Mediaboss Marketing

The Washington Post's Bob Woodward warned on Wednesday that there are people from the Obama administration who could be facing criminal charges for unmasking the names of Trump transition team members from surveillance of foreign officials.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said earlier that he had briefed Trump on new information, unrelated to an investigation into Russian activities, that suggested that several members of Trump's transition team and perhaps Trump himself had their identities "unmasked" after their communications were intercepted by U.S. intelligence officials.

The revelation is notable because identities of Americans are generally supposed to remain "masked" if American communications are swept up during surveillance of foreign individuals.

During an interview on Fox News, Woodward said that if that information about the unmasking is true, "it is a gross violation."

He said it isn't Trump's assertion, without proof, that his predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower that is of concern, but rather that intelligence officials named the Americans being discussed in intercepted communications.

"You can learn all kinds of things from diplomats gossiping, because that's what occurs. Under the rules, and they are pretty strict, it's called minimization. You don't name the American person who is being discussed," Woodward said.

He noted that there are about 20 people in the intelligence community who, for intelligence reasons, can order this "minimization" be removed.

"But the idea that there was intelligence value here is really thin," Woodward said. "It's, again, down the middle, it is not what Trump said, but this could be criminal on the part of people who decided, oh, let's name these people."

He drove the point home, adding that "under the rules, that name is supposed to be blanked out, and so you've got a real serious problem potentially of people in the Obama administration passing around this highly classified gossip."

Also from the Washington Examiner

Rep. Thomas Massie believes the consequences of passing the American Health Care Act on Thursday could be catastrophic for the Republican Party and the process used to come up with the bill embarrasses him.

Massie said on MSNBC Thursday he believes the GOP replacement for the Affordable Care Act is a giveaway to insurance companies and won't actually make health insurance cheaper or healthcare better.

"The consequences of passing it and signing it are much worse for the Republican Party than the consequences of it going down today, and I hope it goes down today," Massie said.

Massie said the plan replaces mandates, subsidies and penalties paid to the government with mandates, subsidies and penalties paid to insurance

03/23/17 8:58 AM

View post:
Bob Woodward: Obama officials possibly facing criminal charges for unmasking scheme - Washington Examiner

House Intelligence Committee Ranking MemberAdam Schiff is in high dudgeonover the bad form of House Intelligence Chairman DevinNunes in reporting his bombshell -- that the chairmanhad been shown actual surveillance(not involving Russia)of the Trump transition team and possibly of the then president-elect himself -- to President Trump before he presented the evidence to the committee.

Bad form, quite possibly. But so what?

The facts are what they are.

What appears at this writing is thatTrump transition team members and possibly Trump himself had their identities revealed, were"unmasked" in the parlance, while foreign diplomats were being surveilled.The identitiesof American citizens werenot sufficiently "minimized," as they arerequired to be by law.This is a crime one would assume wouldput the perpetrators in prison. So far it hasn't. More than that, such behavior isa grave threat to a free society, to all of us.

In effect, Trump was wiretapped -- if not in the corny, old sense of the word, something very close. Technologically, he was wiretapped, as were several(actually many) others.

A fair amountofthis happened not long beforeBarack Obamasuddenlychanged the rules regarding raw intelligence, for the first timeeverallowing the NSA to share its data with 16 other intelligence agencies, thus making thedissemination of said data (i. e. leaking) many times more likely.That was done on January 12, 2017, just three scant days before Trump's inauguration. Why did the then president finally decideto make that particularchangeat that extremely late date, rather than on one of the previous seven years and three hundred fifty-three days of his presidency? You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes or Watson to smell a rat. Something's rottensomewhere -- and it's not Denmark.

Whether Barack Obama ordered the surveillance of Donald Trump during the transition is not the question. He would never have had to. In fact, he would have beenhighly unlikely to have done so for obvious legal and practical/political reasons. Instead, supporters of the thenpresident in a position to authorize or activate such surveillance would normally know or assume his wishesanywaywithout having to be told and could act accordingly.

That is the way of the world since there was a world.

The operative question is whether these recorded conversations then ever wound up on Obama's desk or whether he knew about themin some other manner... and, if so, when.If the worst istrue, itis a scandal that makesWatergate seem like a child's prank. Even Watergate's own Bob Woodward seemed to acknowledge as much on The O'Reilly Factor on Wednesday night.

This is why any legitimate investigation by a congressional committee or anyone else must encompass both Obama and Trump. This is a two-part story. If both parties are not investigated -- they cannot be separated -- this is no more than a partisan show. Further, the press cannot even faintly be trusted to investigate or adjudicatethis matter. Their bias is so overwhelming it would sink the Titanic twice.

See more here:
Time to Investigate Obama, not Just Trump - PJ Media

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The AHCA has been dubbed Obamacare Lite by Paul a leading conservative critic of the plan and by other conservatives as RyanCare, RINO-Care, and Obamacare 2.0, since the bill does not actually fully repeal Obamacare and keeps many of the main structures that the now-former President Barack Obama installed in the healthcare system. It has come under intense scrutiny from both sides of the Republican Party moderates and conservatives are lining up against the bill and Ryan, despite publicly projecting confidence, cannot find the necessary 216 votes to pass the legislation.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Paul, one of the leading senators out of more than a dozen Republicans in the upper chamber criticizing the bill there, told Breitbart News in this exclusive interview he believes there are at least 35 House Republicans ready to vote against the bill in its current form. And he predicted that, unless some major changes come to the legislation between now and the scheduled vote on Thursday, Ryan will need to withdraw the bill and Republicans will have to start from scratch with a new bill and a new strategy on Obamacare.

Paul said in the in-person interview athis U.S. Senate office in the Russell Senate Office Building:

I think theres easily 35 no votes right now so unless something happens in the next 24 hours, I would predict they pull the bill and start over. I think if conservatives stick together, they will have earned a seat at the table where real negotiation to make this bill an acceptable bill will happen. But its interesting what conservatives are doing to change the debate. We went from keeping the Obamacare taxes for a yearhundreds of billions of dollarsbut theyre coming towards us because were standing firm. So we have to stick together, and if we do stick together there will be a real negotiation on this. The main goal I have is not to pass something that does not fix the situation. If a year from now, insurance rates and premiums are still going through the roof and its now a Republican plan it will be a disservice to the president and all of us if we pass something that doesnt work.

There is plenty of reason to believe that Paul is correct in predicting Ryan does not have the votes to pass this legislation and will need to pull the bill to start over. Despite overtures from President Donald Trump, the House Freedom Caucus members and particularly its chairman Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) remain steadfastly opposed to the bill.

NBC News has confirmed at least 26 Republicans who are opposed:

But Breitbart News can confirm several more than that are definitely opposed to the legislation. To kill the bill, Republicans need just 21 Republicans opposedand some are talking about holding a press conference on Wednesday or Thursday with the necessary number of House Republicans to crush RyanCare, appearing arm-in-arm in public opposition before a vote.

House GOP leadership made some last minute changes, too, whichPaul in his interview with Breitbart News flatly said no, were not enough to get the bill passed. Regarding those changed, Paul said:

If you keep all the insurance mandates, and you keep subsidizing insurance, basically its Obamacare Lite. So I think its still Obamacare Lite. The modifications, some are going in the right direction, but they actually expanded some of the subsidies. So one of the new things about it is its actually $75 billion more in subsidies. So, I think theyre stuck trying to split the baby. Theyre trying to give conservatives a few token changes. And theyre trying to give the moderates more subsidies.

Paul added that Ryan would not have dragged President Trump into this awful position if he had been more open and inclusive in the process from the beginning. In effect, Paul argued as he has done before, that Ryan is hurting President Trump by doing this the way he is doing it. Paul said:

Im still unclear as to why they completely ignored conservatives early on in the process and then they had the audacity to look at conservatives and say this is what you all campaigned on. That just, frankly, was never true. I was elected in 2010 in the big Tea Party wave that was for repealing Obamacare root and branch, rip the whole thing out. We were for repealing it. I still think that our grassroots conservative supporters are for repealing it. But somewhere along the line, Paul Ryan decided that it wasnt so much about repealing it but about replacing it with Obamacare Lite. And I think that was a tactical error on their part to think oh, well just be for this and everybody will be for this when in reality no conservatives are really for the Ryan plan.

Paul would not say if Ryan will lose the confidence necessary to run the House of Representatives if this bill fails, as some have suggested. When asked if Ryan can still run the House if the bill goes down, Paul told Breitbart News that instead he thinks the bill going down would lead to real negotiations on healthcare reform. He said:

I think what it will be is the real negotiations will begin the moment his bill fails, and when his bill fails conservatives will have a seat at the table. As long as conservatives stay unified and dont start negotiating one person at a time whats a really bad part of negotiations is if everybody starts saying individually oh if you give me this, give me this, give me this because then you wont really fix the main thrust of the bill and the main outcome is that insurance premiums continue to rise and we continue to bail out insurance companies thats not repeal of Obamacarethats Obamacare Lite.

More from Sen. Rand Pauls latest exclusive interview with Breitbart News is forthcoming.

Read more here:
Exclusive Rand Paul: Easily 35 No Votes Against Paul Ryan ...

Sen. Rand Paul is holding up a popular treaty ratifying Montenegro's membership in NATO. | AP Photo

Rand Paul is at it again.

Its not enough for the Kentucky Republican to try to tank House Speaker Paul Ryans Obamacare repeal bill. Hes also driving his Senate colleagues crazy by holding up the one thing the Senate could do to quickly rebuke Russian President Vladimir Putin: pass a popular treaty ratifying Montenegros membership in NATO.

Story Continued Below

The dispute exploded on the Senate floor this month as Paul blocked Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) from bringing up the treaty. McCain said Paul is working for Putin; Paul responded that McCain is past his prime. But the anger toward Paul goes much deeper than just McCain nearly the entire Senate wants to pass the treaty immediately.

Its a minority position, yeah, Paul conceded with a smile.

Thats an understatement.

Senators and aides said the treaty could be passed easily if Paul would release his hold, sending a swift message to Russia that the United States isnt stepping away from Eastern Europe, even with a NATO skeptic like Donald Trump as president. While Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is demanding a roll-call vote rather than passing the treaty with a quick request to do so unanimously, Paul is far more implacable and doesnt want it to move forward at all.

Montenegro doesnt add a great deal to the national security of the United States, Paul said in an interview. For people who want Montenegro [in NATO], many of them want Ukraine and Georgia in there. And I think if you do that you have to be prepared to go to war with Russia.

Due to Senate rules, Paul can single-handedly force the chamber to spend days on the measure, an impossible feat in the short term since Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is prioritizing a Supreme Court nominee and Obamacare repeal this spring.

That leaves the treaty stalled indefinitely and his colleagues steamed.

He knows the vote will be 99-1, said one angry Republican senator who requested anonymity to speak candidly about his colleague. He could hold the floor for days. I just think its typical.

Its not a stunt. I disagree with him. But these are things he really believes, said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who champions a more interventionist foreign policy.

Notably, McCains charge that Paul is a Putin lapdog could have been a violation of Senate rules but only if raised by another senator. No one came to his defense last week.

But Paul is unmoved, and said his message is in line with Trumps: Adding another country to overextended NATO is unproductive when other countries arent meeting their defense spending obligations. Trump hasnt commented publicly on the issue, but his administration may be lining up against Paul.

Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson fully support Montenegros accession into NATO. Sources said Vice President Mike Pence is also close to issuing a recommendation. Ousted national security adviser Michael Flynn was close to backing Montenegros entrance into NATO before he resigned.

An administration official said no final decision has been made. However, a Senate source said some White House officials have indicated support for Pauls move to block NATO expansion because it is in line with Trumps campaign platform.

It was very useful what Sen. McCain did, said Montenegrin Foreign Minister Srdjan Darmanovi, who is in Washington meeting with Senate Foreign Relations Committee members and administration officials. Sen. McCain exposed Sen. Paul being a very stubborn obstacle in the ratification.

For Paul, its just one more example of him against the world. And these days its hard to keep track of his simultaneous fights.

Republicans close to GOP leaders in both chambers are highly annoyed at Pauls high-profile quest to sink Ryans health care bill, which Paul calls Obamacare-lite every chance he gets. And while Democrats are entertained by his criticism of the Obamacare repeal efforts, theyre less enthused with his position on NATO.

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) is also frustrated over the treatys delay, sources said, but is trying to work with Paul and declining to call out the senator publicly. Paul has also been blocking several international tax treaties with other countries favored by his colleagues for years.

Although some lawmakers are pushing for new Russian sanctions legislation, Montenegros accession to NATO is more doable in the near term. But McConnell, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Paul have been unable to come to a deal and the Montenegro treaty could easily slip into the summer if Paul holds firm given the crowded calendar.

Its unfortunate. Wed like to see it done now, said Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This is a Republican fight, but we have the overwhelming majority of Republicans that are supporting it.

Get breaking news when it happens in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Meanwhile, Montenegros future is hanging in the balance as Russia asserts increasing influence in the small Balkan nation. Montenegro has spent more than seven years applying for NATO membership and the vast majority of NATO countries have approved the countrys acceptance into the alliance. The United States is one of the few left to endorse it.

NATO accession remains a highly controversial issue inside Montenegro. An opinion poll conducted in December 2016 has only 39.5 percent of Montenegrins in favor of NATO membership and 39.7 against. Russia has taken advantage of this division by bankrolling Montenegros Democratic Front, a stridently anti-NATO party that won 20 percent of the vote in parliamentary elections.

For Montenegro, time is of the essence. The longer the country remains out of NATOs protective orbit, the more opportunities Putin has to meddle in the countrys internal affairs. The delay also hurts the stature of NATO and the United States, senators said.

You tell them: Go through these steps youre going to be able to become part of our alliance. And they do and then you cant [add them], it undermines the credibility of the alliance, Rubio said. Thats why I think you have 98 people that feel strong about it.

Cardin said Paul wants a vote on one of his isolationist-leaning priorities in return for moving forward. The Kentucky Republican is a master of using the Senate floor for leverage, holding up popular items until he receives votes on priorities like slashing spending on foreign aid or obtaining information from government officials. But he said thats not the case this time.

I dont know that we necessarily need [to send] a provocative message to Russia on Montenegro, Paul said. Im holding it because of the issue. Im not in favor of expanding NATO beyond what we have.

Originally posted here:
Rand Paul's latest lonely fight incenses fellow senators ...

The proposal -- which has also drawn support from Sen. Ted Cruz -- purports to ease passage of a more expansive Obamacare replacement bill by foregoing traditional Senate rules and seating Vice President Mike Pence as Senate chair for the vote.

Paul argued that with Pence as chair, he would be empowered to make decisions about what can be passed through budget reconciliation, a procedural distinction that has a simple majority-vote-threshold. That would allow Republicans to bypass the larger, 60-vote requirement that would otherwise be required to repeal and replace key components of the Affordable Care Act -- a major roadblock.

Paul -- who opposes the current GOP health care bill moving through the House -- said Wednesday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that leadership "is afraid of the Senate parliamentarian. But we've read the rules, and it looks to us like the vice president can sit in the chair, and the vice president can decide for the Senate what is reconcilable."

He explained, "the rules, the budget rules that everyone touts and are so arcane, they say the chair rules, and not the parliamentarian. The chair rules. The vice president has the prerogative of sitting in the chair, and if they want this done, the vice president should come to the Senate."

Paul's proposal comes as Republicans are under growing pressure to pass an Obamacare repeal bill -- but divisions within the party, a slim Senate majority, and legislative procedure have complicated those efforts.

Lacking large enough majorities in Congress to pass outright repeal, GOP leadership has sold Obamacare repeal and replacement as a three-phase plan, with partial repeal now and other key changes left for later.

The problem is that many of those key changes that are left for later will still require 60 votes in the Senate, which could take multiple election cycles to achieve -- something Paul's proposal purports to solve.

On MSNBC, he said that phase three of leadership's plan "is never going to happen," and argued that Republicans could instead achieve repeal and replace simultaneously with Pence, seated as Senate chair, declaring that a more expansive version of the bill is reconcilable.

Still, such a move would be a dramatic break from the way Senate rules have traditionally been observed, and could set an irrevocable precedent for legislating akin to "nuking" the filibuster for some Senate nominees. Paul seemed to acknowledge that his proposal faced long odds.

"Do you believe that is something that could happen?" asked "Morning Joe" host Willie Geist.

"Only if we have the guts to do it, and I don't know if we have the guts to do it," Paul replied.

Read more:
Rand Paul: Bring Pence to Senate to repeal Obamacare - CNN