Government – Page 81 – The Tarbabys Blog

Harris says reports of Navalny’s death are another sign of Putin’s brutality

CNN

Harris says reports of Navalny’s death are another sign of Putin’s brutality

Priscilla Alvarez, CNN – February 16, 2024

US Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called reports Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has died in a Russian prison “terrible news,” and that “Russia is responsible.”

“We’ve all just received reports that Alexey Navalny has died in Russia. This is, of course, terrible news, which we are working to confirm,” Harris said as she began her remarks.

She added, “If confirmed this, would be a further sign of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s brutality. Whatever story they tell, let us be clear: Russia is responsible.”

The Russian prison service said Friday morning that Navalny died. He had been serving multiple lengthy prison sentences for crimes that he had denied. He faced those charges after returning to Russia following treatment in Germany after being poisoned in August 2020. Navalny returned to Russia after that treatment concluded in 2021, and he was quickly arrested.

Navalny had long been a point of contention between the US and Russia. President Joe Biden previously told reporters in 2021 that he warned Putin that the consequences would be “devastating for Russia,” if Navalny died in prison.

Harris had been facing the fraught task of reassuring US allies on the world stage, as lawmakers struggle to pass aid for Ukraine and Israel and former President Donald Trump threatens to abandon NATO allies.

It was another high-profile moment for Harris to address the Munich Security Conference Friday amid a consequential moment in US foreign policy, as ongoing conflicts overseas have roiled domestic politics. It came at a delicate time for the White House, which continues to grapple with the fallout of the special counsel report that called into question President Joe Biden’s mental acuity and has placed renewed focus on the vice president.

But it suddenly became an opportunity for Harris to be the most prominent American voice to offer a reaction to the reports of Navalny’s death.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan said on NPR earlier Friday that the US was working to confirm Navalny’s death.

“If it’s confirmed, it is a terrible tragedy, and given the Russian government’s long and sordid history of doing harm to its opponents, it raises real and obvious questions about what happened here,” Sullivan said.

The administration had repeatedly called for Navalny’s immediate release, and CNN has reported Biden called for Navalny’s release in his first phone call with Putin after taking office in 2021.

After her opening comment on Navalny, Harris transitioned into her prepared remarks that were meant to reassure American allies over the future of US foreign policy.

Chief among the worries from the US’ top allies is Trump’s statement last weekend that he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to any NATO member country that doesn’t meet spending guidelines on defense.

After the Biden administration helped strengthen the bonds of the NATO alliance following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Trump’s statement is sparking real concern that he would not abide by the collective-defense clause at the heart of the alliance if reelected.

During her speech, Harris launched a veiled attack against Trump, describing his foreign policy approach as “dangerous” and issuing a stark warning if the US cedes ground to Russia.

“They suggest it’s in the best interest of the American people to isolate ourselves from the world, to flout common understandings among nations, to embrace dictators, and adopt the repressive tactics and abandon commitments to our allies in favor of unilateral action,” Harris said.

“Let me be clear – that worldview is dangerous, destabilizing and indeed shortsighted,” she said.

Trump had drawn immediate consternation last weekend for saying he would encourage Russia to invade countries who don’t meet their NATO obligations. The comment concerned not only the American foreign policy establishment but from American NATO allies, who have watched warily as Russia proceeds with its invasion of Ukraine. The former president on Wednesday said he wouldn’t defend NATO nations who don’t spend enough on defense but did not repeat his comment about encouraging Russia to do whatever they wante

“I’ve been saying look, if they’re not going to pay, we’re not going to protect, OK. And Biden said, ‘Oh this is so bad, this is so terrible that he would say that.’ No, if they’re not paying their bills, and most of them weren’t when I got there,” Trump said at a campaign event in North Charleston, South Carolina.

Harris maintained Friday that US commitment to NATO remains “ironclad” in the wake of Trump’s comments.

It’s a similar message to the one that has been promoted by her boss this week. Biden took direct aim at his predecessor on Tuesday, pointedly accusing Trump of “bowing down” to Putin in some of his harshest criticism of his likely rival on foreign policy to date.

Trump, Biden claimed, sent a “dangerous and shocking” signal with his comments, delivered during a weekend campaign rally.

Concern is also rising over the ability of Washington to send more aid to Ukraine. For months, the White House’s national security supplemental request that includes billions in funding for Ukraine and Israel, among other priorities, has remained stalled in Congress over GOP infighting.

The White House has repeatedly stressed the need to deliver additional funds to Ukraine, framing it as a matter of national security. Harris will meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Saturday.

Harris called Putin’s war in Ukraine an “utter failure” and stressed the consequences of ceding any ground to Russia, reaffirming US support for Ukraine.

“Imagine if America turned our back on Ukraine and abandoned our NATO allies and abandoned our treaty commitments. Imagine if we went easy on Putin. Let alone encouraged him,” Harris said.

“History offers a clue. If we stand by while an aggressor invades its neighbor with impunity, they will keep going. In the case of Putin, that means all of Europe would be threatened. If we fail to impose severe consequences on Russia, other authoritarians across the globe would be emboldened,” Harris said.

This story has been updated with additional developments on Friday.

Biden says ‘no nuclear threat’ to U.S. as Russia considers potential space weapon

NBC News

Biden says ‘no nuclear threat’ to U.S. as Russia considers potential space weapon

Rebecca Shabad, Courtney Kube, Dan De Luce, Alexander Smith and Tara Prindiville – February 16, 2024

Biden discusses threat posed by Russian weapon targeting satellites

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden sought to reassure the American public Friday that there’s “no nuclear threat” to the U.S. even as Russia considers using an anti-satellite capability that officials say would be used in space.

“First of all, there is no nuclear threat to the people of America or anywhere else in the world with what Russia is doing at the moment, No. 1,” Biden said in remarks from the White House when asked if he was concerned about Russia’s potential anti-satellite capability.

“No. 2, anything they’re doing or they will do relates to satellites in space and damaging those satellites potentially,” he added. “No. 3, there’s no evidence they’ve made a decision to go forward with anything in space either.”

The question came after Biden spoke about the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of being responsible for Navalny’s death in a Siberian prison Friday.

President Joe Biden at the White House on Feb. 16, 2024. (Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, briefed top House leaders behind closed doors Thursday on Capitol Hill about the Russian threat. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby also confirmed Thursday at the White House briefing that the threat is “related to an anti-satellite capability that Russia is developing.”

“First, this is not an active capability that’s been deployed, and though Russia’s pursuit of this particular capability is troubling, there is no immediate threat to anyone’s safety,” Kirby told reporters. “We are not talking about a weapon that can be used to attack human beings or cause physical destruction here on Earth. That said, we’ve been closely monitoring this Russian activity and we will continue to take it very seriously.”

In response, Biden has directed a series of actions, Kirby said, including additional briefings to members of Congress and direct diplomatic engagement with Russia as well as with U.S. allies and other countries.

A U.S. official and congressional official familiar with the intelligence told NBC News on Thursday that the threat is a Russian nuclear-powered space asset that could be weaponized rather than a nuclear bomb that Russia is trying to send into space. Russia is making headway, although it has not fielded the capability, officials said.

NBC News has reported that arms experts believe the threat is likely a nuclear-powered satellite that might be able to carry a high-powered jammer that could block satellite communications for long periods, according to a 2019 essay in The Space Review, an online publication, that was widely shared among experts following this week’s news.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov characterized the U.S. information as a “malicious fabrication,” according to Russian state-run news agency Tass.

Information about the threat surfaced after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, released a cryptic statement Wednesday that called on the White House to declassify information about an unnamed “serious national security threat.”

Sullivan later said he had already planned on briefing top leaders in the House on Thursday.

Trump has one trick up his sleeve to dodge crushing NY fraud judgment

Salon – Opinion

Trump has one trick up his sleeve to dodge crushing NY fraud judgment

Thomas G. Moukawsher – February 16, 2024

Donald Trump’s whole life has prepared him, not for the presidency, but for this moment—beset by lawsuits and criminal charges in court. Some calculations show he filed over 3,500 lawsuits over the years. He knows the vulnerabilities of our legal system and is having no trouble exploiting them.

He hasn’t needed much help in Florida. He appears to have a willing ally in Judge Aileen Cannon in the secret documents case who, so far, has either ruled in Trump’s favor or, in ruling against him, has left the door open to giving Trump what he wants later. What Trump wants is delay. Judge Cannon is likely to give it to him.

In Washington, Trump claims that he is so immune from criminal responsibility that he could have used Seal Team Six to assassinate his political opponents without consequences. Trump has bought himself time with this issue, including asking for more time to petition the Supreme Court. If he fails on this issue, you can expect a series of other claims—each one holding things up.

In Georgia, Trump’s seedy collaboration with the National Enquirer has combined with his connoisseurship of the courtroom to deliver us a Jerry Springer Show moment with Trump and his allies examining the love life of District Attorney Fani Willis on live television. Once again, Trump has come out a winner, smothering the main event and making Willis, Judge Scott McAfee, and the judicial system look ridiculous.

And most ridiculous of all, the first criminal case against Trump going to trial is the case about his payoff to a porn star. Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg claims Trump falsified business records and disguised a campaign contribution by paying hush money about an affair. More silliness, more salaciousness. More distraction from what matters: the allegation that Donald Trump, president of the United States, attempted by fraud, coercion, and a violent attack on the United States Capitol to overthrow the democratically elected government of our country.

And if you think Trump at least faced the music in his New York civil fraud case with Justice Arthur Engoron’s ruling ordering Trump to pay $355 million in penalties, think again. The case is far from over. Trump will stall the case, diddle the docket, drag out the appeal, appeal from the appeals court, and, if he becomes cornered resort to another trick he has considerable experience with—he will declare bankruptcy.

It doesn’t have to be this way, but deeply engrained formalism in court plays right into Trump’s hands. When in doubt, judges delay. When there is a claim, however frivolous and intentionally dilatory, it must receive the same slow service as every other claim at the courthouse window. While the idea of due process is the constitutional promise of a meaningful hearing at a meaningful time, too many judges prefer the appearance of fairness that long delays promise but don’t deliver. Too many times, justice delayed is justice denied, but judges in our contemporary system simply aren’t set up to do it any other way, and Trump and other courthouse cognoscenti know how to exploit it.

Instead of exalting form over substance, courts should recognize the humanism of legal dilemmas and focus on it. That is, every case in court has a human heart. A value against lying, cheating, stealing, violence or what have you is in play and the fate of real people are on the line. When the parties’ claims and not the process is the focus, courts can push aside obstacles and achieve substantial justice. Parties can be ordered to make all their legal challenges to a case at the same time to keep them from dribbling out and causing long delays. Judge McAfee should have ruled on whether a hypothetical relationship between prosecutors would have anything to do with Donald Trump before allowing a circus about it. The upper courts should see Donald Trump coming and rule fairly and quickly on his claims in New York. The courts should try Trump’s attempted takedown of democracy before they put on a show about a payoff to a porn star.

American courts are in the spotlight. Trump’s opponents can be grateful that he may face justice someday, but not one of the cases against him will be over before the election.

“Trump is out of money”: Republicans fear Trump will drain RNC funds to pay his own legal bills

Salon

“Trump is out of money”: Republicans fear Trump will drain RNC funds to pay his own legal bills

Tatyana Tandanpolie – February 15, 2024

Lara Trump NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images

A crop of senior GOP officials fear that Donald Trump‘s effort to pack the Republican National Committee with his preferred picks could give way to the former president using the RNC to cover his legal bills — again. Their worries come on the heels of Trump’s endorsements earlier this week of his daughter-in-law, among other allies, to assume leadership roles at the committee. “While those endorsements have been well-received by many committee members — who note that it is customary for a presidential candidate to put his imprint on the party’s main campaign apparatus — others fear a potential misallocation of party resources,” Politico reports.

Henry Barbour, a Mississippi committee member, told the outlet that he thinks “most RNC members will go along” with Trump’s committee lineup “unless there is a play to use RNC funds for President Trump’s legal bills.” Another member who has been critical of the former president, Oscar Brock, told Politico that the RNC’s recently passed budget did not allot any money for Trump’s legal fees. Brock did recognize, however, the potential for the committee to reconfigure its financial plan to do so upon request, which the Tennessee committeeman said he’d be against. “I don’t think it’s appropriate for the committee to pay the legal bills for things done outside the work of the committee,” Brock told Politico.

Chris LaCivita, a senior Trump campaign strategist, called the concerns about the committee paying Trump’s legal fees “manufactured.” Instead, the money would come from other avenues, including Trump’s Save America PAC and his own pocket, senior campaign advisors told Politico. In 2021 and 2022, the RNC forked over nearly $2 million to two legal firms working on the former president’s cases but stopped once Trump launched his current presidential campaign. It will still have a legal fund intended to handle lawsuits, recount efforts and typical legal business for the party.

Lara Trump this week vowed that “every penny” at the RNC would go toward helping Trump.

Bloomberg reported on Wednesday that Trump is on pace to drain his war chest for his legal fees this summer after already spending more than $50 million on legal bills.

“Trump is out of money which is why he is going hard at Ronna Romney so he can take over the RNC treasury,” tweeted former Trump White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

New documents underscore why the Supreme Court must let Jack Smith’s Trump case move forward

Salon – Opinion

New documents underscore why the Supreme Court must let Jack Smith’s Trump case move forward

Amanda Marcotte – February 14, 2024

Jack Smith; US Supreme Court Photo illustration by Salon/Getty Images

Despite taking their own sweet time to render what should have been a five-minute decision ruling that Donald Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals did do Americans one big favor: They removed most of Trump’s avenues to continue delaying what has become known as the “January 6” criminal case against him. I’ll spare readers the tedium of recounting the legal maneuvering that was avoided, and sum it up as this: The court gave Trump a Monday deadline to appeal to the Supreme Court. He, as usual, put it off until the last minute but did indeed make that appeal by the end of the day.

Now there is only one question: Will the six Republican justices on the court sabotage the case brought by special prosecutor Jack Smith?

Almost no legal experts think that the justices, despite being partisan hacks, will humiliate themselves by upholding Trump’s asinine claims of total license to commit as many crimes as he wishes. But, as Ian Millhiser at Vox explains, “the Court could simply sit on his request for a very long time without taking any action on it.” Doing so would destroy the chance that Trump’s criminal trial for his attempted coup would occur this year. If he wins the election, it would destroy the case completely. There is no doubt that Trump would appoint a corrupt crony to head the Justice Department, and that stooge would kill the case.

On the same day that Trump filed his appeal, Talking Points Memo released a blockbuster report that underscores what a devastating blow to democracy it would be if the Supreme Court derailed this criminal case against Trump. As Josh Kovensky writes, Kenneth Chesebro, one of the unindicted (so far) co-conspirators in Smith’s D.C. case, provided “a trove of documents” to Michigan prosecutors as part of a cooperation agreement to avoid charges of efforts to steal the election in that state. (Chesebro has already pled guilty in a similar case in Georgia.) The documents show how Trump and his conspirators hatched a plan to steal the election by interrupting, delaying, filibustering or otherwise blocking the congressional certification of electoral votes. The idea was to sow chaos for days, if not weeks, in hopes the Supreme Court would step in and simply nullify the election, declaring Trump president.

The full plan never came to fruition, in large part because the conspirators didn’t get enough buy-in from then-Vice President Mike Pence and other key Republican leaders to pull it off. But the documents are a chilling reminder that the violence of the Capitol insurrection was just a small part of what was a vast, sweeping conspiracy to steal the 2020 election from President Joe Biden and the voters who elected him. This matters, because “January 6” has become a shorthand for an attempted coup that, in actuality, lasted for two months and across multiple states. No doubt, the Capitol riot was the flashiest part of this effort. But there’s a real danger that the violence that day is eclipsing the public’s understanding of all the events — and crimes — that led up to QAnon idiots storming the Capitol.

Worse, focusing on the Capitol riot at the expense of talking about Trump’s larger attempted coup allows Republicans to gaslight voters about how serious Trump’s efforts to overthrow democracy really were. One of the favorite tactics of Republicans is to pretend the riot was just a protest that got “out of hand” and deny that Trump was deliberately instigating it with his “fight like hell” speech.

That lie is harder to pull off when one looks at the larger context. Trump and his conspirators had been plotting for months to derail the electoral vote count, creating what they hoped would be a pretext to nullify the election. The attack on the Capitol was part of this larger plan. That’s why it’s ridiculous to pretend Trump didn’t deliberately instigate the riot. Taken together with all his other actions to derail the electoral vote-counting, it’s clear that the riot was part of the larger scheme to keep the election from being certified.

It’s worth revisiting the indictments that Smith filed against Trump last summer. While journalists tend to call this the “January 6” case, the indicting document refers to a conspiracy that stretched from “November 14, 2020 through on or about January 20, 2021.” The evidence is extensive, but only a fraction of it involves the efforts to bring followers to the Capitol to be foot soldiers in the insurrection. Mostly it’s about the various efforts to persuade officials on all levels of government to certify fraudulent electors in the place of the real ones, or to fabricate enough votes for Trump to throw the election, or to get the Justice Department to declare the election fraudulent as a pretext to throw out the results. It’s only when all that failed that Trump turned to violence to create the chaos that Chesebro and his associates thought could be used as cover to declare Trump the victor.

It’s crucial that Smith get to present this evidence to a jury — and to the nation — before the election, and ideally, before the official party nominations are secured at the conventions this summer. Republican voters will probably pick Trump as their nominee anyway, but it’s only fair that they have a chance to be reminded of how central he was to his own coup before they decide to move forward. Trump is more than a guy who gave an ill-advised speech on a single day. He spent every day for weeks scheming to overthrow democracy. Voters really are owed a full accounting of the attempted coup, and not this reductive view that it was just one bad day at the Capitol on January 6.

The new Chesebro documents are a strong reminder that the plot to steal the election really hinged on whether the Supreme Court would, as Trump hoped, use the Trump-created chaos as an excuse to simply declare the election null and claim Trump can retain power indefinitely. There’s some reason to believe the justices, like Pence, wouldn’t have played along it if came to that, because they knocked down Trump’s other lawsuits asking for the courts to nullify the election.

But if they slow-walk this case so that Smith doesn’t get to try it before this year, the court has proved themselves just as corrupt as Trump believed them to be when he asked them to steal an election for him. The case presented to them is a lay-up. There’s no legitimate cause to argue that Trump gets forever immunity for his crimes. All they need to do is put out a one-sentence response upholding the D.C. opinion. That can be done this week. Frankly, that could have been done within minutes of Trump filing his appeal. It’s rare that matters of law are as black-and-white as this, but here we are. If the Supreme Court slow-walks this, the only reason would be to help a man who tried to overthrow the government get away with his crimes.

The Trauma of the Trump Years Is Being Rewritten

The New York Times – Opinion

The Trauma of the Trump Years Is Being Rewritten

By Charles M. Blow – February 14, 2024

Donald Trump with his face partially obscured in a blur of colored light. — Credit…Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Americans rehabilitate ex-presidents all the time.

It was fascinating to see the rebranding of George W. Bush — the man who took us into the disastrous Iraq war and horribly bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina — into a charming amateur artist who played buddies with and passed candy to Michelle Obama.

And it didn’t just happen for him. The Monica Lewinsky scandal faded in our consideration of Bill Clinton. Barack Obama’s reliance on drone strikes and his moniker “deporter in chief” rarely receive mention now.

This is because our political memories aren’t fixed, but are constantly being adjusted. Politicians’ negatives are often diminished and their positives inflated. As Gallup noted in 2013, “Americans tend to be more charitable in their evaluations of past presidents than they are when the presidents are in office.”

Without a doubt, Donald Trump benefits from this phenomenon. The difference is that other presidents’ shortcomings pale in comparison with his and his benefit isn’t passive: He’s seeking the office again and, as part of that, working to rewrite the history of his presidency. His desperate attempts, first to cling to power, then to regain it, include denying the 2020 election result and embracing the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection that his denials helped fuel.

His revisionism has worked remarkably well, particularly among Republicans. A Washington Post/University of Maryland poll conducted in December found that Republicans “are now less likely to believe that Jan. 6 participants were ‘mostly violent,’ less likely to believe Trump bears responsibility for the attack and are slightly less likely to view Joe Biden’s election as legitimate” than they were in 2021.

This is one of the truly remarkable aspects of the current presidential cycle: the degree to which our collective memory of Trump’s litany of transgressions has become less of a political problem for him than might otherwise be expected. Even the multiple legal charges he now faces are almost all about things that happened years ago and, to many citizens, involve things that the country should put in the rearview mirror.

Indeed, in the same poll, 43 percent of Americans and 80 percent of 2020 Trump voters said they believed that the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol was an event that the country needed to move on from.

Many Americans experienced the Trump years as traumatic, and one of the most bewildering aspects of this year’s presidential race is the way that so many other Americans are disregarding or downgrading that trauma.

In 2021 a study was published about how we remember political events, specifically examining recollections about two watershed moments, one being Trump’s election in 2016. The study’s lead author, Linda J. Levine, a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, wrote, “People exaggerated when remembering how angry they had felt about the political events but underestimated their feelings of happiness and fear.”

This is part of what she describes as “memory reconstruction,” the updating of our memories of the past to reflect our current feelings and beliefs. And what it says to me is that many of us have a clearer recollection of our indignation from 2016 but have developed a hazier recollection of the sense of foreboding that hung in the air during the years that followed.

I’m not sure that people — not just Republicans — are fully remembering what it felt like, just a few years ago, to wake up every morning having to brace themselves before checking the news because they didn’t know what fresh outrage awaited them.

I’m not sure that people are fully remembering the constant chaos or the disorienting feeling of the stream of lies flowing from the Trump White House.

I’m not sure that people are remembering the family separation policy, the “very fine people” refrain or the tossing of rolls of paper towels in Puerto Rico after a hurricane ravaged the island.

Too many people have settled into a hagiographic view of Trump’s presidency, even though you can make a solid case that today’s economy is stronger than the one Trump left behind and that Trump did — and still does — gush over the world’s dictators and agitate America’s allies.

D. Stephen Voss, a political scientist at the University of Kentucky, told me this week that “voters are usually only responding to fairly recent memories and fairly recent messaging.” As he put it, “Candidates can fairly easily put their past behind them.”

This electoral quirk is an outgrowth of human nature. Staying in moments of apprehension is so emotionally expensive and consumes so much energy that we often allow ourselves to grow numb to them or diminish them.

But the threat that Trump poses to our country hasn’t diminished. It has increased. He keeps saying things — he won’t be a dictator “except for Day 1” — that demonstrate he is not only a danger to the country but also to the world order.

And in the end, that is the most important issue in this election, not Biden’s memory or disagreements over his foreign policy or migrants at the border or economic anxiety. You can’t make the country better without saving it first.

Those fighting to save our democracy can never lose sight of that, particularly since many of those supporting Trump now see his multifarious sins through rose-tinted glasses.

Charles M. Blow is an Opinion columnist for The New York Times, writing about national politics, public opinion and social justice, with a focus on racial equality and L.G.B.T.Q. rights.

Ex-F.B.I. Informant Is Charged With Lying Over Bidens’ Role in Ukraine Business

New York Times

Ex-F.B.I. Informant Is Charged With Lying Over Bidens’ Role in Ukraine Business

The informant’s story was part of a series of explosive and unsubstantiated claims by Republicans that the Bidens engaged in potentially criminal activity.

By Glenn Thrush – February 15, 2024

Hunter Biden in a suit and tie appears with others outside. — Hunter Biden outside the U.S. Capitol building in December. An FBI informant has been charged with lying to his handler about ties between Joe Biden and son Hunter and a Ukrainian energy company. Credit…Kenny Holston/The New York Times

The special counsel investigating Hunter Biden has charged a former F.B.I. informant with fabricating claims that President Biden and his son sought two $5 million bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, according to an indictment in a California federal court.

The former informant, Alexander Smirnov, 43, was accused of falsely telling the F.B.I. that Hunter Biden, then serving as a paid member on the board of Burisma, demanded the money to protect the company from an investigation by the country’s prosecutor general at the time.

The story Mr. Smirnov told investigators was part of a series of explosive and unsubstantiated claims by Republicans that the Bidens engaged in potentially criminal activity — allegations central to the party’s efforts to impeach the president.

In July, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, released a copy of an F.B.I. record that included the false allegation without naming Mr. Smirnov, or questioning its veracity.

“I’ve been pushing the Justice Department and F.B.I. to provide details on its handling of very significant allegations from a trusted F.B.I. informant implicating then-Vice President Biden in a criminal bribery scheme,” Mr. Grassley said in a statement at the time, praising “heroic whistle-blowers” who brought the document to light.

The claims in the report turned out to be a lie, said the special counsel, David C. Weiss, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Delaware.

Mr. Smirnov now faces a two-charge indictment for making false statements and obstructing the government’s long-running investigation of the president’s troubled son. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison.

Mr. Smirnov is a permanent resident of the United States, according to a senior law enforcement official. He was arrested in Las Vegas on Wednesday after disembarking from an international flight and was expected to appear before a federal judge later Thursday.

Hunter Biden promised to protect the company “through his dad, from all kinds of problems,” Mr. Smirnov falsely claimed to the bureau in 2020, according to Mr. Weiss, the special counsel who has charged the president’s son twice over the past year on tax and gun charges.

Mr. Smirnov, prosecutors working for Mr. Weiss said, was only in contact with Burisma executives in 2017, after Mr. Biden left office — when he “had no ability to influence U.S. policy.”

He is accused of exaggerating his “routine and unextraordinary business contacts with Burisma” into “bribery allegations” against the president, who is identified in the filing as “Public Official 1.”

Glenn Thrush covers the Department of Justice. He joined The Times in 2017 after working for Politico, Newsday, Bloomberg News, The New York Daily News, The Birmingham Post-Herald and City Limits. More about Glenn Thrush

US has new intelligence on Russian nuclear capabilities in space

CNN

US has new intelligence on Russian nuclear capabilities in space

Katie Bo Lillis, Alex Marquardt, Jim Sciutto, Oren Liebermann, Natasha Bertrand, Melanie Zanona and Kevin Liptak – February 14, 2024

The US has new intelligence on Russian military capabilities related to its efforts to deploy a nuclear anti-satellite system in space, according to multiple sources familiar with the intelligence.

The intelligence was briefed to Congress and key US allies, and some lawmakers say it is serious enough that it should be declassified and made public. While the intelligence is concerning, multiple senior members of Congress briefed on the information on Wednesday emphasized that it does not pose an immediate threat to the US or its interests.

The system remains under development and is not yet in orbit, according to three US officials familiar with the intelligence. It’s not clear how far the technology has progressed, one of the officials said. A separate US official told CNN the threat does not involve a weapon that would be used to attack humans.

It was not immediately clear whether the intelligence referred to a nuclear-powered, anti-satellite capability or a nuclear-armed capability.

While members of Congress downplayed the immediacy of the threat, an anti-satellite weapon placed in orbit around Earth would pose a significant danger to US nuclear command and control satellites, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. The US relies on such satellites – which he called “essential” – to ensure constant, seamless control over its nuclear arsenal.

Other countries have tested anti-satellite weapons in the past, but this would be an escalation, Kristensen said, and the US has made clear that it would react “very forcefully” to an attack on its nuclear command and control satellites.

“If it’s orbital, it’s a new level of threat [to the system], whether it’s nuclear or not,” said Kristensen, who added that even conventional weapons on an orbital anti-satellite system could pose a significant threat to the US.

ABC News first reported that the intelligence related to a Russian space-based nuclear capability.

Earlier Wednesday, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, ignited a firestorm on Capitol Hill when he issued a cryptic statement announcing that the panel had “information concerning a serious national security threat.”

In a letter to lawmakers inviting them to view the intelligence in the committee’s classified spaces, he said that it related to a “destabilizing foreign military capability that should be known by all congressional policymakers.”

Immediately, lawmakers began tramping down to the House basement to learn what the intelligence was.

Some left underwhelmed. One Democratic member with deep national security experience said that they had never before received that kind of urgent summons over a national security matter during their time in Congress — and that the intelligence they saw when they arrived was not urgent enough to justify Turner’s alarm-pulling.

Within hours, the Republican speaker of the House, Rep. Mike Johnson, attempted to tamp down the imbroglio, telling reporters that “there is no cause for alarm” and indicating that he had known about the intelligence since at least January.

“We just want to assure everyone steady hands are at the wheel. We’re working on it and there’s no need for alarm,” Johnson said.

Rep. Jim Himes, the committee’s top Democrat, said in a statement that “the classified intelligence product that the House Intelligence Committee called to the attention of Members last night is a significant one, but it is not a cause for panic.”

National security adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday said he was “surprised” that Turner had made the existence of the intelligence public, noting that he was already scheduled to brief the top Republican and Democratic leaders of the House as well as Turner and Himes on Thursday.

“We scheduled a briefing for the House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” Sullivan said. “That’s been on the books. So I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defense professionals tomorrow.”

Turner in his statement has urged the Biden administration to declassify “all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat.”

Meanwhile, in a joint statement, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee suggested that they had been tracking the intelligence but that it would be difficult to declassify it without exposing sensitive sources and methods.

The uproar over the new intelligence comes as a $60 billion aid package to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia has stalled in the House and former President Donald Trump has been publicly supporting GOP members who have opposed the package. Trump has also in recent days said that he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies that do not meet alliance-set spending goals on their own defense.

Johnson has said that he will not bring the Senate-passed aid measure to the floor.

But Turner has publicly supported continuing to fund the Ukraine war effort. Some lawmakers and US officials privately speculated that his effort to brief lawmakers on the intelligence — something the House Intelligence Committee voted on Tuesday night to do — might be an attempt to shore up flagging support for Ukraine.

Sources declined to provide further detail on the intelligence or the Russian capabilities it describes.

But for years, Russia has pursued counterspace systems designed to neutralize US military and commercial space systems, according to a 2022 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report on space security. Russian doctrine called for being able to target an enemy’s satellites from the ground, air, cyber and space, using attacks that range from temporary jamming to outright destruction.

In 2020, Russia tested a space-based anti-satellite weapon with sophisticated orbital capabilities that could have a dual purpose: it could service and inspect friendly satellites while having the capability to attack enemy satellites.

An attempt to launch a nuclear-armed anti-satellite system into space would violate The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which explicitly prohibits “any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction” in orbit.

This story and headline have been updated with additional developments.

CNN’s Michael Williams, Annie Grayer and Morgan Rimmer contributed to this report.

Top Republican warns of ‘serious’ national security threat

BBC News

Top Republican warns of ‘serious’ national security threat

Bernd Debusmann Jr – BBC News, Washington – February 14, 2024

The chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee has issued a vague warning of a “serious national security threat” facing the US.

The cryptic statement from Republican Mike Turner called on President Joe Biden to declassify the threat, although no further details were given.

The White House has said the threat is not imminent, but that congressional leaders would be briefed this week.

Lawmakers have until Friday to review intelligence about the threat.

In a statement posted by the House Intelligence Committee on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, Mr Turner said only that the committee has “made available to all members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat”.

“I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the administration and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,” the statement added.

A memo sent to members of the House of Representatives on Tuesday night that was obtained by Punchbowl News provided few additional details, noting only that the “urgent matter” is in “regard to a destabilising foreign military capability”.

The intelligence is available for lawmakers to view in a secure facility within the US Capitol complex until Friday, 16 February.

Some reports in US media suggest the warning is related to Russian attempts to develop a space-based anti-satellite nuclear weapon. The New York Times, citing current and former US officials, said the weapon was not yet in orbit.

The top Democrat on the committee, Connecticut’s Jim Himes, said in a statement that while the classified threat is “significant”, it “is not a cause for panic”.

“As to whether more can be declassified about the issues, that is a worthwhile discussion but it is not a discussion to be had in public,” he added.

Similarly, House Speaker Mike Johnson said that there is “no need for public alarm”.

Senate Intelligence Chairman Mark Warner and Vice-Chairman Marco Rubio said in a statement that their committee has been “rigorously tracking this issue from the start” and “are discussing an appropriate response with the administration.”

“We must be cautious about potentially disclosing sources and methods that may be key to preserving a range of options for US action,” the statement added.

Asked about the threat at the White House, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters that he had offered to personally brief the so-called “Gang of Eight” comprised of House and Senate leaders from both parties and the top lawmakers on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.

A briefing for the House members of the wider group – which includes Mr Turner, Mr Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries – had been scheduled for Thursday, 15 February.

“I’m a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defence professionals tomorrow,” Mr Sullivan said. “I’m not in a position to say anything further today.”

Mr Sullivan later added that the Biden administration is “protecting the national security of the United States and the American people”.

“Americans understand that there are a range of threats and challenges in the world that we’re dealing with every single day, and those threats and challenges range from terrorism to state actors,” he said. “And we have to contend with them.”

GOP warning of ‘national security threat’ is about Russia wanting nuclear weapon in space: Sources

ABC News

GOP warning of ‘national security threat’ is about Russia wanting nuclear weapon in space: Sources

John Parkinson, Luke Barr, Anne Flaherty, Luis Martinez and Adam Carlson – February 14, 2024

White House plans to brief lawmakers as House chairman warns of 'serious national security threat'

The White House’s national security adviser and leading lawmakers on Capitol Hill sought to allay public concerns on Wednesday after the House Intelligence Committee chairman warned of a “national security threat” related to a “destabilizing foreign military capability” so serious that President Joe Biden should declassify “all information” about it.

Two sources familiar with deliberations on Capitol Hill said the intelligence has to do with Russia wanting to put a nuclear weapon into space.

This would not be to drop a nuclear weapon onto Earth but rather to possibly use against satellites.

Still, “it is very concerning and very sensitive,” said one source, calling it “a big deal.”

While not addressing the subject directly, multiple members of Congress quickly described the issue as serious without stoking public alarm.

“We are going to work together to address this matter, as we do all sensitive matters that are classified,” House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters at the Capitol on Wednesday afternoon.

“But we just want to assure everyone steady hands are at the wheel,” he said.

Rep. Jim Himes, a Connecticut Democrat and the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, echoed that in his own statement, calling the warning “significant” but “not a cause for panic.”

“As to whether more can be declassified about this issue, that is a worthwhile discussion but it is not a discussion to be had in public,” Himes said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Ohio Republican Rep. Mike Turner, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that his panel had “made available to all Members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat.”

“I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,” Turner said.

He said he was making information on the matter available in a secure location to all members of the House in accordance with chamber rules.

Lawmakers arrived to the committee space throughout the afternoon to view the raw intelligence for Turner’s warning, inside a secure facility in the basement at the Capitol.

“it’s concerning,” Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Ark., said afterward, though he didn’t address any additional details.

A letter sent to members of Congress from Turner and Himes, obtained by ABC News, indicated the threat is linked to “a destabilizing foreign military capability that should be known by all Congressional Policy Makers.”

The White House’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan said at Wednesday’s press briefing that he had already scheduled a classified meeting with congressional leadership before Turner’s request.

Sullivan was pressed several times by reporters about the intelligence request, but he declined to specifically say if Thursday’s meeting will be to discuss the reported threat.

He also declined to provide further details about it beyond saying that, broadly, “Americans understand that there are a range of threats and challenges in the world that we are dealing with every single day,” such as terrorism.

“I am confident that President Biden, in the decisions that he is taking, is going to ensure the security of the American people,” Sullivan said.

PHOTO: National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan speaks during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, Feb. 14, 2024. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

“I reached out earlier this week to the Gang of Eight” — referring to the leaders of both parties in both chambers of Congress and the ranking intelligence members — “to offer myself up for a personal briefing … and in fact we scheduled a briefing for the four House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” he said.

“So I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out today,” he said. (Turner has not commented further to the press.)

Sullivan said that the White House has “has gone further and in more creative, more strategic ways dealt with the declassification of intelligence in the national interest of the United States than any administration in history. So you definitely are not going to find an unwillingness to do that.”

“But just to be clear, Turner calls it an urgent matter with regard to a destabilizing foreign military capability,” ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce asked. “Are you aware that there is an emerging serious threat here that he’s referring to?”

“‘I’ll just say that I personally reached out to the Gang of Eight. It is highly unusual, in fact, for the national security adviser to do that,” Sullivan responded.

President Biden had been tracking the threat cited by Turner and specifically asked Sullivan to “engage” the Gang of Eight on it, a U.S. official confirmed to ABC News.

“I did that to set up a meeting. … We’ll have that conversation tomorrow,” Sullivan said at the briefing. “I’m not gonna say anything further.”

ABC News’ Fritz Farrow and Lauren Peller contributed to this report.