UPDATE: NBC News retracted its exclusive story alleging that Michael Cohen’s phones were being wiretapped. According to the network, Cohen’s phones were being “monitored” by a pen register, not a wiretap. Pen registers capture “to and from” calling and texting information, but not the content.
***
President Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, had his phones wiretapped by the FBI, and at least one phone call with the president was intercepted, according to a report on Thursday.
NBC News reported Thursday, citing two people with knowledge of legal proceedings involving Cohen, that federal investigators had wiretapped Cohen’s phone lines, but it is not clear how long it has been authorized.
The network said the wiretap was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen’s home, office, and hotel room in early April.
Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor and newest member of his legal team, learned after the raid the president had made a call to Cohen, and advised him to never call again, out of concern the call was being recorded by prosecutors, according to the report.
The FBI conducted the raid on Cohen after Special Counsel Robert Mueller referred a criminal investigation on Cohen to the U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the special counsel probe after Attorney General Jeff Session’s recusal from the investigation, authorized the referral.
Cohen is reportedly under investigation for bank fraud and campaign violations, possibly related to a $130,000 payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels in the days before the 2016 election to keep her from going public about an alleged affair, which he has denied.
On Wednesday, Giuliani told Fox News’s Sean Hannity that payment to the actress did not involve any campaign funds, and was later reimbursed through Trump’s $35,000 per month retainer payments to Cohen, paid out of his personal finances.
This is the second known wiretap on a Trump associate. The FBI obtained a wiretap on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page in October 2016, using the infamous “pee dossier” as an essential part of the surveillance warrant application.
That wiretap was authorized and renewed four times.
Trump claimed in March, based on a Breitbart News article by Joel Pollak, that his campaign was being wiretapped — for which he was initially mocked. However, later, the Washington Post confirmed the wiretap on Page.
There are still questions over whether his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was also wiretapped
Why Are We Allowing The Chinese To Build Smartphone That The Military Is Using?
The three military exchange services pulled all smartphones made by Chinese electronics manufacturers Huawei and ZTE from stores around the world and banned their sale because of the security risks the devices pose, the Pentagon said Wednesday.
The Defense Department’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness issued a ban of “all Huawei and ZTE cellphones, personal mobile internet modems and related products from locations worldwide,” DOD spokesman Maj. Dave Eastburn said an email to Stars and Stripes.
“Given the security concerns associated with these devices, as expressed by senior U.S. intelligence officials, it was not prudent for the Department’s exchange services to continue selling these products to our personnel,” Eastburn said. He added that DOD is “evaluating the situation” to see if any additional security measures are needed, including an outright ban on use of the phones by servicemembers.
Stars and Stripes first reported last week that an Army and Air Force Exchange Service concession at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, had been selling the mobile electronic devices on base. The products were also found for sale at U.S. bases in other overseas locations.
In February, the director of national intelligence, along with the heads of the CIA, FBI, National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency all testified before a Senate committee that Americans should not use Huawei or ZTE products because of security concerns.
Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer, is a private company started by a former People’s Liberation Army officer. U.S. intelligence officials say the company has very close ties to China’s government.
FBI Director Christopher Wray testified that Huawei products give the Chinese government the ability to gather or alter sensitive corporate and military information undetected.
The concern about Huawei first focused on routers, switches and other high-bandwidth commercial products; it later expanded to consumer mobile phones. They are already banned for official government use in most cases.
Huawei has been the target of numerous U.S. regulations and laws meant to address national security concerns, such as a 2013 law that required federal law enforcement agencies to sign off on certain purchases of its products by government agencies.
Huawei spokesmen have repeatedly denied claims the company’s devices pose any security risks. Huawei phones are used commonly throughout Europe, and the company is in the middle of a worldwide promotional campaign for its latest phone series, the P20, released last month.
Still, the Chinese devices “may pose an unacceptable risk to (the) department’s personnel, information and mission,” Eastburn said.
New rules proposed by the Federal Communications Commission would bar U.S. telecommunications companies that receive FCC subsidies from buying products from foreign companies with security concerns. Companies have yet to be named, but Huawei and ZTE are both expected to make the list of banned manufacturers. A bill introduced in January by Rep. Michael Conway, a Republican from Texas, would make it illegal for U.S. government contractors to use any Huawei equipment.
Huawei also makes personal mobile Internet modems, called “pucks,” which in recent years have been sold to U.S. troops at a coalition base near Irbil, the capital of Iraq’s Kurdish region. Some soldiers may have purchased similar devices made by ZTE.
ZTE was sanctioned by the U.S. government for violating trade embargoes by sending U.S.-made components to Iran inside its devices. Huawei is currently the subject of a similar investigation by the Justice Department.
Eastburn said the Pentagon deferred to command officials for additional guidance on operational security matters, but he said troops should watch out for news of potentially compromised electronics.
“Servicemembers should be mindful of the media coverage about the security risks posed by the use of these devices, regardless of where they were purchased,” he said.
What In The Hello Has Condoleezza Rice Accomplished?
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday morning that President Donald Trump should not engage directly in the details of negotiation with North Korea.
“First of all, don’t try to negotiate the details with Kim Jong-un,” Rice told Fox & Friends. “Leave that for people who understand all the nuances of the situation.”
Condoleezza Rice Said her childhood experience with segregation in the South helped her understand the Palestinian experience. WTF?
Rice noted that she was the last American to negotiate with the North Korean regime, when she was dealing with Kim Jong-un’s father, Kim Jong-il.
“You have to give the [Trump] administration a lot of credit,” she said, for pressuring China to rein in the Kim regime and for using the threat of military force to isolate North Korea.
However, she said, the president should leave the nuts-and-bolts of diplomacy to others, even though he would be meeting directly with Kim Jong-un at a summit in the coming weeks. And she warned that the Kim regime was still a murderous one with a track record of breaking its promises.
Rice said she supported the Trump administration’s move toward pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal.
“I actually think if we pull out now, it is not going to be the disaster everybody is talking about,” she said. “I would not have signed this deal. I don’t think it was a very good deal. I think we were in a hurry to get a deal and we left a lot on the table. … If we get out of this deal, it is going to be just fine.”
Asked whether she wanted to leave the Iran deal, Rice said: “I would probably have stayed in for alliance management purposes but … if the president decides to pull out of the deal I have no argument with that.”
Sarah Maria Beach, 45, faces up to a year in federal prison if convicted of assault
Beach, an American expat living in London, was on a flight to Salt Lake City
She allegedly threw coffee on passengers and assaulted a US Air Marshal
Beach also allegedly overturned a drink cart and ran up and down the aisle
Sarah Maria Beach, 45, an American expat living in London, faces misdemeanor assault charges which were filed in US district court in Utah on Thursday
A rowdy passenger aboard a Delta Airlines flight from London to Salt Lake City has been arrested for allegedly assaulting a US Air Marshal and throwing coffee on passengers.
Sarah Maria Beach, 45, an American expat living in London, faces misdemeanor assault charges which were filed in US district court in Utah on Thursday.
News of Beach’s arrest was reported by KSL.com.
Prosecutors have alleged that Beach threw coffee on passengers during the flight, overturned a drink cart, and ran up and down the aisle of the plane.
Flight attendants asked air marshals who were sitting in the back of the plane to help subdue Beach, according to the criminal complaint.
After Beach calmed down, she was seated next to one of the air marshals, who escorted her to the bathroom three times.
After she came out the third time, she allegedly jumped on the air marshal’s back and grabbed his head, neck, and jaw.
+2
Beach allegedly behaved rowdily while on a Delta Airlines flight from London to Salt Lake City. Delta planes are seen at Salt Lake City International Airport in this 2015 stock image
Another air marshal came to his colleague’s aid and pulled Beach off of her, the government alleges.
Beach was then handcuffed for the remainder of the flight.
Where is the collusion investigation on Christopher Steele a spy from Britain?
The former British spy who wrote the infamous dossier has been ordered to appear for a deposition in a lawsuit over the salacious document filed in the U.S.
A British court ordered Christopher Steele to testify about his role in compiling the dossier, which alleges that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Steele’s report was funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee. BuzzFeed News published the 35-page document in Jan. 2017.
Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian businessman named in the dossier, is suing BuzzFeed in Florida and Steele in London. The dossier claims that Gubarev was recruited as a Russian spy and that his web hosting companies were used to infiltrate the DNC’s computer systems.
Gubarev’s lawyers have tried for months to force the London-based Steele to provide a deposition for the lawsuit against BuzzFeed, which is being heard in federal court in Florida.
Steele has resisted the efforts to provide a deposition, arguing that Gubarev’s lawyers are attempting to use his deposition in the BuzzFeed case in order to collect information for use in the lawsuit pending against him in the U.K.
But a British judge sided against that argument.
A judge on the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court in London ruled, “it is obvious that the author of the paragraph complained of in the Florida proceedings would be a relevant witness in defamation proceedings which are entirely based on the allegations in that paragraph, in a jurisdiction where the plaintiffs have to prove that the allegations are false,” Fox News reported.
Evan Fray-Witzer, a lawyer for Gubarev, praised the decision.
“We’re thrilled that the English Court has ordered Mr. Steele to sit for his deposition,” Fray-Witzer said. “It was always amazing to us that he could talk as freely as he has to reporters around the world about the dossier, yet refuse to sit for a deposition about the same topics.”
Fray-Witzer told The Daily Caller News Foundation a date has not been set for the deposition, but will likely be held within the next 4-6 weeks.
Fray-Witzer says that his team recently narrowed the scope of the information it sought from Steele. The former MI6 officer has asserted that his deposition could put dossier sources in danger.
Fray-Witzer says that his team has agreed not to ask Steele about his sources. He also says that Steele has chosen not to appeal the decision. “Buzzfeed published information about Mr. Gubarev and his companies that was unverified and untrue and they seem to be hoping to scuttle the deposition of the person most positioned to testify to those facts,” he told TheDCNF.
Supreme Court Rules To Protect Illegal Immigrants That Commit Felonies.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a provision of federal law Tuesday that allows the deportation of foreign nationals convicted of certain felonies.
Justice Neil Gorsuch joined with the court’s four liberals to strike down the law, in keeping with longstanding conservative anxieties about sweeping and imprecise grants of power to bureaucrats and regulators.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion for a five-member majority.
At issue in the case was a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) that permits the deportation of any alien convicted of an aggravated felony. The law lists a number of convictions that qualify as “aggravated felonies,” then includes a catchall provision for “any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
James Dimaya, a lawful permanent resident, was slated for deportation to the Philippines following two convictions for first-degree burglaries. An immigration judge ordered his removal under the INA’s catchall provision, as first-degree burglary does not appear on the list of qualifying offenses. In turn, Dimaya challenged the provision, arguing it is unconstitutionally vague.
In a 2015 decision called Johnson v. U.S., the high court struck down as unlawfully vague a section of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) that defined a “violent felony” as, among other things, “conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” Since then, litigants have brought a number of vagueness challenges to similar provisions of federal law.
The late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the Johnson decision.
Dimaya argued the catchall section of the INA was substantially similar to the statute the court overturned in Johnson. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, prompting the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) appeal to the Supreme Court. The DOJ argued the 9th Circuit’s review of the statute was excessive, since civil laws are only considered vague if they are “unintelligible.” Deportation proceedings are civil, not criminal matters.
In her opinion for the court, Kagan rejected that argument, finding the grave nature of deportation warrants heavy judicial scrutiny. She then explained the INA’s catchall provision has precisely the same elements as the unconstitutionally vague section of the ACCA, minor linguistic differences notwithstanding.
“Johnson is a straightforward decision, with equally straightforward application here,” she wrote, elsewhere noting the statute “invited arbitrary enforcement, and failed to provide fair notice.”
Gorsuch wrote a separate opinion concurring in the judgment, in which he argued vagueness challenges to civil laws should be treated as seriously as challenges to criminal laws. Many civil penalties — and not just deportation — are in his view so sweeping that courts should police aggressively for vagueness, and abandon the “unintelligible” standard currently in use.
“Grave as that penalty may be, I cannot see why we would single it out for special treatment when (again) so many civil laws today impose so many similarly severe sanctions,” he wrote. Such sanctions include “confiscatory rather than compensatory fines, forfeiture provisions that allow homes to be taken, remedies that strip persons of their professional licenses and livelihoods, and the power to commit persons against their will indefinitely.”
His opinion largely tracks the growing distrust in conservative legal circles of draconian penalties assessed through administrative processes, and is part of a growing campaign to challenge economic regulations on vagueness grounds.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the primary dissent, joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito.
The Justice Department said Congress should quickly amend the INA to ensure a wider range of criminal convictions qualify for deportation.
“We call on Congress to close criminal alien loopholes to ensure that criminal aliens who commit those crimes—for example, burglary in many states, drug trafficking in Florida, and even sexual abuse of a minor in New Jersey—are not able to avoid the consequences that should come with breaking our nation’s laws,” Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley said after the ruling.
