Raj Shah leaves White House to helm communications firm with Clinton administration alum

Raj Shah, who served as deputy press secretary for much of the Trump administration, has left the White House and joined a prominent communications and lobbying firm. Shah and Jamie Rubin, former assistant secretary of state for public affairs in former President Bill Clinton’s administration, are together leading Ballard Media Group. It's a division of the government relations firm Ballard Partners, founded by longtime Florida lobbyist Brian Ballard.

“I’m excited to join Brian, Jamie and the top-notch team to launch Ballard Media Group,” Shah said in a statement. “Companies, organizations and industries today face increasing scrutiny from an unrelenting media landscape. Our team, with years of proven results, will provide the strategic communications clients need to navigate these challenges and successfully deliver their message to the right audience.”

Shah joined the White House as principal deputy press secretary after serving as deputy communications director for the Republican National Committee. During his tenure at the White House, Shah briefed the press in the absence of White House press secretary Sarah Sanders and helped to oversee strategy and communications for the successful confirmation last year of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The Senate narrowly confirmed Kavanaugh in October after a contentious confirmation fight. Ballard Partners said Shah will join the firm as a partner.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/raj-shah-leaves-white-house-to-helm-communications-firm-with-clinton-administration-alum

>>4751879

Welcome to draining the swamp.

Devin Nunes: Counterintelligence bombshell shows FBI leaders 'had no real evidence against the Trump team'

Rep. Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said the New York Times' bombshell report on a counterintelligence investigation into President Trump's ties to Russia only strengthens the argument that the FBI has no evidence of collusion against the Trump team.

"This is yet more evidence that FBI leaders actually had no real evidence against the Trump team," Nunes said in a statement obtained by the Washington Examiner's Byron York. "Instead, they were simply trying to undermine a president they didn't like and avenge Comey's firing. By relying on the Steele dossier — a fraudulent document funded by Democrats and based on Russia sources — FBI leaders were either complicit or too oblivious to notice they were being used in a disinformation operation by the Democratic Party and Russian operatives."

On Friday, the New York Times reported the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into Trump the day after he fired FBI Director James Comey in the spring of 2017. The counterintelligence inquiry was later wrapped into the FBI's broader Russia collusion investigation, which special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed to lead after Comey's ouster. That inquiry is still ongoing. In a follow-up, the Washington Post reported the president took steps to try to protect his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, including pressuring a translator to withhold information on discussions between the two leaders from administration officials.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders has called the Times report "absurd," and when he was asked about whether he has ever worked for the Russians during an interview with Fox News' Jeanine Pirro late Saturday, Trump said it was "the most insulting thing I’ve ever been asked."

Similar to Nunes, Trump also argued on Twitter that the Times story showed "the corrupt former leaders of the FBI, almost all fired or forced to leave the agency for some very bad reasons, opened up an investigation on me, for no reason & with no proof, after I fired Lyin’ James Comey, a total sleaze!"

Nunes' brief comment on the Times report is his first major public statement he's made since abdicating the chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee to Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who is a vocal critic of Trump. As chairman, Nunes led the committee's investigation into Russian meddling, which ultimately found no evidence of collusion. Schiff and his fellow Democrats complained that the inquiry ended prematurely. With a new majority in the lower chamber, Trump is in their crosshairs on a number of fronts, including the Russia question. In his own statement reacting to the Times report, Schiff said, "The House Intelligence Committee has a responsibility to the American people to ensure that the President is working in our national interest and is not motivated by any other factor, and we are pressing forward with that work."

Although Schiff and his Democratic counterparts have been quick to raise the alarm, they have neglected to comment on whether they had been briefed by federal officials about the reported counterintelligence operation.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/devin-nunes-counterintelligence-bombshell-shows-fbi-leaders-had-no-real-evidence-against-the-trump-team

U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge to consumer protection bureau

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a Texas bank’s constitutional challenge to the structure of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, passing up a case that could have led to more presidential power over an independent agency that President Donald Trump’s administration already has weakened.

The decision by the justices not to hear an appeal by State National Bank of Big Spring may not be the final word on the matter as three other cases involving the CFPB are heading toward the high court. At issue was whether the CFPB’s sole director possesses too much power in violation of the authority the U.S. Constitution gives a president to appoint and remove certain federal officials. A ruling in favor of the bank could have allowed a president to fire the agency’s director for any reason. The CFPB, a consumer watchdog agency often criticized by conservatives and Trump’s fellow Republicans, was established in 2011 under legislation signed by former President Barack Obama that was passed by a Congress controlled by Obama’s fellow Democrats to crack down on predatory financial practices after the 2007-2009 financial crisis. “The case raises constitutional issues of major importance regarding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency that wields massive power over the economic activities of the public and sets a dangerous precedent for unaccountable federal bureaucracy,” said Sam Kazman of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative group involved in the challenge. Democrats have said the agency plays a critical role in protecting consumers.

The Texas bank’s challenge was delayed in reaching the justices because it was put on hold while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dealt with a case involving mortgage servicer PHH Corp that had raised the same issues.

Only eight of the nine justices on the court, which has a 5-4 conservative majority, participated in the decision to hear the case. Trump’s appointee Brett Kavanaugh recused himself, most likely because he took part in an earlier ruling in the case before joining the high court last October.

The agency was set up under the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law. Since then, there have been efforts by Republicans and the financial industry to undercut its authority, driven by concerns about its powers over a wide array of financial products and its structure. The Trump administration has shelved several rules and aggressively curtailed the agency’s enforcement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-cfpb/u-s-supreme-court-rejects-challenge-to-consumer-protection-bureau-idUSKCN1P81M8?il=0