Tommy Battle extends debate invitation to Kay Ivey, awaits response

Kay Ivey_Tommy Battle

Huntsville Mayor and Republican gubernatorial candidate Tommy Battle on Tuesday extended an invitation to Governor Kay Ivey to appear with him at several political events, candidate forums, and debates across the state. Battle sent his request via e-mail to Ivey’s team on Tuesday, and although they acknowledged they received the invitation, as of Wednesday Ivey’s team had yet to deliver a response. Battle’s formal invitation to Ivey is a nod to a move Ivey herself made in 1982. When running as a Democrat for State Auditor, she sent her opponent Jan Cook a telegram invitation to appear across the state with her to discuss their respective qualifications. Cook said her scheduled as already full and denied Ivey’s request. Ivey then proceeded to hold a a news conferences on the capitol steps in Montgomery, with an empty chair labeled with her Cook’s name, sitting beside her; making blatant note of her absence. Earlier this month Ivey made a comment to the Associated Press that she would be happy to take part in debates. Battle agreed and announced that he would take Ivey up on that offer, “all residents of Alabama deserve to hear from each candidate, personally, about their qualifications and their vision for our great state, especially since neither of us have yet to be elected Governor.” His e-mail to Ivey is a formal invitation to initiate that process. Battle has committed to attend the following events, and hopes that Ivey will also attend: April 12 – 7 a.m.: A debate hosted by the Birmingham Business Journal April 12 – 7 p.m.: A debate hosted by NBC 13 in Birmingham April 14 – 8 a.m.: A candidate forum hosted by the Mid Alabama Republican Club in Birmingham May  9 – 2 p.m.: A candidate forum hosted by the Association of Builders and Contractors in Huntsville May 10 – 11:30 a.m.: A candidate forum hosted by the Moody Area Chamber of Commerce Whether or not Battle be attending the events an empty chair by his side… that remains to be seen. The full text of the letter is as follows: I know you believe the people of the state of Alabama are important to both of us. Our campaign is constantly talking about the importance of economic development, repairing our roads and bridges and how to boost education as a whole across all of Alabama. We both agree Alabamians deserve to hear from us, personally, about our vision to lead our state into the 21st century, since neither of us have yet been elected as governor. I want to extend an invitation to you to appear with me at debates, candidate forums and political events throughout the state to discuss our individual records and qualifications to be elected governor. I look forward to your response. I wish you and your campaign staff safe travels as the Republican primary approaches.

Senators press Trump officials on safeguarding 2018 ballots

Kristjen Nielsen, Jeh Johnson

With the 2018 elections already underway, senators chided the current and former secretaries of Homeland Security on Wednesday for not more strongly warning the American public about past Russian intrusions in state election systems and for a lack of urgency to protect balloting this year. Kirstjen Nielsen, President Donald Trump’s secretary of Homeland Security, testified alongside Jeh Johnson, secretary under former President Barack Obama, as the Senate intelligence committee launched an effort to protect the country’s election security after Russian agents targeted election systems in 21 states ahead of the 2016 general election. There’s no evidence that any hack in the November 2016 election affected election results, but the attempts rattled state election officials and prompted the federal government and states to examine the way votes are counted. Senators on the panel have criticized both administrations for not moving quickly enough to stem the Russian threat, and continued to do so at the hearing. Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican, critiqued Nielsen’s opening statement, which described a series of efforts the department had already announced. “I hear no sense of urgency to really get on top of this issue,” Collins said, noting that 2018 elections are already underway. Collins noted that many state election officials have remained without security clearances, making it harder for the department to share information with them. To speed up communications and intelligence sharing, the department has been working to grant security clearances to up to three election officials in each state. Nielsen said Wednesday that just 20 of those officials have been granted full clearances. “We are doing our best to speed up the process,” Nielsen said, adding that the department has a policy in place to provide information on immediate threats to state and local election officials even if clearances have yet to be granted. Communication and intelligence sharing by the federal government has been a key concern among state and local election officials. Those officials complained that it took the federal government nearly a year to inform them whether their states had been targeted by Russian hackers. Collins, who has introduced legislation with other members of the committee to improve election cybersecurity, also pressed Johnson, asking if he should have issued stronger warnings in 2016 as it became clear that Russians were trying to intrude into the systems. Johnson defended the way he alerted state and local election officials, noting that in the late summer and fall of 2016 he was repeatedly issuing public warnings for those officials to get cybersecurity assistance from the department. “We were beating the drum pretty hard,” Johnson said. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, also lambasted the Obama administration’s response, saying it was not sufficient to warn the public “in any way, shape or form.” Before leaving office, the Obama administration designated the nation’s election systems as “critical infrastructure,” on par with the electrical grid and water supply. That decision prompted alarm among state election officials, who expressed concern the federal government was trying to take over elections that have long been the jurisdiction of state and local governments. Johnson said he had considered the move earlier, but had backed off because of resistance to states. Johnson also testified that during the 2016 election he contacted The Associated Press because he was worried about the possibility the news cooperative’s election results could be hacked. He said he called AP’s CEO Gary Pruitt about his concerns and came away satisfied that the company was taking appropriate precautions as it counted votes and analyzed results. The hearing follows a Tuesday news conference in which committee members from both parties said government efforts to protect state and local elections from Russian cyberattacks haven’t gone far enough. Top U.S. intelligence officials have said they’ve seen indications Russian agents are preparing a new round of election interference this year. Senators warned that it could be worse the next time around. “What it looks like is a test,” said Maine Sen. Angus King of the 2016 hacking attempts. The committee is recommending that states make sure voting machines have paper audit trails and aren’t capable of being connected to the internet. Senators also are pushing for better communication among the various U.S. intelligence agencies and federal, state and local governments. Senators are also urging state and local election officials to take advantage Homeland Security Department resources, such as comprehensive risk assessments and remote cyberscanning of their networks to spot vulnerabilities. As of last month, just 14 states had requested risk assessments and 30 had asked for remote cyberscans of their networks, according to Homeland Security officials. But even that was straining resources, since many of those risk assessments have not been completed. The committee’s recommendations preview an election security report expected to be released in full in the coming weeks. It is the first of four reports planned as part of the panel’s wide-ranging investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. The recommendations come as Congress is eyeing $380 million in state grants for election security in a wide-ranging spending bill expected to be unveiled as soon as Wednesday. The bill also contains $307 million for the FBI to go after Russian cyberattacks. The top Democrat on the intelligence panel, Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, has said he thinks the nation’s election security needs to be more robust, especially since Trump has not addressed the matter as an urgent problem. “It’s pretty amazing to me we’ve had the director of the FBI, the director of national intelligence and the head of the NSA say in public testimony within the last month that they’ve received no direction from the White House to make election security a priority,” Warner said. Nielsen defended Trump at the hearing, saying, “the line he is drawing is that no votes were changed. That doesn’t mean there’s not a threat.” She added: “We think the threat remains high.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.

Riggs Walker qualifies to run for Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Riggs Walker has formally qualified as a candidate for Place 1 on the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in the June primary elections. Walker hopes to replace Judge Samuel Welch who has maintained the position for the past 11 years and will not be seeking re-election this year. Riggs has spent the last 19 years living and working in the Birmingham, Ala. area prosecuting thousands of criminal cases including murders, burglaries, assaults and theft cases. He graduated from Jones School of Law, at Faulkner University in 1998 and from there went to work for Circuit Judge William A. Shashy in the 15th Judicial Circuit. He later moved to Birmingham to work as a deputy district attorney in the Jefferson County District Attorney’s office. According to a press release announcing his candidacy, Walker is a committed conservative who believes in personal responsibility, individual liberty and a constitutionally limited government. He thinks that these values, coupled with strong communities built by strong families are critical to meeting the criminal justice challenges facing our state today. Walker believes these principles will allow him to deliver just verdicts fairly while maintaining the rule of law. “There are profound challenges in our society today. However, justice rightfully administered should provide hope and a guiding light for future generations.” said Walker. Walker is an active member in several Republican organizations, and serves as a committee member on the Jefferson County Republican Executive Committee. He is engaged in his community, volunteering for Homewood city schools and attending Covenant Presbyterian Church with his wife Cheryl, and their two daughters.

Steve Marshall qualifies for Alabama Attorney General race

Steve Marshall

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall officially qualified to run for the office Attorney General on Friday. Marshall was appointed in February 2017 by then governor Robert Bentley to replace Luther Strange as Attorney General. “I want Alabama to know that the office of Attorney General will not shy away from any challenges, and will be on the forefront of the major issues that continue to challenge our state,” stated Marshall. According to Marshall’s Facebook, he is looking forward to “four full years standing up for Alabama’s values, solving the opioid crisis, defending faith, fighting federal overreach, and supporting the rights of everyone (including the unborn).” He has also expressed interest in fighting violent crime and human trafficking. Marshal served as district attorney in Marshall County Ala. for 16 years. He built a strong reputation of fighting crime and was instrumental in the passage of state legislation to track the sale of ingredients used to produce crystal meth. Marshall also took a lead role supporting the passage of the Brody Act which has made it possible to prosecute criminals for two crimes if they kill or injure an unborn baby during an attack on the mother. Marshall also serves as co-chair of Governor Kay Ivey’s Opioid Overdose and Addiction Council. Steve and his wife, Bridgette, have a daughter named Faith and currently reside in Albertville, Ala.

Mike Ball proposes legislation to scrap partisan primaries

vote-election-day

One Alabama lawmaker wants to scrap partisan primaries in favor of open elections that would send the two top vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, on to the general election. Madison-Republican State Rep. Mike Ball introduced HB214 on Tuesday, which would replace the state’s current primary system, which advances the top vote-getting Republican and top vote-getting Democrat, when both parties offer a candidate, to the general election. Under Ball’s bill, all Alabamians would receive the same ballot and be able to vote for any candidate, regardless of party affiliation. The two highest vote-getters, regardless of party, would advance to the general election, thus eliminating the need for run-off elections. Consequently, it would be possible for two candidates belonging to the same political party to win in the proposed system and face off in the general election. Ball’s idea isn’t unheard of. Called a “top two,” “nonpartisan blanket” or “jungle” primary system, states like Washington, California and Louisiana all use similar electoral systems. The plan is also used in Texas and some other states in special elections but not primaries. HB214 would be used in all elections, except that of the Presidential election. According to the text of the bill: This bill would create a primary election system for all offices other than the office of President where all qualified candidates, including party candidates and independent candidates, would have their names on the primary election ballot and all qualified electors would vote the same ballot. This bill would provide that the two candidates that receive the highest number of votes in a primary election, regardless of their party affiliation or lack thereof, would be placed on the ballot in the general election. If passed, Ball’s bill would go into effect after the state elections in 2019.

Angry Dems turn against leaders after House election losses

Nancy Pelosi

Democratic Party divisions were on glaring display Wednesday as a special election loss in a wildly expensive Georgia House race left bitter lawmakers turning their anger on their own leaders. “We as Democrats have to come to terms with the fact that we lost again,” said Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass. “Personally I think it’s time for a new generation of leadership in the party.” The loss in Georgia followed similar disappointments in special House elections in Kansas and Montana, as well as in South Carolina Tuesday night. The Carolina outcome was closer than in Georgia but drew little national attention. In the well-to-do Atlanta suburbs, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California was the focus of torrents of negative advertising in a House race that cost more than $50 million, the most expensive in history. Republican Karen Handel beat Democrat Jon Ossoff by about 5 percentage points. Although the race was widely viewed as a referendum on President Donald Trump, he was rarely discussed by either candidate, and House Democrats were rattled that the attack ads casting the 77-year-old Pelosi as a San Francisco liberal proved so potent. Some expressed fears about the same tactic being used elsewhere as they aim to take back control of the House in next year’s midterms. Democrats need to pick up 24 House seats to retake the majority. “It makes it a heck of a lot harder,” said Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, who unsuccessfully challenged Pelosi in a leadership election last fall. “One of the disappointing things from the last couple days is that that approach has a little bit of punch to it, it still moves voters.” Trump’s election as president had papered over the intraparty disputes and generational divides among House Democrats, as lawmakers joined in opposing the White House and trying to channel the energy of their party’s liberal base. But now, after a string of disappointments, those divisions have re-emerged, though Pelosi appears unlikely to face an immediate challenge. Lawmakers are also bemoaning a weak Democratic bench of candidates nationally, and demanding a better strategy for success and a new and stronger economic message that differentiates them more clearly from the Republicans. “If we think we’re going to win these elections because President Trump’s at 35 percent, I think in districts like mine and certainly Georgia and South Carolina, it takes more than that,” said Rep. Tim Walz of Minnesota. “And I’m not sure that that’s there yet. I certainly don’t feel it.” “We need to be focused on next November, and what happens with the reality of health care and trade, tax policies and the impact on working men and women,” said Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan. She said she has told Democrats to stop focusing on Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. Put on defense, House Democratic leaders from Pelosi on down tried to spin the outcome in Georgia as positive, arguing that coming in a close second in the solidly Republican district augured well for their chances of taking back the House next year. “Unfortunately a loss for us, but not good news for them,” Pelosi told the rank-and-file in a closed door meeting Wednesday morning, according to Democrats present. “We gave them a run for their money.” Rep. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that invested millions in the race, argued in a memo to lawmakers, “Despite the loss, we have a lot to be proud of” and “we have a unique opportunity to flip control of the House of Representatives in 2018.” And Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 House Democrat, remarked that “we had no business winning those districts” because of their GOP allegiance. Democratic leaders said there are at least 70 other districts that will be easier terrain for them than the one in Georgia after post-census gerrymandering in GOP-led states created so many heavily Republican districts. In a letter to Democrats late Wednesday, Pelosi insisted majority control of the House is up for grabs. “The president’s numbers are in the thirties and our base is energized,” she wrote. “We must now put forth our message.” Many rank-and-file Democrats were not having it. “We put a lot of resources, a lot of fight, and close is only good in horseshoes,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J. “A loss is a loss is a loss and there’s no excuses.” But prescriptions for how the Democrats should move forward varied. Some on the left argued for a sharper progressive message and more pointed attacks on Republicans and Trump, while Democrats from Midwestern and working-class districts emphasized the importance of an economic message that could appeal to working class voters who were drawn to Trump. One thing most everyone could agree on: Coming in second doesn’t cut it now and wouldn’t be an outcome to celebrate next November. Said Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado: “Closing the gap is great, but it’s not good enough, and we have to do better.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Dems try to enlist military vets in fight for House majority

Seth Moulton

Democrats hope to enlist military veterans in another type of fight – for majority control of the House. Looking ahead to next year’s elections, Democrats are trying to recruit at least two dozen military veterans to challenge Republican incumbents, arguing that candidates with a military background on their resumes appeal to independent voters and can help the party break the GOP grip on Washington. “Veterans have had the experience of putting the country first, before personal politics” and party dictates, said Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass, who did four tours of duty in Iraq, left the Marines as a captain and was elected to Congress in 2014. That tends “to attract the kind of independent voters who are looking for a good leader,” Moulton added. Several veterans already have announced their bids in some of the 79 Republican-held House districts that national Democratic Party leaders have identified as top targets. Decades ago, veterans of World War II, Korea and Vietnam were mainstays in Congress. In 1969-71, 398 veterans served in the House and 69 in the Senate, according to the Congressional Research Service. But the change to an all-volunteer force in 1973 sent those numbers plummeting. The extended post-Sept. 11 conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq helped reverse the trend, and now there are 80 veterans in the 435-seat House and 20 veterans in the 100-member Senate. For Democrats, struggling to return to the majority, military veterans provide potential candidates as the party deals with an electoral wipeout during Barack Obama‘s presidency, with the loss of more than 1,030 seats in state legislatures, governor’s mansions and Congress. Moulton and Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., who lost both legs and partial use of an arm in a rocket-propelled grenade attack in Iraq, have spoken to veterans in districts ranging from obvious Democratic targets to places where the path to victory isn’t as obvious. The party needs to pick up 24 seats to reclaim a House majority next November. In the Philadelphia suburbs, former Air Force officer Chrissy Houlahan is challenging two-term Republican Rep. Ryan Costello in one of 23 districts where Democrat Hillary Clinton topped Trump in November. Outside Denver, former Army Ranger and combat veteran Jason Crow, a onetime campaign adviser to Obama, is running for the seat held by another veteran, five-term GOP congressman, Mike Coffman. Both mentioned President Donald Trump as factors in their campaign. “All the bravado and the wailing and gnashing of teeth isn’t the way we conduct ourselves as professional service members,” Houlahan said of Trump’s rhetoric. Said Crow: “I’m deeply troubled by President Trump and what he’s trying to do to country and our democracy.” Dan McCready, a former Marine who attended Harvard Business School alongside Moulton, steered clear of Trump as he announced his bid to win the more Republican-leaning North Carolina district of three-term Republican Rep. Robert Pittenger. But all three candidates, along with Moulton, agreed that veterans offer voters an approach rarely taken on Capitol Hill. “We know what it’s like to serve the country in non-political ways, and we’re standing up to say that the system is broken,” said Crow. He added that any military unit brings together “Republicans, Democrats, unaffiliated, every different background, every part of the country, urban rural, every rung of the economic ladder, and they have to come together very quickly … or the mission fails.” Democratic veterans have run notable campaigns in recent years. Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards, a West Point graduate and former Ranger, emphasized his record to attract enough voters in a conservative state. In Missouri last year, former Army intelligence officer Jason Kander drew national attention for his U.S. Senate campaign ad in which he assembled an AR-15 rifle while blindfolded. He lost by 3 percentage points, but got 230,000 more votes than Clinton, who lost the state by 18 points. Seth Lynn, who runs the nonpartisan Veterans Campaign, an organization that trains veterans running for office, says research suggests veterans running against a non-veteran get “about a 2-point bump” on average. Lynn isn’t yet tracking exact numbers of veteran candidates, but says he’s seen a “noticeable uptick” among Democrats. Some of that, Lynn says, is the usual clamoring by the party out of power: Republican veterans arose in 2010, the first midterm under Obama, and Democrats’ boasted a large slate in 2006, amid opposition to the Iraq war during President George W. Bush‘s second term. Those veteran candidates did not all win, of course. But those midterm years marked the last two times voters tossed out the House majority in favor of the other party. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Twitter leader says he’s ‘sorry’ for social media role in Donald Trump’s election

Donald Trump Twitter

A co-founder of Twitter says he’s sorry if the popular social media platform helped put Donald Trump in the White House, as the president has suggested. In an interview with The New York Times, Evan Williams says Twitter’s role in Trump’s populist rise is “a very bad thing.” The president has credited Twitter with his election to the highest office in the land. When confronted with that notion, Williams said: “If it’s true that he wouldn’t be president if it weren’t for Twitter, then yeah, I’m sorry.” The 45-year-old Silicon Valley entrepreneur also said the internet is obviously broken because it rewards extremes. Williams also says he was wrong thinking that the world would be a better place if there was a platform for everyone to freely speak and exchange ideas. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Americans offer hope, prayer in assessing Donald Trump’s 100 days

They are young and old: a high school student who can’t yet vote, a Vietnam vet who did so proudly. They hail from all corners of the United States and very different walks of life: a “downhome boy” from Kentucky, a third-generation Mexican-American from Texas, a stay-at-home mom in Pennsylvania, an Iranian immigrant in Los Angeles. Some oppose Donald Trump and all that he stands for, while others voted enthusiastically for him. Now, they are critiquing him. One hundred days into Trump’s presidency, The Associated Press returned to some of the everyday people interviewed these past months to ask them to write a letter to the president, evaluating the job he’s done so far and looking ahead to the months to come. One supporter tells the president he “might have fallen a little short” — on Obamacare, in particular — but he signs off “with hope.” A refugee implores Trump to “make America more friendly,” but finds optimism in the president’s reaction to this month’s chemical attack in Syria: “I hope this is a turning point.” A Trump objector calls his biggest accomplishment “waking up the public to fight.” She offers this advice: “Make decisions with your heart. It will give you wisdom.” ___ FROM RURAL AMERICA, A SUPPORTER SEES HOPE IN TRUMP’S PRESIDENCY Alan Halsey, 31, is a self-described “downhome boy” from Campton, Kentucky, who along with his wife owns and operates The Swift Creek Courier, a weekly newspaper, and Halsey’s Country Store, “a small business that is a chunk of 1950 set down in 2017.” He says he works seven days a week to try to provide for his family, but is struggling and tired of government regulation and red tape. He wrote: ” … I supported you quite strongly in the 2016 election, even to the point of hanging one of your signs on the front door of my business. I particularly related to your foreign policy of ‘America First,’ and your promise to bring business back to the United States. So far, I believe you’re heading in the right direction on that front, and I find a glimmer of hope in the future of the American economy. “Overall, I think you might have fallen a little short on your first 100 days, but I don’t put a lot of weight into a time frame that small. Provided you serve two terms, 100 days is about 4 percent of that. I still feel that something needs to be done with the Affordable Care Act, although I’m not certain exactly what. … I know many ACA recipients that visit a doctor more than once a week, while those that purchase their own insurance wait until a visit to a doctor is imperative to their survival. There must be a middle to that scenario. …” He signed his letter: “With Hope.” ___ CANCER SURVIVOR WORRIES OVER TRUMP’S PROPOSED BUDGET CUTS, BUT PRAYS FOR HIM Rebecca Esparza, 45, is a freelance writer in Corpus Christi, Texas, who didn’t vote for Trump. A cancer survivor, Esparza fears proposed budget cuts targeting the nation’s premier medical research institution, the National Institutes of Health, will hurt Americans who battle illness. She wrote: “. I cannot say I’m proud of your work so far. However, I have respect for the Office of the President, even if I disagree with your political aspirations. … I could write a dissertation on the many ways I disagree with your political ideals. I’m a third-generation Mexican-American, born and raised in South Texas. Your disdain for Mexico, its descendants and immigrants in general troubles me. Your plan to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, leaving millions of Americans with no other health insurance options, leaves me anguished. “But what distresses me most is your plan to cut nearly $6 billion in funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). On Thanksgiving Day in 2001, at age 30, I was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. … Cancer research saved my life. … The cuts you are proposing are disconcerting not only for cancer survivors, but for millions of Americans suffering from many types of chronic and rare diseases. … “I’ll be praying for you, President Trump. … I pray you will carefully consider how your decisions have life or death consequences for hard-working Americans.” Read more about Esparza. ___ ONE-TIME OBAMA VOTER FEELS PRIDE IN TRUMP’S WORK Laverne Jones Gore, 60, owns an executive leadership development company in Cleveland and voted for Trump after previously supporting Barack Obama. Gore calls herself a “middle-class American who happens to be black” and says she felt uncomfortable voicing her opinion during the Obama years, but Trump has “made me proud to be an American again.” Part of a military family — her deceased husband was a Marine and a son graduated from West Point — Gore’s one hesitation these past 100 days is over Trump’s airstrike in Syria. She wrote: ” … Mr. President you have absolutely met my expectations. I actually believe you have shown a strength that I had not given to you, and I am surprised by your willingness to meet head on the challenges and resistance within your governing bodies. I don’t believe you have been afforded an opportunity to really show us what you have to offer in the form of leadership of our nation. “I have no issue with you as it relates to ‘Russians.’ I personally believe most of it was contrived. I have no issue with you as it relates to immigration. I think the issues were in need of control. … I have some reservations about your use of Twitter, but I understand the difficulty you have getting your intended message out. “Yes, you surprised me with the Syria strike and I am not certain how I feel about another war or thought of war. I am still contemplating your action and observing the responses to come from the world theatre as they absorb your full intent.” ___ ‘YOUR SIGNATURE CRUSHED MY FAMILY’ Marjan Vayghan, 32, an artist and writer

Ethics panel to probe complaints against Devin Nunes

The Latest on the congressional inquiry into Russian meddling in the 2016 election (all times local): 10:20 a.m. The House Ethics Committee is investigating allegations that intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes may have made unauthorized disclosures of classified information. The full 10-member committee is investigating the allegations, a departure from the usual procedure of having a smaller subcommittee handle a probe, and an indication of the seriousness of the claims. The California Republican congressman says several left-wing activist groups have filed accusations against him with the office of congressional ethics. Nunes says the charges are false and politically motivated. But he says it’s in the best interest of the committee to have Republican Mike Conaway of Texas temporarily take charge of the committee’s investigation. ___ 10:15 a.m. Two ethics watchdog groups filed complaints about the chairman of the House intelligence committee, Republican Devin Nunes of California. Nunes says he’s temporarily stepping aside from the panel’s investigation of Russian meddling in the election because of the complaints. Democracy 21 and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington say Nunes disclosed classified information, which violates House ethics rules. The groups say Nunes publicly disclosed information he learned by viewing classified material. Two of the four people who signed the March 28 letter alleging ethics violations served as White House counsels in Republican and Democratic administrations. ___ 10:05 a.m. Speaker Paul Ryan says Texas Republican Mike Conaway will take over the House investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election. Ryan says an ethics complaint filed against Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes of California by government watchdog groups would be a “distraction” and that Nunes should no longer lead the probe. Nunes has come under intense criticism for meeting secretly with White House officials to view intelligence regarding Trump associates. Ryan says he is confident that Conaway “will oversee a professional investigation into Russia’s actions and follow the facts wherever they lead.” ___ 9:49 a.m. The chairman of the House intelligence committee says he will temporarily step aside from the panel’s probe into Russian meddling in the election. In a statement on Thursday, Republican congressman Devin Nunes of California says that several left-wing activist groups have filed accusations against him with the office of congressional ethics. Nunes says the charges are false and politically motivated. But he says it’s in the best interest of the committee to have GOP congressman Mike Conaway of Texas temporarily take charge of the committee’s investigation. He says he will continue fulfilling other duties with the committee and wants to talk to the ethics committee as soon as possible to defend himself. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Donald Trump steps up effort to dispute and distract on Russia

After weeks on the defensive, President Donald Trump has stepped up his efforts to dispute, downplay and distract from revelations stemming from the investigations into the Kremlin’s interference in last year’s election and possible Russian ties to his campaign associates. The White House says the real story is not about Russia — it’s about how Obama administration officials allegedly leaked and mishandled classified material about Americans. Trump and his aides have accused former officials of inappropriately disclosing — or “unmasking” — the names of Trump associates whose conversations were picked up by U.S. intelligences agencies. “Such amazing reporting on unmasking and the crooked scheme against us by @foxandfriends,” Trump tweeted Monday. ‘Spied on before nomination.’ The real story.” The White House has not pointed to any hard evidence to support such allegations, and instead has relied on media reports from some of the same publications Trump derides as “fake news.” The truth is buried somewhere in classified material that is illegal to disclose. Here’s a look at what the White House believes is the real story. __ THE FLYNN AFFAIR Trump fired national security adviser Michael Flynn following news reports that Flynn misled the White House about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. But the White House says the problem is that Flynn’s conversations were in the news at all. “The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington?” Trump tweeted after firing Flynn in February. The White House has called for investigations into the disclosure of multiple intercepted conversations that Flynn had with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak before the inauguration. The government routinely monitors the communications of foreign officials in the U.S. It’s illegal to publicly disclose such classified information. Officially, the White House said Flynn was forced to resign because he had given inaccurate descriptions of the discussions to Vice President Mike Pence and others in the White House. But Trump has continued to defend Flynn, suggesting he was only fired because information about his contacts came out in the media. “Michael Flynn, Gen. Flynn is a wonderful man,” Trump said. “I think he’s been treated very, very unfairly by the media.” ___ THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION White House officials say some Obama holdovers are part of a so-called deep state out to tear Trump down. Last week, the White House latched onto a month-old television interview from an Obama administration official who said she encouraged congressional aides to gather as much information on Russia as possible before the inauguration. Evelyn Farkas, the former deputy assistant secretary of defense, said she feared that information “would disappear” after President Barack Obama left office. She was no longer in government at the time, having left the Pentagon about a year before the election. White House spokesman Sean Spicer called Farkas’ comments “devastating” and said they “raised serious concerns on whether or not there was an organized and widespread effort by the Obama administration to use and leak highly sensitive intelligence information for political purposes.” On Monday, Spicer suggested there should be more interest in a Bloomberg report in which anonymous U.S. officials said that Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, asked for the identities of people related to Trump’s campaign and transition dozens of times. Spicer remarked that he was “somewhat intrigued by the lack of interest” in the Rice revelations. But he added: “I do think that it’s interesting, the level, or lack thereof, of interest in this subject.” As national security adviser, Rice would have regularly received intelligence reports and been able to request the identities of Americans whose communications were intercepted. ___ THE HILL WEIGHS IN The White House has embraced a top Republican’s assertion that information about Trump associates were improperly spread around the government in the final days of the Obama administration. It appears the White House played a role in helping House intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., acquire some of that information. Nunes announced last week that he had seen intelligence reports showing that Trump aides’ communications were picked up through routine surveillance. But he said their identities may have been improperly revealed. The California congressman later said he viewed the reports at the White House. The White House contends that Nunes’ information — which has not been made public — validates Trump’s explosive claim that his predecessor wiretapped his New York skyscraper. Nunes has disputed that but still says he found the reports “troubling.” The White House’s apparent involvement in helping Nunes access the information has overshadowed what Trump officials contend are real concerns about how much information about Americans is disseminated in intelligence reports. Trump has asked the House and Senate intelligence committees to include the matter in their Russia investigations. ___ CAMPAIGN MODE Trump won the election, but thinks it’s his vanquished opponent whose ties to Russia should be investigated. Some of the White House’s allegations against Clinton stem from her four years as secretary of state, a role that gave her ample reasons to have frequent contacts with Russia. To deflect questions about Trump’s friendly rhetoric toward Russia, the White House points to the fact that Clinton was a central figure in the Obama administration’s attempt to “reset” relations with Moscow — an effort that crumbled after Vladimir Putin took back the presidency. “When you compare the two sides in terms of who’s actually engaging with Russia, trying to strengthen them, trying to act with them, trying to interact with them, it is night and day between our actions and her actions,” Spicer said. Rex Tillerson, Trump’s secretary of state, has deep ties to Russia from his time running ExxonMobil and cutting oil deals with Moscow. The White House has also tried to link Clinton to Russia’s purchase of a controlling stake in a mining company with operations in the U.S., arguing that she was responsible for “selling off one-fifth of our country’s uranium.” The Clinton-led State Department was among nine U.S. government agencies that had to approve the purchase of

Paul Manafort had plan to benefit Vladamir Putin government

President Donald Trump‘s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, secretly worked for a Russian billionaire to advance the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin a decade ago and proposed an ambitious political strategy to undermine anti-Russian opposition across former Soviet republics, The Associated Press has learned. The work appears to contradict assertions by the Trump administration and Manafort himself that he never worked for Russian interests. Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and the former Soviet republics to benefit the Putin government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse. Manafort pitched the plans to Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska, a close Putin ally with whom Manafort eventually signed a $10 million annual contract beginning in 2006, according to interviews with several people familiar with payments to Manafort and business records obtained by the AP. Manafort and Deripaska maintained a business relationship until at least 2009, according to one person familiar with the work. “We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success,” Manafort wrote in the 2005 memo to Deripaska. The effort, Manafort wrote, “will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government.” Manafort’s plans were laid out in documents obtained by the AP that included strategy memoranda and records showing international wire transfers for millions of dollars. How much work Manafort performed under the contract was unclear. The disclosure comes as Trump campaign advisers are the subject of an FBI probe and two congressional investigations. Investigators are reviewing whether the Trump campaign and its associates coordinated with Moscow to meddle in the 2016 campaign. Manafort has dismissed the investigations as politically motivated and misguided, and said he never worked for Russian interests. The documents obtained by AP show Manafort’s ties to Russia were closer than previously revealed. In a statement to the AP, Manafort confirmed that he worked for Deripaska in various countries but said the work was being unfairly cast as “inappropriate or nefarious” as part of a “smear campaign.” “I worked with Oleg Deripaska almost a decade ago representing him on business and personal matters in countries where he had investments,” Manafort said. “My work for Mr. Deripaska did not involve representing Russia’s political interests.” Deripaska became one of Russia’s wealthiest men under Putin, buying assets abroad in ways widely perceived to benefit the Kremlin’s interests. U.S. diplomatic cables from 2006 described Deripaska as “among the 2-3 oligarchs Putin turns to on a regular basis” and “a more-or-less permanent fixture on Putin’s trips abroad.” In response to questions about Manafort’s consulting firm, a spokesman for Deripaska in 2008 — at least three years after they began working together — said Deripaska had never hired the firm. Another Deripaska spokesman in Moscow last week declined to answer AP’s questions. Manafort worked as Trump’s unpaid campaign chairman last year from March until August. Trump asked Manafort to resign after AP revealed that Manafort had orchestrated a covert Washington lobbying operation until 2014 on behalf of Ukraine’s ruling pro-Russian political party. The newly obtained business records link Manafort more directly to Putin’s interests in the region. According to those records and people with direct knowledge of Manafort’s work for Deripaska, Manafort made plans to open an office in Moscow, and at least some of Manafort’s work in Ukraine was directed by Deripaska, not local political interests there. The Moscow office never opened. Manafort has been a leading focus of the U.S. intelligence investigation of Trump’s associates and Russia, according to a U.S. official. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the investigation were confidential. Meanwhile, federal criminal prosecutors became interested in Manafort’s activities years ago as part of a broad investigation to recover stolen Ukraine assets after the ouster of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych there in early 2014. No U.S. criminal charges have ever been filed in the case. FBI Director James Comey, in confirming to Congress the federal intelligence investigation this week, declined to say whether Manafort was a target. Manafort’s name was mentioned 28 times during the hearing of the House Intelligence Committee, mostly about his work in Ukraine. No one mentioned Deripaska. White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Monday that Manafort “played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time” in the campaign, even though as Trump’s presidential campaign chairman he led it during the crucial run-up to the Republican National Convention. Manafort and his associates remain in Trump’s orbit. Manafort told a colleague this year that he continues to speak with Trump by telephone. Manafort’s former business partner in eastern Europe, Rick Gates, has been seen inside the White House on a number of occasions. Gates has since helped plan Trump’s inauguration and now runs a nonprofit organization, America First Policies, to back the White House agenda. Gates, whose name does not appear in the documents, told the AP that he joined Manafort’s firm in 2006 and was aware Manafort had a relationship with Deripaska, but he was not aware of the work described in the memos. Gates said his work was focused on domestic U.S. lobbying and political consulting in Ukraine at the time. He said he stopped working for Manafort’s firm in March 2016 when he joined Trump’s presidential campaign. Manafort told Deripaska in 2005 that he was pushing policies as part of his work in Ukraine “at the highest levels of the U.S. government — the White House, Capitol Hill and the State Department,” according to the documents. He also said he had hired a “leading international law firm with close ties to President Bush to support our client’s interests,” but he did not identify the firm. Manafort also said he was employing unidentified legal experts for the effort at leading universities and