4317049   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7061 >>7085

Schumer knocks Trump over ‘very sad’ chief of staff situation

 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., dinged President Trump over the lack of candidates lining up to be his next chief of staff. “Very sad not a single person in America will agree to be WH chief of staff, formerly one of the most sought-after jobs in government,” Schumer wrote in a tweet Friday.

 

Trump named Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, as his new chief of staff hours prior to Schumer’s comment. Mulvaney will replace John Kelly in an acting capacity. Schumer said he was not surprised Trump picked Mulvaney and called his selection “very troubling.” “He’s been a leading advocate of government shutdowns,” Schumer said.

 

Several candidates for the position announced publicly in recent days that they were uninterested in being chief of staff. Trump, meanwhile, has claimed there were "many" people who wanted the job. Trump reportedly discussed the role with his son-in-law Jared Kushner, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former campaign aide David Bossie, and Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff Nick Ayers.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/schumer-knocks-trump-over-very-sad-chief-of-staff-situation

Anonymous ID: 096b07 Dec. 14, 2018, 7:53 p.m. No.4317154   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7367 >>7432 >>7493

Federal judge rules Obamacare unconstitutional

 

A judge ruled Friday evening that Obamacare is unconstitutional, putting the future of the federal healthcare law in jeopardy. The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern District of Texas — a George W. Bush appointee, is likely to face an appeal to the Fifth Circuit. Obamacare will remain in place pending appeal .

 

The suit in the case, Texas v. Azar, was brought by 20 Republican state officials, who have asked that all of Obamacare be thrown out as a consequence of the new tax law, which zeroed out a penalty on the uninsured, known as the "individual mandate." The officials argued that the penalty was central to making the rest of the law work, and that without it, the rest should crumble. O'Connor appeared to sympathize with this argument in his opinion. He explained that he believed Congress would not have enacted Obamacare in the first place, with its various rules and taxes, without the mandate, and that the regulatory framework was intended to work together. "Congress stated many times unequivocally — through enacted text signed by the president — that the individual mandate is 'essential' to the ACA," he wrote of the Affordable Care Act, the formal name for Obamacare. "And this essentiality, the ACA’s text makes clear, means the mandate must work 'together with the other provisions' for the Act to function as intended."

 

O'Connor was talking about the Obama administration's argument that the mandate could not be severed from the rest of the law in a 2012 Supreme Court case. In his opinion, he elaborated on the different ways that Obamacare had been challenged in court and in Congress. "It is like watching a slow game of Jenga, each party poking at a different provision to see if the ACA falls," O'Connor wrote.

 

The decision came just a day ahead of when the open enrollment for Obamacare's marketplaces are set to close across most of the U.S. Enrollment in these marketplaces, or exchanges, has been lagging, with some critics arguing that the zeroing out of the fine is partially to blame. The marketplaces apply to people who don't get healthcare coverage through work or a government program. Roughly 10 million people buy plans on the exchanges and another 7 million have plans outside of them that must still abide by Obamacare's rules under law. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that if the ruling is upheld in the higher courts then it will be a "disaster for tens of millions of American families, especially for people with pre-existing conditions." “The ruling seems to be based on faulty legal reasoning and hopefully it will be overturned," he said.

 

Trump's Department of Justice had joined the lawsuit but asked specifically that the rules on pre-existing illnesses be struck down. These rules prohibit health insurance companies from turning away sick customers, from charging them more for their illness, or from refusing to cover medical services associated with managing their condition. Justice Department attorney Brett Schumate had asked that any changes to Obamacare by the court be delayed until 2020, given that the rates for next year are already set. The case was argued Sept. 5. Its defendants, including several Democratic state officials, said that it was never the intent of Congress to undo other parts of the law.

 

President Trump has pledged that a Republican replacement plan to Obamacare would protect people with pre-existing conditions, a plan he asked Congress to "get it done" late Friday. Republican replacement plans in Congress have contained similar language as Obamacare for protecting sick people but omit other portions to make coverage affordable to them. One of Trump's top health chiefs, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma, recently said that the administration had devised a backup plan in case the law is struck down, but wouldn't share at the time what it was. Political attacks on healthcare featured heavily during the midterm elections, and Nancy Pelosi, the favored House speaker for the next Congress, credited the party's platform healthcare for the Democratic victory in the House.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/federal-judge-rules-obamacare-unconstitutional

 

Full Court Order Here:

https://www.scribd.com/document/395727621/Texas-v-US-Order#fullscreen&from_embed

Anonymous ID: 096b07 Dec. 14, 2018, 8:03 p.m. No.4317277   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7432 >>7493

Here’s How Much The Mueller Investigation Has Cost Taxpayers

 

The Mueller investigation has cost taxpayers $25 million, according to documents released Friday by the Department of Justice. The special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 election has been ongoing since May 2017. The latest numbers released by the department show that, in a six-month time period from April 1, 2018, to Sep. 30, 2018, there were over $4.5 million in expenditures. Those expenditures included over $2.8 million in salary for Mueller and his team.

 

This adds up to “just over $25 million,” according to CNN analysts: The department previously reported $6.7 million in direct and indirect costs from May through September 2017, and $10 million from October 2017 through March 2018 — bringing the total from all three reports over the life of the investigation to just over $25 million. Of that amount, only $12.3 million is the special counsel’s direct expenditures.

 

Mueller’s investigation has so far proven no hard evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia but has implicated various campaign aides in unrelated crimes. Trump campaign staff Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates and George Papadopoulos have all been targeted by the broad scope investigation. President Donald Trump has regularly called the investigation a “witch hunt” and complained of its expense.

 

https://www.dailycaller.com/2018/12/14/how-much-mueller-investigation-cost/