Opinion Opinions | I helped classify calls for two presidents. The White House abuse of the system is alarming.
Nancy Pelosi calls for law to be able to indict presidents
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called on Friday for legislation to ensure sitting US presidents can be indicted for crimes. "I do think that we will have to pass some laws that will have clarity for future presidents. (A) President should be indicted if he's committed a wrongdoing — any president," Pelosi told NPR's "All Things Considered" host Ari Shapiro and NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis on Friday. "There is nothing any place that says the President should not be indicted," she said. "That's something cooked up by the President's lawyers. That's what that is.
Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.
The whistleblower at the heart of the Ukraine controversyWhite House officials ordered information about President Trump’s phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky to be removed from the classified server typically used to store such information and placed on a hyper-secure “code word” server. Such special protections are typically reserved for material of the gravest sensitivity: detailed information about covert operations, for example, where exposure can get people killed.
Opinions | Why Trump gets away with everything
Republicans rally around him no matter what he does or what dangers our republic might face. It’s just what they do now. And so far, this extreme partisanship has worked for Trump and his party. Attorney General William P. Barr’s false account of what special counsel Robert S. Mueller III concluded in his probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election poisoned the public debate because it sat there for weeks before the report itself was released. The lie that Mueller had cleared Trump took hold just enough that it turned the discussion of “partisanship” on its head.
The move was highly suspicious, the whistleblower said several White House officials told him, because “the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.” On Friday, the White Housethat National Security Council lawyers directed that the call records be placed on that server.
I served under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and worked for four advisers on the National Security Council’s staff. I have staffed presidential meetings and phone calls with foreign leaders and spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours in the White House Situation Room. It is difficult to overstate just how abnormal and suspicious treating the call in that manner would be. It strongly suggests White House staff knew of serious wrongdoing by the president and attempted to bury it — a profound abuse of classified systems for political, and possibly criminal, purposes.
Ukrainian President Thought Only Trump's Side of Conversation Would Be Released, Says Such Calls 'Should Not Be Published'
"I just thought that they would publish their part," Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky said.The Trump administration released the transcript on Wednesday, one day after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump, accusing the president of seeking assistance from a foreign leader to investigate a political rival. The call summary revealed that Trump had urged Zelensky to investigate the son of his 2020 rival former Vice President Joe Biden. The U.S. president also offered his own administration's Attorney General to assist in the probe.
(The records of Trump’s conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi officials also wereto an unusually small group of officials, it now appears, though it’s unclear whether the memos were placed on the special server.)
In my almost six years on the NSC staff, I never personally saw or heard of the records of a presidential call being moved to the “code word” system. Such a move would be justified only if a president and foreign leader were discussing material so sensitive that intelligence officials with top-secret clearance had to be “read into” to access to it — an unlikely prospect, even with our closest allies. Presidents tend to discuss general foreign policy issues, not the fine details of covert actions.
Moving the memo to the code word server suggests Trump officials really did know the call was as bad as the president’s critics say it is. The argument some Trump officials are— that they protected Trump’s conversations to avoid leaks — is scarcely less damning, if the point was to avoid leaks of conversations in which the president leveraged U.S. power for his own political advantage (or endorsed foreign interference in U.S. elections).
The whistleblower complaint: What they all knew and when they knew it
Many officials knew what was going on and did nothing about it.The whistleblower complaint released Thursday morning is detailed, professional and compelling. It tells the story of an ongoing scheme primarily by President Trump and his private attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani to invite and even pressure a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 election.
If the code word server was used to prevent leaks as a general matter — the most charitable interpretation — does that mean all of the president’s phone calls with foreign leaders are stored there? That, in itself, would represent a remarkable departure from the intended use of the classification system.
People outside national security circles might well wonder whether a president’s calls to foreign leaders are, by their nature, sensitive enough to be placed on the special server. They are not. To be sure, presidential calls are extraordinarily well-protected, befitting their importance. Those calls are the coin of the foreign policy realm. They are carefully prepared, well-staffed by professionals and (ordinarily) used only to advance America’s national interests. They focus on peace deals, trade agreements and matters of war and peace.
The memorandums of these conversations — like the one released to Congress last week — are generated by national security professionals in the Situation Room, including career employees of the intelligence agencies, the State Department and the military. These people produce rough transcripts, which are then reviewed for accuracy by relevant experts on the NSC staff who were listening to the call and finally by people in what is known as “the Suite” — the small West Wing offices that house the NSC chief of staff, the deputy national security adviser and the national security adviser.
A computer server haunted Clinton in 2016. Now it may be Trump's turn
As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump repeatedly attacked his Democratic adversary Hillary Clinton in 2016 over her use of a private computer server for official emails when she was U.S. secretary of state. © ASSOCIATED PRESS President Donald Trump boards Air Force One at John F. Kennedy Airport after spending the week attending the United Nations General Assembly, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019, in New York. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) Now the Republican president has his own server problem as he seeks re-election to the White House in 2020. A whistleblower's complaint that has led the U.S.
Once such memos are produced, very few members of the NSC staff are privy to them — usually only those working directly on issues discussed on the call. Members of the Cabinet, especially the secretary of state, may receive copies. The memos can be classified at various levels, with the classification level varying paragraph by paragraph.
Most of these memos are classified as “secret,” by default. To reach “top secret” classification, they’d have to involve information the unauthorized disclosure of which would cause the United States “exceptionally grave” national security harm. “Code word” status is reserved for the absolutely most sensitive subset of information within the top-secret category. These classifications are made purely to protect national security, never for political reasons.
Material up to “top secret” is stored on a highly secure classified computer system used by NSC staff — not the code word server. I have classified many such documents myself. Based on my experience, the standard system is where the Ukraine memo should have ended up.
Nothing in Trump’s call with Zelensky rises even to the level of “top secret.” The two leaders exchanged compliments, and Trump stressed how important an ally the United States is to Ukraine. He dismissed the efforts of the European Union to help the country, lamented the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor and criticized a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.
Mary Anne Marsh: Impeachment inquiry so far – Trump's days are numbered and never underestimate Pelosi
Pelosi has been clear that she would only support impeachment if it was necessary, bipartisan and had widespread support. Now, she has all three.On the day Donald Trump stood before the United Nations advocating that the world embrace nationalism, Nancy Pelosi decided to protect our nation from Donald Trump.
What stands out in the call, of course, is what caught the attention of the whistleblower and his sources — namely the request that Zelensky work with Attorney General William P. Barr and Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, to find negative information about former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. That is politically embarrassing, and potentially illegal and impeachable, but has nothing to do with state secrets.
If the president had only been asking Zelensky to root out corruption, as a general matter, as he has claimed, that would be standard fare for a presidential phone call, meriting a “secret” designation.
The apparent abuse of the classification system offers reason enough for congressional review of the Ukraine conversation and the events surrounding it. The questions at hand are straightforward: What national security reason was offered for moving the record of the July 25 conversation (and possibly others) to the code word system? Which NSC lawyers made that decision? Was the national security adviser involved?
One reason to pin down the decision-makers is to reestablish the public’s faith in the civil servants who work on intelligence matters. The NSC staff is made up mostly of patriotic and nonpolitical public servants who labor 18-hour days without glory or any interest in public attention. They walk through the gates of the White House every morning with one goal in mind: the protection of American national security. They deserve answers about what happened in this case. Most importantly, the American people deserve to have confidence in the integrity of a national security process that is designed to serve them.
To impeach, or not to impeach: Either way, trust our imperfect Constitution .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally announced an impeachment inquiry against President Trump over a possible quid pro quo and abuse of power in foreign relations with Ukraine. Under our Constitution, impeachment is a formal accusation made by the House of Representatives. Any such accusation, once made by a majority of the House, goes to the Senate. That body then conducts a trial of these charges, voting on whether to convict the president of them. If two-thirds or more vote to convict, the president is removed from office.Pelosi’s launch commences only the fourth serious attempt to impeach a president.
Peter Strozk testimony at House committee hearing resumes as FBI agent faces more questions
FBI official Peter Strzok gives testimony to a hearing of both the House Judiciary and House Oversight committees. Strzok is publicly defending his actions during ...
WHY WEED SHOULD BE LEGAL ft Barack Obama
DOWNLOAD THE SONG HERE http://itunes.apple.com/album/id1126523275?ls=1&app=itunes For more Information go to Drug Policy Alliance ...
Thursday, 17 october 2019
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stands as one of two women at the table during Wednesday's cabinet meeting, joined only by Rep. Liz Cheney.President Donald Trump tweeted out a photo of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a meeting about Syria on Wednesday, accusing her of having an "unhinged […]
Wednesday, 16 october 2019
Tulsi Gabbard is never afraid to break from the pack. And her early answers at the CNN Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday night was no exception — she took a divergent approach, at least rhetorically, when discussing impeachment. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function […]
Wednesday, 16 october 2019
She’s presented herself as the truth-teller, the straight-talker, the one who can break down complex economic ideas and bring nonprogressives along. Now, just as she’s started to get the attention from competitors and the press that comes from leading public polls, she’s insisting on […]
Wednesday, 16 october 2019
Twelve candidates crowded onto the stage, but impeachment remains the biggest story in politics.Give the fourth Democratic presidential debate its due: Yes, it was interminably long, but it was also terminally […]
Wednesday, 16 october 2019
The moment that took all of the air out of Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign was when, in a debate with President Barack Obama, he dug into a peripheral issue that he thought was safe: foreign policy. Romney threw all of his weight at Obama over the relatively limited attack on a U.S. […]
Wednesday, 16 october 2019
In the Democratic presidential debate Tuesday night, once again Medicare-for-All was a major focus of discussion. Once again, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren defended the plan against all comers — most especially Pete Buttigieg, who had a number of slick arguments about how universal […]
Friday, 18 october 2019
If our promises are meaningless, how will our allies ever trust us? If we can’t have faith in our nation’s principles, why would the men and women of this nation join the military? And if they don’t join, who will protect us? If we are not the champions of the good and the right, then who […]
Thursday, 17 october 2019
There are ways to oppose single-payer without demonizing the very concept of tax-financed social programs. Biden’s picked one that does.Joe Biden has a dire warning for voters who’ve been seduced by single-payer advocates’ sweet nothings: In Bernie Sanders’s socialist dystopia, the […]