Mediaboss Marketing

U.S. Senate Democrats, seeking to capitalize on growing disclosures about the Trump campaign's contacts with Russia, urged a top Republican lawmaker on Tuesday to obtain President Donald Trump's tax returns as a matter of national security.

It was the second request for Trump's returns by Senate Democrats in as many weeks, part of a Democratic campaign to pressure Republicans in Congress into obtaining the documents that could reveal conflicts of interest posed by the president's global business empire.

Trump has defied decades of precedent by refusing to release his tax returns, saying his tax affairs were under federal audit. The Internal Revenue Service has said that is no obstacle to releasing them publicly.

Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week

In a letter on Tuesday to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, two of the panel's leading Democrats said Trump's tax returns should be pursued in light of "critical national security implications" posed by contacts between Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak and Trump associates, including U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

The Senate Finance Committee chair Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and ranking Democratic member Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) attend a hearing on "Examining the Opioid Epidemic: Challenges and Opportunities" in Washington February 23, 2016. REUTERS/Gary Cameron REUTERS/Gary Cameron

"There is no debate that the conflicts in question pose a threat to American national security and the integrity of the government of the United States, and more and more keep coming to light," wrote Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the committee's top Democrat, and Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan.

Hatch and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady rejected a request for the returns last Wednesday by Senate Democrats, saying congressional actions that target individual tax returns would constitute an abuse of authority and set a dangerous precedent.

On Tuesday, a Hatch spokesman said the Utah Republican had no further comment.

The two Democratic lawmakers said national security had long been a focus of the Senate Finance Committee oversight of issues involving trade, Iran and terrorism. They also said the panel previously sought the tax returns of former Enron Corp executives, oil and gas companies and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, as part of its oversight duties.

Wyden and Stabenow said they wanted the committee to hold a closed session in which lawmakers could conduct a bipartisan review of Trump's returns.

They added: "If committee members identify ties or relations to foreign governments within these documents, we will respectfully request the chairman and members of the committee hold a vote to make that information available to the public."

Original post:
Democrats Say Trump Tax Returns Are a National Security Issue - Newsweek

Hackers are now reportedly targeting Democratic lawmakers and progressive organizations in the U.S. in an attempt to shake them down for hush money.

At least 12 progressive organizations have been targeted by Russian hackers who seek out embarrassing information on emails or secret details that could be used to hurt the organizations, Bloomberg has been told by two sources familiar with probes by private security companies and the FBI. The progressive organizations were also hit with ransomware, which seeks payment to unlock and restore data.

In addition, the computers of Pennsylvanias Senate Democratic caucus were hacked last week and alsoinfected by ransomware, according to The Associated Press.The Republican caucuss computers were untouched. Its unclear who was behind the hacking, but suspicions about Russian hackers were raised because only Democrats were hit. Ransom was demanded in digital Bitcoin, which is difficult to trace, to get a decryption key to unlock the system and data.

The Pennsylvania Senate cyberattack froze systems and data and shut out politicians and employees throughout Monday. The FBI and Pennsylvania attorney general have launched an investigation. A Democratic leader said that ransom would not be paid. The hackers had given politicians a deadline of a week or threatened that all data would be destroyed, AP reported.

Its unclear if thehackerstargeting the progressive organizations are the same ones the FBI believes targeted the Democratic National Committeeduring last years presidential campaign. But they have the same proclivities and would likely have time on their hands since the presidential election. In addition,some techniques are the same as those used by Cozy Bear, one of the Russian government groups linked to cyberattacks during the U.S. campaign, according to Bloomberg.Some of the targeted liberal organizations paid the Bitcoin ransoms, ranging from $30,000 to $150,000, according to Bloomberg.

The Center for American Progress, a left-leaning Washington think tank, and Arabella Advisors, which steers investments to liberal causes, were among the targeted organizations, Bloomberg reported.

Arabella Advisors was affected by cyber crime, a spokesman for the firm told Bloomberg. All facts indicate this was financially motivated. The Center for American Progress did not comment.

The Kremlin is now suspected of orchestrating cyberattacks to manipulate other elections, including in France and the Netherlands.

Norway revealed in January that hackers linked to Russia had attacked government ministry sites and the emails of the Labour Party in an operation strikingly similar to what happened in the U.S.

See more here:
Hackers Shaking Down Pennsylvania Democrats and US Progressive Groups - Huffington Post

Liberal activists are increasingly upset at what they see as too little opposition to President Trumps Supreme Court nominee and are even threatening to run primary challengers against Democrats in the Senate who end up supporting Judge Neil Gorsuch.

Nearly a dozen influential liberal groups fired off a letter this week calling Judge Gorsuch an ultra-conservative and demanding a more unified opposition.

We need you to do better, the groups said in the letter, which was organized by NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Several news outlets reported that the groups may even back primary opponents against Democrats who dont show enough opposition.

On Capitol Hill, liberal senators are looking for lines of attack against Judge Gorsuch, who until now has received glowing reviews from many of the senators including Democrats with whom he has met.

Three Democrats held a press conference Tuesday to question Judge Gorsuchs rulings on workers rights, saying some of his decisions as an appellate judge contradict Mr. Trumps promises to empower American workers.

Sen. Patty Murray, Washington Democrat, said Judge Gorsuch has a distinctly anti-worker record.

She pointed to a ruling against a woman who lost her job after a leukemia diagnosis, against a female employees discrimination case and against a truck driver who was fired for leaving his post because of health concerns.

Im very concerned that should he end up on the court, he would side with conservative justices in continuing to undermine worker protections, safety and ability to organize, Ms. Murray said.

Carrie Severino, chief counsel at the conservative Judicial Crisis Network, said Ms. Murray and her colleagues were cherry-picking cases to distort the judges record.

She said Judge Gorsuch, as a lawyer, won a major antitrust case against U.S. Tobacco Co. and, as a judge, wrote a ruling that restored multimillion-dollar penalties against Dow Chemical Co. and Rockwell International.

Early efforts to undermine Judge Gorsuch have fallen flat, leaving ardent Democrats looking for new angles of attack.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Democrat, requested documents from the Federalist Society and The Heritage Foundation, two conservative organizations that helped shape Mr. Trumps list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

The wholesale outsourcing of nominee selection to interest groups is without known precedent, especially for a position as important as associate justice of the Supreme Court, Mr. Blumenthal said.

Ms. Murray said liberal groups frustration should be aimed at Mr. Trump.

With all the chaos surrounding this new administration, I want to make it clear I have really serious concerns about moving forward with the nominee at this time, she said.

I think there is a lot going on that makes it very hard to look at anything that they are doing. The hide the ball campaign is real, and this is a serious nomination that should take serious consideration, Ms. Murray said.

Despite the liberal uprising, Judge Gorsuch made rounds Tuesday on Capitol Hill and met with four Senate Democrats.

Sen. Al Franken, Minnesota Democrat, told reporters that he wasnt satisfied with some of Judge Gorsuchs answers to his questions and thought he got into judgespeak.

Hes met with 70 senators, so I think hes probably gotten pretty good at speaking around some things, Mr. Franken said.

Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he doesnt expect Democrats to put aside politics because they are furious that the voters would dare vote for a Republican president and a Republican majority in both houses of Congress.

I have no doubt the Democrats will use whatever procedural tools they have to delay that confirmation, Mr. Cruz said.

Continued here:
Liberals threaten Democrats over support for Gorsuch - Washington Times

The executive committee of Buffalo County Democrats wants to clarify its role as the minority party after the last election. The Hartley Burr Alexander quotation above the main entrance of the Nebraska State Capitol serves as our guiding principle: The salvation of the state is watchfulness in the citizen.

Watchfulness, and our responsibility as citizens to work for a more noble life, directed Alexanders thoughts and guides our actions. We do not believe that we need to sit down and be quiet and accept the results of the last election. Instead we see our role as watchfulness.

The four major goals of our Buffalo County Democratic Party are:

- Be good stewards of the environment by working to promote clean, sustainable, and affordable energy.

- Provide excellent educational opportunities especially through our public education system for all Nebraskans.

- Maintain a fair wage for all hard working Nebraskans.

- Protect the civil rights of all Nebraskans.

Recent discussions at the local, state and national levels have caused local citizens to become concerned. As a result of these concerns, these citizens, from a wide spectrum of political affiliations Democrats, Republicans and non-partisans have organized demonstrations on womens rights, public education and immigration.

While Buffalo County Democrats were not instrumental in organizing these events, many of our members did participate. These demonstrators were local and unpaid and committed to positive change.

Buffalo County Democrats will continue to be watchful. When issues arise that we feel are against the best interests of Nebraskans, we, as the loyal opposition, will take action. We will do this by contacting our elected representatives by orchestrating and setting up phone banks and letter writing campaigns. We will also participate in peaceful public demonstrations to raise awareness.

The one thing we will not do is sit down and be quiet.

Buffalo County Democrats

Executive Committee

EDITORS NOTE: Signing this letter were Chairman Brady McDonald of Shelton, Vice Chairman Kit Alff of Kearney, Vice Chairman Caleb Rohrer of Kearney, Treasurer David Richardson of Kearney, Secretary Linda Liebig of Kearney and Immediate Past Chair John Turek of Gibbon.

Visit link:
Democrats won't 'sit down' - Kearney Hub

The most famous special prosecutor remains the first one: Archibald Cox of Watergate fame. After Cox got sideways with President Richard Nixon in 1973, the president ordered Cox fired, which led to the Saturday Night Massacre and then to Leon Jaworski, and then to ... well, you remember.

Now, though, Democrats are lined up demanding a special prosecutor into Russias interference with our election. They may have visions of Cox and Jaworski dancing in their heads, but they should be careful what they wish for. Democrats assume only Republican oxen will get gored by a special prosecutor, but the record suggests they would get caught up too.

After Watergate, Congress got into the special prosecutors business, passing the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to create the office of the independent counsel. But Capitol Hill soon found that special prosecutors investigations tend to expand beyond their original brief. After more than a dozen wild rides that included Lawrence Walshs endless inquiry into Iran-contra and Ken Starrs work that began with Whitewater and later metastasized into Monica-land, Congress let the office and its procedures to lapse in 1999. There is no law governing special prosecutors today despite what you may have heard some elected officials say on air in recent weeks. The attorney general can name a special prosecutor if he wants (or the deputy attorney general if Jeff Sessionss recusal extends to even considering whether a special prosecutor is needed). But if either Sessions or Rod Rosenstein, Trumps nominee for deputy attorney general, declares the need for a special prosecutor, the key will be: What is the scope of the investigation with which the special prosecutor is charged?

Republicans routinely demanded special prosecutors in the era of President Barack Obama and Attorneys General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Loretta E. Lynch. There were calls for one to investigate Hillary Clintons private email server, the Internal Revenue Services alleged abuse of power regarding tea party-named groups, and the gun walking scandal known as Fast and Furious. But there were no special prosecutors appointed during the Obama years. The Democrats knew better than to set a seasoned prosecutor with subpoena power loose when political intrigue is afoot.

So I would sound a note of caution to Democrats pounding the lectern for a special prosecutor. Still, if one is to be appointed to look into the election of 2016 and all illegal activity surrounding it, I am in favor of going for the cathartic approach and putting everything on the table.

Lets be clear: It seems obvious that Russia did in fact meddle with our process and used WikiLeaks to do so. I and other conservatives said as much repeatedly during the election. And if any American cooperated with that active measures campaign against us, he, she or they should be prosecuted under the appropriate espionage statutes.

But any special prosecutor appointed to look into the alleged Russian connection should also be given a scope of inquiry that includes the handing of the investigation into Clintons server, the slow-walking of document delivery to the Congress and the courts concerning Clintons administration of the State Department as well as alleged Obama administration leaks of classified information from the first campaign debate forward. I think the abuses at the IRS clearly have a nexus to shenanigans in 2016, so you can even add that to the list of appropriate subjects for the special prosecutor. (Everything is alleged, including Team Trump ties to Russia, until proven or abandoned.)

Of course that special prosecutor will have to look at every application for surveillance,e in connection with either candidate for the presidency made to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Long ago I reviewed those applications from the FBIs counterintelligence pros before they went to the attorney general. Their contents are detailed and usually lengthy, and very classified, and so the new special prosecutor and his or her staff are going to need full FBI background investigations, which argues for a former prosecutor and/or a former federal judge who has already undergone the arduous process of clearance background investigations. That person will also need a reputation as a straight shooter, because when he or she begins to get close to touching Democratic nerves the politics of personal destruction will return with a vengeance.

Its certainly possible to find the right person for the job. Back when the independent counsel statute was in effect, I served for a year as clerk to the special panel of three judges who selected the counsel (because my judge, George MacKinnon, was the chair of the panel). When choosing an independent counsel to investigate allegations against Attorney General-designate Edwin Meese (allegations eventually proved false and cleared before Meeses confirmation), the judges debated how to find a lawyer who would move quickly and who would not fall in love with the spotlight. They succeeded when they selected Jacob Stein, who moved efficiently to an end product.

But the point is that special prosecutors are immune from any constraint. You may get a Stein, or you may get a Walsh. Either way, special prosecutors go where they want and when they want. Buyers beware.

If Sessions or Rosenstein decide on a special prosecutor, every big newspaper and network is going to have to assign a few reporters to a new beat one we ought to brand with hashtag #PutinsBigWin to describe its impact.

(Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

The new president isnt going to unleash the hounds on just his campaign. If the hunt is to be had, everyone connected to the election is the fox. The old KGB colonel at the top of the Kremlin must be smiling indeed. His campaign against the legitimacy of everyone and everything in American politics is bearing fruit every day.

View post:
Democrats demanding a special prosecutor should be careful what they wish for - Washington Post