4 Burst results for "Clovis Alternate Associates"

"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

04:35 min | 5 months ago

"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KQED Radio

"Million documents. Hundreds of witness interviews and the consensus from Democrats and Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee is that Russia aggressively tried to influence 2016 presidential campaign, and the Trump campaign was happy to accept Russian help, they said. So in 1000 page report this week, the committee also reportedly made criminal referrals to federal prosecutors believe in a number of people have lied or maid. Contradictory statements to investigators were going to turn now to Justin. Rude. He's a former congressional investigator now director of the project on Government Oversight. Thanks so much for being with us good to be with you. According to officials who spoke with the Times, The Washington Post NBC News the intelligence Committee Told the Department of Justice that Steve Bannon, Erik Prince Sam Clovis Alternate Associates appeared to have made false statements to the committee and that Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner had made statements that were contradicted by other testimony. How often does a congressional committee make a referral like that? But they're not common, but I would say they're not infrequent. It's hard to say for sure, because sometimes these pearls are made publicly. Sometimes they're made privately. These obviously we've made privately so it's hard to have AH, clear accounts, but it's not uncommon, especially at the end of a lengthy investigation like this one toe have examples of Witnesses say you feel may have not have been fully forthcoming on there's a matter almost house. You need to refer that to Department of justice and ask them to look look into a little further. Would you have any concern based on what we do know now that the Justice Department is ignoring Congress or slowing down the process? This is not a normal year. That is not a normal administration for sure make that difficult to see inside a black box of the situation like this. Certainly there are concerns from politicization of the Department of Justice. But I would also say that historically speaking when Congress makes with pearls to the Department of Justice for anything but particularly around obstruction, or or false statements, types of concerns If the figures of the subjects of those girls are connected to the administration administration officials regardless of whether they're Democratic Republican, the Department of Justice rarely takes those cases up frequently. These were for Those are much more successful if they target a private individual. Well, what a tradition. Why don't they traditionally picked them up old fashioned politics? It's hard to convince the Department of Justice to go after a member of their own administration on DH while I think false statements, serious charge, and certainly any federal investigator would tell you get in. I think there are people have gone to prison for lying to Congress, right? Oh, absolutely, and in recent history as well, So I think that we should probably point to that evidence as well. You got Michael Cohen, who pled guilty to a charge of lying to Congress. He had Roger Stone, who was convicted of making false statements now, But those were coming through the Mueller team. The special prosecutor's team and these referrals are going to the U. S Attorney's office here in D. C. Which I think has a little bit of a body a record. I think Congress just heard from members that office in June. I believe about interns around politicization there. In the cases of Michael Flynn and Excuse me and Roger Stone sentencing. So, so it's tough to read whether or not it's going to move forward. I would say that while the Department of Justice don't get these referrals from Congress from committees from members because it's just a letter anyone any member of Congress or the Mini can write one of these letters. I think they tend Give credence to these work world become, as this one does from the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is to say first that's being made on a bipartisan basis by the by the chair and vice chair of the committee is coming at the end of an extensive and detailed investigation. That's just one person's opinion. Kind of popping off. They you assume have AH, decent. Body of records to refer to and the third one is they didn't publicly They didn't try to politicize it so that I think a lot of watches gives credence in some real gravity. Well, thanks very much for being with us. Justin Road, directs the Congressional Oversight Initiative at the project on Government Oversight. We're very grateful for your time. Thank you, sir. For having me At

David Copperfield Mr Dick Dickens David UK Laure Zelig Armando Charles writer
Russia worked to help Trump in 2016 election: Senate panel

Weekend Edition Saturday

04:35 min | 5 months ago

Russia worked to help Trump in 2016 election: Senate panel

"Million documents. Hundreds of witness interviews and the consensus from Democrats and Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee is that Russia aggressively tried to influence 2016 presidential campaign, and the Trump campaign was happy to accept Russian help, they said. So in 1000 page report this week, the committee also reportedly made criminal referrals to federal prosecutors believe in a number of people have lied or maid. Contradictory statements to investigators were going to turn now to Justin. Rude. He's a former congressional investigator now director of the project on Government Oversight. Thanks so much for being with us good to be with you. According to officials who spoke with the Times, The Washington Post NBC News the intelligence Committee Told the Department of Justice that Steve Bannon, Erik Prince Sam Clovis Alternate Associates appeared to have made false statements to the committee and that Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner had made statements that were contradicted by other testimony. How often does a congressional committee make a referral like that? But they're not common, but I would say they're not infrequent. It's hard to say for sure, because sometimes these pearls are made publicly. Sometimes they're made privately. These obviously we've made privately so it's hard to have AH, clear accounts, but it's not uncommon, especially at the end of a lengthy investigation like this one toe have examples of Witnesses say you feel may have not have been fully forthcoming on there's a matter almost house. You need to refer that to Department of justice and ask them to look look into a little further. Would you have any concern based on what we do know now that the Justice Department is ignoring Congress or slowing down the process? This is not a normal year. That is not a normal administration for sure make that difficult to see inside a black box of the situation like this. Certainly there are concerns from politicization of the Department of Justice. But I would also say that historically speaking when Congress makes with pearls to the Department of Justice for anything but particularly around obstruction, or or false statements, types of concerns If the figures of the subjects of those girls are connected to the administration administration officials regardless of whether they're Democratic Republican, the Department of Justice rarely takes those cases up frequently. These were for Those are much more successful if they target a private individual. Well, what a tradition. Why don't they traditionally picked them up old fashioned politics? It's hard to convince the Department of Justice to go after a member of their own administration on DH while I think false statements, serious charge, and certainly any federal investigator would tell you get in. I think there are people have gone to prison for lying to Congress, right? Oh, absolutely, and in recent history as well, So I think that we should probably point to that evidence as well. You got Michael Cohen, who pled guilty to a charge of lying to Congress. He had Roger Stone, who was convicted of making false statements now, But those were coming through the Mueller team. The special prosecutor's team and these referrals are going to the U. S Attorney's office here in D. C. Which I think has a little bit of a body a record. I think Congress just heard from members that office in June. I believe about interns around politicization there. In the cases of Michael Flynn and Excuse me and Roger Stone sentencing. So, so it's tough to read whether or not it's going to move forward. I would say that while the Department of Justice don't get these referrals from Congress from committees from members because it's just a letter anyone any member of Congress or the Mini can write one of these letters. I think they tend Give credence to these work world become, as this one does from the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is to say first that's being made on a bipartisan basis by the by the chair and vice chair of the committee is coming at the end of an extensive and detailed investigation. That's just one person's opinion. Kind of popping off. They you assume have AH, decent. Body of records to refer to and the third one is they didn't publicly They didn't try to politicize it so that I think a lot of watches gives credence in some real gravity. Well, thanks very much for being with us. Justin Road, directs the Congressional Oversight Initiative at the project on Government Oversight. We're very grateful for your time. Thank you, sir. For having me At

Department Of Justice Congress Senate Intelligence Committee Investigator Government Oversight Justice Department Roger Stone Congressional Oversight Initia Intelligence Committee Justin Road Russia NBC Michael Cohen Clovis Alternate Associates Donald Trump Jr The Washington Post Jared Kushner Erik Prince
"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

04:25 min | 5 months ago

"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KQED Radio

"This is weekend edition from NPR News. I'm Scott Simon. Three years more than million documents. Hundreds of witness interviews and the consensus from Democrats and Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee is that Russia aggressively tried to influence 2016 presidential campaign, and the Trump campaign was happy to accept Russian help, they said. So in 1000 page report this week, the committee also reportedly made criminal referrals to federal prosecutors believe in a number of people have lied or maid. Contradictory statements to investigators were going to turn now to Justin. Rude. He's a former congressional investigator now director of the project on Government Oversight. Thanks so much for being with us good to be with you. According to officials who spoke with the Times, The Washington Post NBC News the intelligence Committee Told the Department of Justice that Steve Bannon, Erik Prince Sam Clovis Alternate Associates appeared to have made false statements to the committee and that Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner had made statements that were contradicted by other testimony. How often does a congressional committee make a referral like that? But they're not common, but I would say they're not infrequent. It's hard to say for sure, because sometimes these pearls are made publicly. Sometimes they're made privately. These obviously we've made privately so it's hard to have AH, clear accounts, but it's not uncommon, especially at the end of a lengthy investigation like this one toe have examples of Witnesses say you feel may have not have been fully forthcoming on there's a matter almost house. You need to refer that to Department of justice and ask them to look look into a little further. Would you have any concern based on what we do know now that the Justice Department is ignoring Congress or slowing down the process? This is not a normal year. That is not a normal administration for sure make that difficult to see inside a black box of the situation like this. Certainly there are concerns from politicization of the Department of Justice. But I would also say that historically speaking when Congress makes with pearls to the Department of Justice for anything but particularly around obstruction, or or false statements, types of concerns If the figures of the subjects of those girls are connected to the administration administration officials regardless of whether they're Democratic Republican, the Department of Justice rarely takes those cases up frequently. These were for Those are much more successful if they target a private individual. Well, what a tradition. Why don't they traditionally picked them up old fashioned politics? It's hard to convince the Department of Justice to go after a member of their own administration on DH while I think false statements, serious charge, and certainly any federal investigator would tell you get in. I think there are people have gone to prison for lying to Congress, right? Oh, absolutely, and in recent history as well, So I think that we should probably point to that evidence as well. You got Michael Cohen, who pled guilty to a charge of lying to Congress. He had Roger Stone, who was convicted of making false statements now, But those were coming through the Mueller team. The special prosecutor's team and these referrals are going to the U. S Attorney's office here in D. C. Which I think has a little bit of a body a record. I think Congress just heard from members that office in June. I believe about interns around politicization there. In the cases of Michael Flynn and Excuse me and Roger Stone sentencing. So, so it's tough to read whether or not it's going to move forward. I would say that while the Department of Justice don't get these referrals from Congress from committees from members because it's just a letter anyone any member of Congress or the Mini can write one of these letters. I think they tend Give credence to these work world become, as this one does from the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is to say first that's being made on a bipartisan basis by the by the chair and vice chair of the committee is coming at the end of an extensive and detailed investigation. That's just one person's opinion. Kind of popping off. They you assume have AH, decent. Body of records to refer to and the third one is they didn't publicly They didn't try to politicize it so that I think a lot of watches gives credence in some real gravity..

Department of Justice Congress Senate Intelligence Committee investigator Justice Department Scott Simon NPR News intelligence Committee Russia Government Oversight Michael Cohen Roger Stone Clovis Alternate Associates Donald Trump Jr vice chair NBC The Washington Post Jared Kushner
"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

08:50 min | 5 months ago

"clovis alternate associates" Discussed on KCRW

"I'm Scott Simon. Three years more than million documents. Hundreds of witness interviews and the consensus from Democrats and Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee is that Russia aggressively tried to influence 2016 presidential campaign, and the Trump campaign was happy to accept Russian help, they said. So in 1000 page report this week, the committee also reportedly made criminal referrals to federal prosecutors, believing a number of people have lied or maid. Contradictory statements to investigators were going to turn now to Justin. Rude. He's a former congressional investigator now director of the project on Government Oversight. Thanks so much for being with us good to be with you. According to officials who spoke with the Times, The Washington Post in NBC News, the intelligence committee Told the Department of Justice that Steve Bannon, Erik Prince Sam Clovis Alternate Associates appeared to have made false statements to the committee and that Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner had made statements that were contradicted by other testimony. How often does a congressional committee make a referral like that? But they're not common, but I would say they're not infrequent. It's hard to say for sure, because sometimes these referrals are made publicly. Sometimes they're made privately. These obviously we've made privately so it's hard to have AH, clear accounts. It's not uncommon, especially at the end of a lengthy investigation like this one toe have examples of witnesses you feel may have not have been fully forthcoming on the matter. Almost how's Ginny to refer that to Department of justice and ask them to look look into a little further Would would you have any concern based on what we do know now that the Justice Department is ignoring Congress or slowing down the process? Um, this is not a normal year. This is not a normal administration for sure. Don't make it difficult to see inside a black box of a situation like this. Certainly there are concerns from politicization of the Department of Justice. But I would also say that historically speaking when Congress makes referrals to the Department of Justice for anything but particularly around you Obstruction or or false statements, types of concerns. If the figures of the subjects of those girls are connected to the administration administration officials regardless of whether they're Democratic Republican, the Department of Justice rarely takes those cases up frequently. These were girls are much more successful if they turned in a private individual. Well, what a tradition. Why don't they traditionally pick them up old fashioned politics? It's hard to convince the Department of Justice to go after a member of their own administration on DH while I think false statements, serious charge, and certainly any federal investigator would tell you get in. I think I mean, there are people have gone to prison for lying to Congress, right? Oh, absolutely and and in recent history as well, So I think that we should probably point to that evidence as well. You've got Michael Cohen, who pled guilty to a charge of lying to Congress. He had Roger Stone, who was convicted of making false statements. Now, But those were coming through the Mueller team, the special prosecutor's demon and these referrals or going to the U. S attorney's office here in D. C, which I think has a little bit of, uh, spotty a record. I think Congress just heard from members that office in June. I believe about concerns around politicization there in the cases of Michael Flynn and Excuse me and Roger Stone sentencing, so, so it's tough to read whether or not it's going to move forward. I would say that Well, the Department of Justice does get these were girls from Congress from committees from members because it's just a letter anyone any member of Congress or the Mini could write one of these letters. I think they penned Give credence to these work world become as this one does from the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is to say first it's being made on a bipartisan basis by the chair by the chairman, vice chair of the committee is coming at the end of an extensive and detailed investigation. This is just one person's opinion kind of popping off. They you assume have AH, decent body of records to refer to and the third one is they didn't publicly They didn't try to politicize it so that I think a lot of watchers give gives the treatment from some real gravity. Well, thanks very much for being with us. Justin. Rude directs the Congressional Oversight Initiative at the project on Government Oversight. We're very grateful for your time. Thank you, sir. Hey, for having me. At least 550,000 mail in ballots have been rejected in this year's primary so far, according to a new analysis by NPR that is far more than the total number of ballots rejected in the 2016 general election. And that may bring alarm bells about what might happen this November, when tens of millions more voters are expected to cast ballots by mail. NPR's Pam Fessler joins us, Pam Thanks so much for being with us. Hi, Scott. The alarms. I suppose we're in the air, the beholder. Ah, Many fear widespread disenfranchisement because of Rejected ballots. Many see that uses the frailties of mail in voting. Let's start with what we know about why so many mail in ballots have been rejected. Well, the rejected for several reasons. And by the way, Scott the numbers we have are on the low side because not every state has been reporting them most of ballots that are rejected because the envelope blacks of witness or votre signature or else the votre signature doesn't match the one that the election office has on the record, And the second big reason is that a lot of these ballots just arrived too late. Most states require that they be in by election Day. But as we've been hearing in the last few weeks, there have been a lot of delays. A mail delivery And of course, we have so many more people voting by mail this year because of the pandemic and many of them for the first time, so that's led to a big spike in the number of rejected ballots. And is there a pattern to whose ballots are being rejected? Well, the research is pretty limited. But what we do know is that first time absentee voters as well as young voters and voters of color are more likely than others to have their ballots rejected. And that's often because you know, quite simply there unfamiliar with the rules. And there's also some variability and how these rules are imposed, especially for things like whether signatures match which could be pretty subjective. Daniel Smith is a political scientist at the University of Florida studied his state's March primary. Ari, where more than 1% of mail in ballots were rejected, And he's found that black and Hispanic voters were disproportionately affected, and in some cases, their ballots were twice as likely to be rejected than those of white voters. And he says, This could make a big difference in the general election, even just in Florida alone if you have 1% of maybe up to six million votes. You're talking of tens of thousands of votes that potentially are going to be rejected, and they're not rejected evenly across the electorate. Pam November is getting closer. What kind of impact could there be? Well, it could affect not only the outcome of the presidential race but also congressional and other contests. If they're close, President Trump won the state of Wisconsin in 2016 by just under 23,000 votes. But more than 23,000 absentee ballots were rejected in Wisconsin's primary in April, and there will likely be many, many more people voting by mail in November. And the types of voters who are more likely to have their ballots rejected these young, first time black and Hispanic voters. They tend to vote Democratic. So that certainly has Democrats worried, especially as they're encouraging their supporters to vote by mail this year because of the pandemic and a new survey by the democracy fund and you see Ella Finds that 48% of those who plan to vote for Joe Biden said they'll likely vote by mail compared to only 23% of Trump supporters. There are efforts of foot aren't there to try and avoid so many rejected ballots in November, right actual lot, but but most of it's happened in in in courts on Democrats are suing at about half the states trying to get these rules eased. So, for example, that people don't need to have witnesses sign their ballots or that ballots only have to be postmarked by election Day, not actually received by election Day in order to count. They'd also like election officials to contact voters if there are any errors on their mail in ballots, so they have a chance to fix them. Republicans are fighting these changes. They say loosening the rules will undermine the integrity of the election by removing safeguards against melon voter fraud, even though such fraud is extremely rare. NPR's Pam Fessler. Thanks so much, Thanks allowed. Scott..

Department of Justice Congress Scott Simon Senate Intelligence Committee Government Oversight Pam Fessler NPR Roger Stone Justin investigator Congressional Oversight Initia Donald Trump Jr The Washington Post Justice Department Russia NBC News