Media Search:



Why a Progressive Democrat Was Dragged Out of the N.J. Senate – The New York Times

TRENTON, N.J. The confrontation was brief but explosive, and it laid bare the deepening fault lines within the Democratic Party in one of Americas bluest states.

New Jersey state troopers singled out Sue Altman, the leader of the left-leaning Working Families Alliance, grabbed her by the arms and forcibly removed her from a standing-room-only State Senate hearing on corporate tax breaks.

She was led past her main political rival, George E. Norcross III, a Democratic power broker who was at the hearing to testify in support of an $11 billion economic incentive program that Ms. Altman had criticized harshly and that is the subject of state investigations and subpoenas.

The imagery and its aftermath have roiled Trenton, exposing a generational and philosophical rift between progressive and mainstream Democrats that is mirrored nationwide.

The clash thrust Ms. Altman into the limelight and offered a vivid example of how the grass-roots energy in New Jersey that helped Democrats flip four seats in Congress last year has spilled into the State House.

It was not fun, Ms. Altman, 37, said of the confrontation. But, she added, it had underscored the current volatility in Trenton a perfect storm that she believes has created an opportunity to reshape New Jerseys political system.

Saily Avelenda, a lawyer from Essex County who worked to elect one of the four new Democrats, Representative Mikie Sherrill, said that New Jerseys progressive activists had deliberately shifted their focus from Washington to the state capital.

We created a conversation that wasnt there before, and, boy, do we need to have it, she said. It culminated in that one picture of Sue.

Images of the clash were shared widely on social media including by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a Democratic presidential candidate amplifying tensions between the Democratic factions that control the state government: lawmakers aligned with the progressive first-term governor, Philip D. Murphy, and those, including the powerful State Senate president, who are linked to Mr. Norcross.

Mr. Norcross, an insurance executive whose company and business associates benefited significantly from tax breaks passed under Mr. Murphys predecessor, Gov. Chris Christie, is widely regarded as the states most powerful unelected official.

His influence extends well beyond New Jersey. He is a member of both President Trumps Mar-a-Lago club and the Democratic National Committee. His brother, Representative Donald Norcross, is a Democrat who represents a South Jersey district.

Ms. Altmans ejection from the November hearing is being reviewed by the attorney general, and it is coloring the discussion of a range of issues, including the renewal of the corporate tax-break program and the fight for control of the Democratic State Committee.

The whole atmosphere here has changed somewhat, said Senator Loretta Weinberg, a Democrat who initially called Ms. Altmans removal one of the hearings disruptions, but later acknowledged that it was improper and embarrassing.

Ms. Altman became the leader of the Working Families Alliance in May, after the previous director left to help run Senator Bernie Sanderss presidential campaign.

A former prep-school history teacher with an M.B.A. from Oxford University, she speaks in rapid-fire sentences that pivot quickly in tone from policy wonk to street-savvy organizer.

She is at home in front of a power-point presentation, holding forth on what she sees as the ultimate prize: dismantling established political structures to make it viable for outsiders to run and win without the blessing of county bosses who still rule with tight fists in many parts of the state.

I want the whole thing to be rethought, she said in an interview at the rowhouse she rents in Camden.

To some people, Ms. Altmans background makes her an unlikely champion of Camden, one of the poorest cities in the United States. She is an Ivy-League educated former basketball star who was raised in Hunterdon County, an affluent enclave known for its horse farms.

Critics have said that Ms. Altman, who earns $75,000 in her new role, has been reluctant to speak out on issues that might upset the governor.

She was a registered Republican until 2008. My parents were, so I just signed up as them, she said. She later registered without a party affiliation before becoming a Democrat.

Her outspokenness about corporate tax breaks and her decision to live in Camden, a city seen as the Norcross familys inviolable power base, made her a ready target for opponents long before the contentious Senate hearing.

Felisha Reyes-Morton, a Camden councilwoman, said that she was tired of hearing Ms. Altman blame George Norcross and the tax breaks for everything that was wrong with the city.

I think she uses it to her advantage, not that shes a caring Camden resident, Ms. Reyes-Morton said.

Ms. Altman regularly spars with the powers-that-be on Twitter and seems to revel in the role of outside agitator. Barely a week into her job as the alliances director, she participated in a demonstration where protesters stood near an inflatable pig handing out fake million-dollar bills stamped with Mr. Norcrosss face.

She credits her years on the basketball court with making her comfortable in the political scrum. After leading her college team at Columbia University in scoring, she played professionally in Ireland and Germany. She went on to teach and coach at Blair Academy before studying at Oxford, where she also played basketball.

Youre going to get booed, she said. You still have to make your foul shots.

She is flirting with the possibility of making a primary run against Donald Norcross. I havent ruled it out, she said, despite taking no concrete steps toward a campaign.

A spokesman for the congressman declined to comment, but provided a list of re-election endorsements that include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Planned Parenthood.

The alliance, a wing of a national labor-backed umbrella organization, cites New Jerseys adoption of a $15 minimum wage in February as a key victory. The groups legislative agenda syncs closely with the governors, and includes approving drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, a so-called millionaires tax and the legalization of recreational marijuana.

When the Democratic Party is not fighting for progressive values, were going to fight the Democratic Party, said Kevin Brown, a vice president of the 32BJ Service Employees International Union, an alliance member.

A senior Murphy administration official who was not authorized to speak publicly said that in the past year Ms. Altman had influenced the debate in Trenton more than any other person, calling her a game changer.

A fellow Camden activist described her as fierce.

She doesnt have to stay here, said Ronsha Dickerson, 42, an African-American mother of six who works for an organization that has called for a moratorium on new charter schools in Camden. But shes chosen this space to really be committed to making change.

In college, Ms. Altman took up boxing to stay in shape. She picked it up again this past fall, parrying punches with the ease of a lifelong athlete during a recent workout.

As she left the gym, Wayne Shareef Jr., a boxing coach and trainer, jokingly cautioned her not to get in trouble.

I cant guarantee that, she said, chuckling.

A spokesman for George Norcross, Daniel Fee, bristled at the depiction of Ms. Altman as an independent reformer. He pointed to a $100,000 donation to the Working Families Alliance from New Direction New Jersey, a group aligned with Mr. Murphy, as evidence of her financial dependence on the governor.

The alliance is not required to disclose its donors, but Ms. Altman has been criticized for not doing so voluntarily.

I wouldnt ascribe to them any success other than getting media coverage, Mr. Fee said. The way to make change is to win elections, and so far they havent.

The well-oiled political organizations in New Jerseys 21 counties are skilled at nurturing obedience, in large part by controlling which candidates share the ballot line with incumbents. The structure makes it almost impossible for an insurgent to win a primary, as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did in New York.

Its a self-fulfilling prophecy, said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. Once youve got the line, you hold the power to keep the line.

Perhaps nowhere is the schism within the Democratic Party clearer than in the fight over who will lead the state committee. The victor controls the partys purse strings, and the true prize: command over selecting a committee that will redraw the legislative map, a power that can make or break candidates and is a potent bargaining chip.

Ms. Avelenda was hired two weeks ago to be the campaign manager for Mr. Murphys choice, John Currie, the current state party chairman. Mr. Currie is locked in an uphill race against LeRoy Jones, who has the support of George Norcross and the Senate president, Stephen M. Sweeney.

If Mr. Currie loses, the governor will face re-election in 2021 with a party chairman he did not select, or want.

Ms. Altman welcomed the choice of Ms. Avelenda, who may be best known from a 2017 episode involving Rodney Frelinghuysen, to run Mr. Curries campaign.

That year, Mr. Frelinghuysen, New Jerseys most powerful member of Congress at the time, highlighted Ms. Avelendas political activism in a personal note attached to a fund-raising letter sent to a member of the board at the bank where she worked.

She resigned from the bank and devoted herself to electing a Democrat; Mr. Frelinghuysen decided not to seek re-election.

Love seeing the Dems recognize the talents of progressive women, Ms. Altman wrote on Twitter. Plus, we need a win.

Go here to read the rest:
Why a Progressive Democrat Was Dragged Out of the N.J. Senate - The New York Times

Russia, Ukraine to revive peace process amid little progress – The Associated Press

PARIS (AP) The presidents of Ukraine and Russia agreed Monday to revive the peace process on the bloody separatist conflict in eastern Ukraine and exchange all their prisoners, but they failed to resolve crucial issues such as a timeline on local elections and control of the borders in the rebel-held region.

At the first meeting between new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two leaders failed to find a compromise to bring an end to the 5-year-old war that has killed 14,000 people, emboldened the Kremlin and reshaped European geopolitics.

But they did agree to try again in four months to find new solutions, said French President Emmanuel Macron, who mediated the talks along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and called them fruitful in that it brought all four leaders together.

There are disagreements, especially on timeline and next steps. We had a very long discussion on this, Macron said at a news conference after the talks in the Elysee palace.

The talks focused on reviving a largely stalled 2015 peace agreement intended to end fighting between Ukrainian troops and Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Putin said they agreed that there was no alternative to the 2015 accord reached in the Belarusian capital of Minsk. He emphasized that Ukraine should quickly extend a law giving wide autonomy to the rebel-held regions in line with the deal and also approve a legislation granting amnesty to the rebels.

He added that in addition to the prisoner swap, agreement was reached to continue pulling back troops in other areas in the east, clear mines there and remove fortifications.

Zelenskiy acknowledged many previous cease-fire deals didnt hold but he added that this time we agreed to treat it seriously.

Im convinced that if all parties want it strongly, we will be able to implement it, he said.

Ukraine and Russia conducted several rounds of prisoner exchange, most recently in September. Mondays deal goes further, envisaging a blanket all for all exchange of all known prisoners held by Ukraine and the rebels.

Zelenskiy made a particular emphasis on that.

I would very much like our people to come home in time to spend the New Year holidays with their families, Zelenskiy said after the talks.

But there was little clarity on the key contentious issues autonomy for the east and control of the border.

Russia wanted the summit to increase pressure on Zelenskiy to fulfill the 2015 Minsk peace accord, which promises wide autonomy to Ukraines rebel-held regions.

The Minsk deal puts forth that Ukraine can regain control over the border with Russia in the separatist-held regions only after they are granted a broad self-rule and hold local elections.

In particular, it stipulates that the Ukrainian law should allow municipal authorities in the east to appoint judges and prosecutors in the region and form local police. It notes that the law should also provide for an amnesty for those who took part in the fighting. Those provisions were anathema to many in Ukraine.

The 2015 deal was a diplomatic coup for Russia, ensuring that the rebel regions get a broad authority and resources to survive on their own without cross-border support.

Zelenskiy wants to tweak the timeline laid out in the accord, which calls for Ukraine to be able to regain control of its border with Russia only after local elections are held in the separatist regions and the regions receive autonomous status. He says Ukraine must get control of its border first before local elections are held, but the Kremlin insists thats not an option.

The summit was the biggest test yet for Zelenskiy, a comic actor and political novice who won the presidency this year in a landslide partly on promises to end the war.

Macron praised Zelenskiys courage and determination, adding that he made gestures that allowed peace talks to be relaunched.

Today an important step was made. Thats the first time in three years such a summit is being held,Macron said. Thats the first time President Zelenskiy and President Putin are meeting... and we have tangible results.

A major breakthrough at the Paris talks had been seen as unlikely, and Ukrainian protesters in Kyiv had put pressure on their new leader not to surrender too much to Putin, who has been in office nearly 20 years.

But the fact that Putin and Zelenskiy met at all was a significant step after years of war. Putin and Zelenskiy faced each other across the table, flanked by Macron and Merkel. Putin and Zelenskiy also held a separate one-on-one meeting.

While opinion surveys have shown an overwhelming support for Zelenskiys peace efforts, a minority opposing them is highly-mobilized and energetic. Thousands rallied on Kyivs man square Sunday to warn him against making any concessions, and some set up a tent camp around his headquarters. Cries of shame! and whistles of derision greeted announcements from the leaders news conference in Paris.

We didnt see any real steps Putin did not promise control of the border or the withdrawal of his troops, 38-year-old demonstrator Nina Onufrik said.

Despite the 2015 peace agreement, Ukrainian soldiers and Russia-backed separatists have continued to exchange fire.

Germany and France helped to broker the Minsk accord, in hopes of ending a conflict on Europes eastern edge that has complicated relations with Russia, a powerful trading partner and diplomatic player.

But with progress stalled, the leaders havent met since 2016. Ukraine and Russia struck a prisoner exchange deal in September and agreed on a troop and heavy weapons pullback from two locations in eastern Ukraine. Russia has also released three Ukrainian navy ships that were seized a year ago.

While Zelenskiy still enjoys broad public support, he has been embarrassed by the scandal around his discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump that have unleashed an impeachment inquiry in Washington. The U.S. is an important military backer for Ukraine, which is hugely out-gunned by Russia.

While the U.S. was never part of this peace process, U.S. backing has strengthened Ukraines overall negotiating position with Russia in the past. Now that support is increasingly in doubt, after the Trump administration froze military aid earlier this year and is increasingly focused on Trumps re-election bid. With U.S. influence waning around the world, many in Kyiv see one clear winner: Russia.

Russia denies providing troops and weapons to help the separatists but has maintained political support and sent aid. It argues that people in eastern Ukraine feel stronger cultural and linguistic ties with Russia than with Western-leaning Kyiv.

The Kremlin hopes that an end to the conflict could also lead to the eventual lifting of EU sanctions against Russia linked to the fighting, which European businesses have pushed for. The EU and U.S. imposed separate sanctions on Russia over its annexation of Ukraines Crimean Peninsula in 2014.

The EU is expected to extend sanctions this week by another six months. Arriving for meetings in Brussels on Monday, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said: At the moment I see no grounds to change anything in the European Unions sanctions policy toward Russia in this matter. It would be good if we could get there at some point.

Macron and Merkel said they agreed to intensify the monitoring by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is now only active for 12 hours a day and conduct it 24 hours a day.

___

Karmanau reported from Kyiv. Sylvie Corbet and Angela Charlton in Paris, Inna Varenytsia in eastern Ukraine, Daria Litvinova in Moscow and Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed.

Read the original:
Russia, Ukraine to revive peace process amid little progress - The Associated Press

FBI Director Wray shoots down Ukraine interference claim pushed by Trump and GOP – USA TODAY

10/30/2019, Washington DC. FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies before the House Homeland Security Committee on global terrorism and threats to the homeland on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on Oct. 30, 2019. (Photo: Eric P Kruszewski, for USA TODAY)

WASHINGTON FBI Director Christopher Wray said there was no indicationthat Ukraine meddled in the 2016 U.S. election, contradicting claims made by President Donald Trump and several Republican lawmakers in recent weeks.

"We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election," he said in an ABC News interview aired on Monday.

When asked if he's concerned about the impact of politicians pushing the discreditedclaim that Ukraine interfered, Wray demurred, saying, "There's all kinds of people saying all kinds of things out there."

"I think it's important for the American people to be thoughtful consumers of information and to think about the sources of it and to think about the support and predication for what they hear," he added.

His comments come a day after a testy exchange between NBC News'"Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who said he believed there was "considerable evidence" that "Ukraine blatantly interfered in our election" alongside Russia.

Cruz pointed to an op-ed by a former Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S. as evidence of meddling, but Todd noted that it was entirely different from Russia's interference, which Special Counsel Robert Mueller called a "sweeping and systematic" effort to tip the election in Trump's favor.

More: How to stay updated on USA TODAY's impeachment coverage

Several Ukrainian officials voicedconcern in 2016 about then-candidate Trump's friendly statements toward Russia and its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

Cruz is one of several lawmakers including Sen. John Kennedy, R-La.,who have raised the idea that both Ukraine and Russia meddled in 2016 as they try to mount a defense for Trump in the ongoing impeachment inquiry. House Democrats are drawing up articles of impeachment over allegations that Trump sought to pressure Ukraine to open two investigations that politically benefited him.

The president's allies argue that Ukraine's potential interference gave himample reason to ask for the investigations. But while lawmakershave said there's no dispute that Russia interfered, Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giulianihave promoted a theory that Ukraine - not Russia - was behind the 2016 meddling.

During his July25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump made reference to a conspiracy theory that Ukraine - not Russia - stole emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign.

When asked about the president raising the conspiracy theory, Wray again repeated the FBI has "no information to indicate that Ukraine tried to interfere" in the election.

Some Republicans have criticized their colleagues for equating Russia's sophisticated cyberattack and social media campaign with Ukrainian disapproval of Trump's remarks.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.,told Politicothat "its important to distinguish op-eds" from "the systemic effort to undermine our election systems."

"Theres no way to compare any other efforts to what Russia did in 2016," Rubio said. "Theres nothing that compares, not even in the same universe.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah,a vocal critic of Trump, told reporters last week, "It's one thing to pull for the candidate. It's another thing to interfere as Russia did.

Contributed: William Cummings

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/09/fbi-director-wray-says-no-indication-ukraine-interference-2016-election/4380050002/

Read more:
FBI Director Wray shoots down Ukraine interference claim pushed by Trump and GOP - USA TODAY

Ukraine and Russia agree to ceasefire and to exchange prisoners – The Irish Times

The leaders of Russia and Ukraine agreed early on Tuesday to exchange all remaining prisoners from the conflict in east Ukraine and to implement a full and comprehensive ceasefire by the end of 2019.

A number of difficult questions about the regions status have been left for future talks.

Russias Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in their first face-to-face meeting, took part in nine hours of talks in Paris, brokered by French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Angela Merkel.

The conflict in eastern Ukraine that broke out in 2014 has killed more than 13,000 people, left a large swathe of Ukraine de facto controlled by Moscow-backed separatists and aggravated the deepest east-west rift since the Cold War.

The body language between Mr Putin and Mr Zelenskiy, a comedian-turned-politician elected earlier this year on a promise to resolve the conflict, was chilly.

There was no public handshake, and they avoided eye contact.But the talks did deliver specific commitments.

A final communique set out the prisoner exchange and a renewed commitment to implement an existing ceasefire agreement in eastern Ukraines Donbass region that has never fully taken hold as well as enhanced powers for international ceasefire monitors.

The sides also said they had agreed, over the next four months, to work towards local elections in Donbass, a major stumbling block up to now.

There were no details though on how the votes would be conducted, and Mr Macron acknowledged there were still disagreements on the subject.

We have made progress on disengagement, prisoner exchanges, ceasefire and a political evolution, Mr Macron said at a news conference at which Mr Zelenskiy and Mr Putin sat separated by Ms Merkel and Mr Macron. We have asked our ministers in the coming four months to work on this.

In addition, Mr Zelenskiy said he and Mr Putin had worked out the outline of an agreement that would allow the transit of Russian natural gas to continue across Ukrainian soil. He gave no details. A member of the Russian delegation said officials had been instructed to hammer out details.

However, there was no definitive agreement on the political issues that stand in the way of resolving the conflict. These include the status of Donbass within Ukraine and who should de facto control the border between Donbass and Russia.

Another round of talks in the so-called Normandy format, brokered by France and Germany, will be held within four months.

Ukraines industrial Donbass region spun out of Kievs control in 2014, soon after street protests ousted a pro-Moscow leader in the Ukrainian capital and Russia sent in armed men to seize Ukraines Black Sea Crimea region.

A 2015 ceasefire deal was signed in Minsk, the capital of Belarus. But fighting still flares up in Donbass four years on, and a peace deal has been elusive. Mondays summit was the first time the four leaders have met under the Normandy format since 2016.

Many Ukrainians are concerned about compromising with Russia. They see Mr Putin as an aggressor seeking to restore the Kremlins influence on the former Soviet republic and ruin Ukraines aspiration for closer European ties.

Protesters who have warned Mr Zelenskiy about making concessions to Mr Putin in Paris were camped outside the presidential administration in Kiev, watching the summit news conference on a big screen.

Mr Zelenskiy, who sparred verbally with Russian journalists at the news conference, said he had given no ground on Ukraines sovereignty or territorial integrity. He said he and Putin had disagreed on several issues.

Asked who triumphed in their exchanges, Mr Zelenskiy said: I dont know who (beat) who. I think it would be appropriate to be diplomatic as weve just started talking. Lets say for now its a draw.

Mr Putin, for his part, is unwilling to be seen to bend to outside pressure over eastern Ukraine, and he does not want to be seen to be leaving the Russian-speaking population of Donbass at the mercy of the Kiev government.

He expressed only cautious hope for the peace talks. All this gives us the grounds to suppose that the process is developing in the right direction, he said. - Reuters

See the rest here:
Ukraine and Russia agree to ceasefire and to exchange prisoners - The Irish Times

Ted Cruz says Ukraine ‘blatantly interfered’ in 2016 election during testy exchange with Chuck Todd – USA TODAY

U.S. and Ukraine relations go further back than the now infamous phone call between Trump and Zelensky. We explain their relationship. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

Sen. Ted Cruz joined the list of Republican lawmakers who have argued President Donald Trump had legitimate reasons to ask Ukraine to investigate the 2016 election because they believe thatcountry meddled in the 2016 election.

Cruz said on NBC News' "Meet the Press"there was "considerable evidence" that "Ukraine blatantly interfered in our election," though he could only point to one op-ed from a former Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S.as proof of that interference.

Cruz said the news media has been "misleading" byacting as if only one country could have interferedwhen it could have been both Ukraine and Russia.

"Of course Russia interfered in our election. Nobody looking at the evidence disputes that," Cruz said. "But here's the game the media is playing. Because Russia interfered, the media pretends nobody else did."

More: How to stay updated on USA TODAY's impeachment coverage

During the 2016 election, many Ukrainians and several officials expressed concern about then-candidate Trump's positive words forRussian President Vladimir and an interview in which he indicated he would consider recognizing Putin's military annexation of Crimea.

Host Chuck Todd told Cruz an op-ed and expressions of policy concerns were of an entirely different magnitude from Russia's interference, which former special counsel Robert Mueller's report called a "sweeping and systematic" effort in Trump's favor that included sophisticated cyberattacksand a massive social media campaign.

"Youre trying to make them both seem equal. I don't understand that," Todd said.

Despite Cruz's assertion that no one was disputing Putin's guilt, Trump has expressed doubt about Russian election meddling on several occasions. And Trumphas continued topromotethe same discredited theory he referenced in his July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whichsays Ukraine, and not Russia, stole emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign.

Last week, Todd had a heated exchange over the same issue with Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who also insisted "both Russia and Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election."

Todd had asked Kennedy if he was concerned he had been duped as part of a Russian disinformation campaign becauseformer National Security Council officialFiona Hill had warned lawmakersat an open hearing in the impeachment inquiry last month that the idea that Ukraine, and not Russia, was behind 2016 election interference was a "fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves."

'Parroting Russian propaganda': Hillary Clinton slams Sen. Kennedy for Ukraine claim

'I was wrong': Sen. Kennedy takes back claim that Ukraine may have been behind 2016 election email hack

Kennedy, who had retracted a previous claim that Ukraine and not Russia had been behind the DNC hack, said Hill was "entitled to her opinion," but he stood by his assertion that Ukraine intervened in other ways.

During a Senate hearing on U.S. policy toward Russia, Democratic lawmakers sought to put the Trump administration on the defensive by questioning top State Department officials about official U.S. policy toward Ukraine. (Dec. 3) AP

He listed several publications that he said printed articles backing up his claim, including Politico and CBS News. He included The Financial Times in his list, but that paper's U.S. national editor, Edward Luce, told MSNBC he could find no Financial Times article that fit Kennedy's description.

"The idea that Ukraine intervened in the U.S. election specifically is not something Sen. Kennedy can point to The Financial Times as supporting," Luce said.

The Democratically-controlled House is preparing articles of impeachment against Trump for allegations he used military aid as leverage to get Ukraine to open a probe into the 2016 election, as well as an investigation intoan energy company with ties to former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter.

Democrats say both investigations were intended to help Trump politically, but Cruz, Kennedy and other Republicans argue Trump had legitimate concerns on both counts.

Trump took notice of the defense mounted by Cruz, thanking him in a tweet, and retweeting several other posts, headlines and clips referencing his "Meet the Press" performance.

On "Meet the Press," Todd asked Cruz about a New York Times report that said U.S. intelligence officials had briefed senators that Russia had engaged in a"yearslong campaign to essentially frame Ukraine as responsible for Moscows own hacking of the 2016 election."

"I have been in multiple briefings, year after year after year, about foreign interference in our election. Russia has tried to interfere in our elections. China's tried to interfere in our elections. North Korea's tried to interfere in our elections. Ukraine has tried to interfere in our elections. This is not new. 2016's not the first year they did it. And they're going to keep trying," Cruz said.

Sen.Roger Wicker, R-Miss., is another lawmaker who has said Russiansand"alsoUkrainians tried to interfere."

But other Republican senators have rejected their colleagues' efforts to equate Russian and Ukrainian election interference.

"Theres a big difference between pulling for someone and hoping someone wins in the American election and interfering the way that Russia did," Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, told the Times.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., told Politico "its important to distinguish op-eds" from "the systemic effort to undermine our election systems."

"Theres no way to compare any other efforts to what Russia did in 2016," Rubio said. "Theres nothing that compares, not even in the same universe.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/08/ted-cruz-says-ukraine-interfered-2016-election-cites-one-op-ed/4377080002/

Read the original post:
Ted Cruz says Ukraine 'blatantly interfered' in 2016 election during testy exchange with Chuck Todd - USA TODAY