NRA Acknowledges Receiving Foreign Funds, Moving Money Between Accounts
The National Rifle Association is acknowledging that it accepts donations from foreign entities, and that it moves money between its various accounts “as permitted by law.”
But the gun group insists none of that foreign money has ever been put towards election purposes, which would be illegal.
The NRA’s admissions came in a recent letter to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who has sought answers about the group’s foreign funding following reports that the FBI is probing whether a Russian banker funneled money to the NRA to benefit the Trump campaign.
The NRA is not required to disclose how funds are transferred between its various entities. As TPM has reported, that would makes it difficult to trace if the NRA received foreign money into a non-political account, then transferred the same amount into an account that can legally be used for political spending.
Responding to a letter from Wyden asking whether any of the the NRA’s organizations have ever “wittingly or unwittingly” received contributions on behalf of foreign interests, NRA General Counsel John Frazer acknowledged that they have. But he said the group’s internal review turned up no evidence that that foreign money has been spent on election purposes, or that any donations received during the 2016 election cycle originated in Russia.
“While we do receive some contributions from foreign individuals and entities, those contributions are made directly to the NRA for lawful purposes,” Frazer wrote to Wyden. “Our review of our records has found no foreign donations in connection with a United States election, either directly or through a conduit.”
Some donations received between 2015 and 2016 came from U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies, but none were “connected with Russia, and none of their contributions were made in connection with U.S. elections.”
In a followup letter sent Tuesday, Wyden said that Frazer’s responses left him with even more questions. Wyden asked for an in-depth account of how foreign donations were used over the past thee years, and whether Russian nationals were members of the NRA’s donor programs, among other questions.
One issue of interest to Wyden: how the organization makes “transfers between accounts are made as permitted by law,” as Frazer acknowledged it does.
WaPo: Trump Pushes Military To Fund Border Wall
Still feeling spurned by the paltry $1.6 billion allotted for his border wall in last week’s funding bill, President Donald Trump is now urging the military to pay for the project, the Washington Post reported Tuesday.
Trump ended an early Sunday morning tweet detailing the wealth of the military and the necessity of the border wall with “Build WALL through M!” Unnamed advisers told the Washington Post that “M” stands for military.
According to the report, Trump floated the idea to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) on Wednesday, receiving little reaction, though unnamed senior officials later dismissed the viability of the proposal.
Ivanka juat a regular white beanie prolly looks like shit without makeup and you can see Trump Jr in her when she smiles
Trump Reportedly Wants to ‘Go After’ Amazon: ‘He’s Obsessed’
President Trump really doesn’t like Amazon, and a report on that may have impacted the company’s stock today.
An Axios report this morning says Trump really wants to go after Jeff Bezos:
The tech behemoth Trump wants to go after is Amazon, according to five sources who’ve discussed it with him. “He’s obsessed with Amazon,” a source said. “Obsessed”…
Trump’s wealthy friends tell him Amazon is destroying their businesses. His real estate buddies tell him — and he agrees — that Amazon is killing shopping malls and brick-and-mortar retailers.
One source said, “He’s wondered aloud if there may be any way to go after Amazon with antitrust or competition law.”
Trump has publicly gone after Amazon on Twitter before:
Another source told Axios, “It’s been explained to him in multiple meetings that his perception is inaccurate and that the post office actually makes a ton of money from Amazon.”
After Axios’ report dropped, according to CNBC, shares of Amazon fell by 4.6 percent.
Trump Org Fails To Regain Control Of Panama Hotel That Ousted Brand
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s family hotel business has lost a bid to regain control of the luxury hotel in Panama that ousted his brand, according to a new emergency arbitration ruling.
The arbitrator ruled Tuesday that Trump’s company should not have been evicted while a broader arbitration dispute was ongoing between the hotel owners and Trump. But with Trump outmaneuvered in Panama and the hotel in the owners’ hands, the arbitrator declined to reinstate the Trump team. He also barred all parties from starting new legal fights over the matter.
“The facts on the ground now militate against forcibly undoing the steps that have been taken,” arbitrator Joel Richler wrote. He said his decision might be different if Trump had sought an emergency arbitration decision before the hotel owners asked for help from Panamanian courts.
Trump Organization officials did not respond to emails and a phone call Wednesday seeking comment on the ruling.
Tuesday’s decision dashes the Trump Organization’s hopes of reversing its high-profile eviction from the property, a 70-story luxury high rise on Panama City’s waterfront now named The Bahia Grand Panama. The owners of the property — which was run by Trump under a management agreement — sought to fire his company last October, citing damage to Trump’s brand and mismanagement by hotel officials. But the Trump Organization disputed its termination as illegitimate and refused to hand over the property.
The fight — initially waged in confidential arbitration — burst into the public eye in February when Orestes Fintiklis, the hotel’s majority owner, sought to fire Trump’s hotel management and take control of the property on behalf of the owners’ association. Trump’s family company responded by beefing up its security team and blockading doors — sometimes by building walls in the administrative office’s hallways. Rival teams of hotel security guards skirmished on the property, and police were repeatedly called in to keep the peace.
The standoff ended March 5, when Panamanian judicial officials sided with Fintiklis and a justice of the peace backed by police officers ordered the Trump management team to vacate the property. A workman immediately scrubbed Trump’s name from the hotel, using a crowbar to pry “TRUMP” off the hotel’s signage amid a scrum of news cameras.
Richler’s ruling stated that, under the contract between the hotel owners and the Trump Organization, the dispute over Trump’s firing should have remained in arbitration and never have been brought to Panama’s courts. But because his determination applies only to his own decision, it is unclear whether that decision has any significance.
The arbitrator ordered both sides to split the $40,000 cost of the emergency arbitration evenly and ordered both the hotel owners and Trump to refrain from bringing new challenges against each other until the arbitration is sorted out.
“The parties to the arbitration agreement are enjoined from making any emergency applications concerning the management of the hotel in any forum other than the ICC or the courts of New York,” he wrote — jurisdictions in which the matter has already been contested, including the International Chamber of Commerce.
The parties are still fighting over who broke the hotel management contract and who should pay whom. A $3 million arbitration claim filed by Trump’s business against the hotel and a cumulative $25 million in claims against Trump in arbitration and Panamanian court remain outstanding.
Judge Rules DC, Maryland Have Standing To Sue Trump
A federal judge ruled on Wednesday that Maryland and Washington, D.C. have standing to sue President Donald Trump, allowing their lawsuit claiming that the President violated the Constitution’s Emoluments clause to move forward for now.
Maryland and D.C. have cleared one hurdle in their lawsuit against the President, but the judge has yet to issue a ruling on the meaning of the Emoluments clause, another factor that will determine whether the case can proceed. The judge, who is based in Maryland, will issue an opinion on the rest of Trump’s motion to dismiss the case at a later date.
The judge also ruled that Maryland and D.C. only have standing to sue over activities at the Trump International Hotel and the Trump Organization’s operations in Washington, D.C., not the Trump Organization’s operations outside the District.
The attorneys general in Maryland and D.C. argue in their lawsuit that Trump violated the Emolument’s clause by failing to sever financial ties with his hotel in Washington, D.C. The Emolument’s clause bars the President from accepting payments from a foreign government. It’s one of three lawsuits related to the Emoluments clause filed against the President, one of which was thrown out last year.
Foreign officials have patronized Trump’s hotel in Washington, D.C., and Maryland and D.C. argued in their lawsuit that the hotel’s connection to Trump drew people to that venue, as opposed to other event spaces in the area. In a January hearing on the lawsuit, a lawyer for the Trump hotel argued that the complaint was merely a “political” attempt to learn more about the President’s business. As for the debate over the meaning of the Emoluments clause, Trump’s legal team has argued that it does not apply to business transactions.
Asked about the ruling in the daily press briefing on Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said she “can’t comment on ongoing litigation.”
Dems Want Probe Into Whether Interior Department Discriminated
Senior Democrats are demanding that Congress’s investigative arm probe whether Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s mass reassignment of senior career civil servants last summer violated federal anti-discrimination laws.
In a letter sent Wednesday to the Government Accountability Office, obtained early by TPM, a group of Senate and House Democrats say they’re concerned that the controversial reassignments — already the subject of multiple investigations — are disproportionately affecting employees who “belong to a protected class.”
It’s illegal to make federal personnel decisions based on race, gender, age, religion, or disability.
The congressional letter comes days after the attorney representing some of the targeted employees in the Senior Executive Service (SES), the top rank of non-political federal employees, claimed that nearly half of those reassigned were minorities.
It also comes on the heels of several episodes that have raised questions about Zinke’s commitment to diversity and racial sensitivity, as well as a review by TPM of the DOI’s website that found that pages dedicated on diversity training and African-American resources have been cut back or removed entirely.
“We are concerned that mismanagement of this program could lead to premature retirements, lower morale within the federal workforce, higher costs for the Department, and discourage talented professionals from entering the SES,” the eight top Democrats on the House and Senate’s committees that oversee federal worker issues wrote. “We are concerned about reports of agencies reassigning SES staff in a manner that is inconsistent with the purposes of the SES program, and which will impair the ability of agencies to implement programs in accordance with laws and Congressional intent.”
The letter is signed by Reps. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD) and Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), and Sens. Tom Carper (D-DE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND). It’s a follow-up to the lawmakers’ demand last summer for a probe into whether the reshuffling in the Department was “based on political considerations.”
The saga began last July, when Zinke moved to reassign dozens of senior career officials, telling many of them to either accept a new placement on the other side of the country or in a role unrelated to their background, or leave the agency. Many of those pushed out of their prior jobs are now challenging the move, and some are speaking out publicly to accuse Zinke of targeting them for political reasons.
The most prominent of the bunch is Joel Clement, the agency’s top climate change official, who Zinke moved to the office that collects royalties from oil, gas and mining companies. Clement told TPM that he believes he was targeted because of his work on both climate change and with Native American communities.
“Some of the reassignments were probably fair enough, but doing dozens at once is eyebrow-raising,” said Clement. “I believe some were discrimination, and some were retaliation.”
Under laws dating back to the late 1800s, it’s illegal to make decisions about hiring, firing, promoting or demoting federal workers based on political affiliations or patronage. Additionally, a few weeks before the moves were announced, Zinke said he wanted to reduce the Department’s workforce by thousands of people, raising concerns that the goal of the reassignments was to pressure career staffers to resign.
The GAO, the Interior Department’s Inspector General, and the Office of Special Counsel have all for months been investigating the motive for Zinke moving Clement and his colleagues.
Clement’s attorney Katie Atkinson told CNN earlier this week that more than 40 percent of the people who were reassigned without warning are people of color. Atkinson was traveling and unable to respond immediately to TPM inquiry about the source of her numbers. But the allegation was alarming enough that Democrats now want some of the investigating bodies to take a closer look at whether members of a legally protected class —such as racial minorities — were singled out in the purge.
“We need to make sure the agencies are being run in a professional way, and targeting people for their political beliefs, or perceived political beliefs, attacking the scientists and experts whose work conflicts with some of the beliefs that the Trump administration has, and disproportionately going after racial minorities is far from that,” a Senate Democratic aide told TPM, speaking on background due to the sensitivity of the oversight work.
Adding to Democrats’ concern are new reports that Zinke has repeatedly said to DOI officials “diversity isn’t important” and “I don’t care about diversity.”
Those alleged comments have made some on Capitol Hill take a fresh look at a cryptic remark the Secretary made last September, when he said, “’I’ve got 30 percent of the crew that’s not loyal to the flag.’”
“The Department of the Interior is 70 percent white and 30 percent people of color,” the Senate Democratic aide said. “In light of this, I think it’s fair to ask Secretary Zinke which 30 percent are you talking about?”
The Department of the Interior did not respond to TPM’s question as to whether the 30 percent referenced by Zinke was referring to the Department’s people of color.
Zinke’s attitude toward racial minorities came under additional scrutiny, when, at a recent budget hearing on Capitol Hill, he responded “Oh, konnichiwa” to Rep. Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI), when the lawmaker asked about his commitment to funding monuments to commemorate WWII Japanese-American internment camps. Hanabusa, who is Japanese-American, later noted that the remark was an example of “racial stereotyping,” and that no other member of the committee “was greeted in their ancestral language” by Zinke.
The Secretary did not apologize, and instead asked, “How could ever saying ‘Good morning’ be bad?”
The Department of the Interior’s website dedicated to training resources on diversity and civil rights also appears to have been taken down. An archived version of the site accessed via the Internet Archive shows that as of late 2016, the site had a long list of recommended subjects for training, including Disability Accommodations, Employment Law, and Recruiting for Diversity. The agency’s page for African American Resources, meanwhile, included in 2016 a list of 20organizations and sources of information on black history, culture, literature and advocacy groups like the NAACP. The page now consists of a large picture of Zinke in front of the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial and a link to the page of a single group — Blacks in Government.
The Interior Department did not respond to TPM’s inquiry as to why the pages were cut back and removed.
Democrats on Capitol Hill say all these data points have convinced them to focus a significant piece their oversight work in the months to come on the Interior Department’s treatment of employees of color.
“You start to get a pattern of an entitled white guy who has no time for diversity and actually scoffs at it,” the aide told TPM.
An Interior Department spokesman didn’t immediately respond to that charge.