white house

The president, in an ABC interview, also said that “there’s nothing wrong with listening.”

President Donald Trump says he might not report to the FBI any election help offered by a foreign source in the 2020 election cycle.

In an excerpt from an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos published on Wednesday, the president pushed back when asked whether a candidate should report information on an opponent if it came from a foreign agent, and denied that accepting the information counted as election interference.

Story Continued Below

“It’s not an interference, they have information — I think I’d take it,” Trump said. “If I thought there was something wrong, I’d go maybe to the FBI — if I thought there was something wrong.”

“It’s called oppo research,” he added.

Stephanopoulos pointed out that FBI Director Christopher Wray told Congress that a candidate should offer that kind of information to the agency, but Trump flatly rebuffed the notion: “The FBI director is wrong.”

“Give me a break,” Trump said, scoffing. “Life doesn’t work that way.”

Trump’s comments come as his son Donald Trump Jr. is in hot water over a meeting in Trump Tower in June 2016 with Russian nationals who offered “dirt” on then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The president expressed frustration with the focus on his son, saying he is a “good young man.”

Trump said that if he received information and “thought there was something wrong,” he would consider reporting it to the FBI, but said that “there’s nothing wrong with listening.” He added that members of Congress “all do it.”

Jared Kushner, Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, also said recently that he didn’t know whether he would contact the FBI in such a situation. Axios’ Jonathan Swan asked Kushner in an interview published earlier this month about an email he received in the lead-up to the Trump Tower meeting and why he did not report the email to the FBI. Kushner responded that he received hundreds of emails a day and forgot about it after showing up to the meeting and realizing that it was “a clown show.”

But when pressed if he would report a similar email to the FBI in the future, Kusher said that “it’s hard to do hypotheticals.”

POLITICO previously reported that Trump’s reelection campaign did not respond to numerous inquiries on whether he would report foreign assistance to the FBI, including information stolen from opponents.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the president’s remarks, and an FBI spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Law enforcement veterans said Trump’s comments set off glaring red alarms.

“I am sure that the president’s attorneys are apoplectic given that the Mueller report sets forth a pattern of obstruction that is profound,” said Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor from Virginia. “This statement is a jewel of an admission that sheds light on the intent of not only himself but possible members of his family and campaign. In layman’s terms, the president truly stepped in it.

“If I were trying the case, the video would be Exhibit One. In fact, this quote would be the first sentence out of my mouth in my opening statement to the jury. Stay tuned.”

David Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor from South Florida, said any American connected to an election had a “fundamental responsibility” to report contact with foreign agents, with repercussions on national security and potential violations of foreign lobbying laws. “The comments made today show that he doesn’t have even a basic grasp of the laws that exist in our country,” Weinstein told POLITICO.

The political Blowback from Trump’s remarks was swift.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said on CNN that he was stunned but unsurprised by the president’s remarks. Schiff countered Trump’s and Kushner’s assessments that foreign help did not need to be reported, saying that foreign contact must be declared just as campaign contributions.

“Donald Trump has made it clear that he will engage in any action, no matter how unethical or unpatriotic, that he will go up to the line of what’s legal and indeed he looks like he crossed that line many times,” Schiff said.

Schiff also said it was “pure nonsense” that members of Congress would receive foreign assistance in campaigns and not report it.

“He projects onto others his own lack of morality,” Schiff said of the president.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who’s running for president, tweeted soon after the interview clip was published: “A foreign government attacked our 2016 elections to support Trump, Trump welcomed that help, and Trump obstructed the investigation. Now, he said he’d do it all over again. It’s time to impeach Donald Trump.”

Warren has called for Trump’s impeachment since the release of a redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Darren Samuelsohn contributed to this report.

congress

The freshman senator is unnerving GOP colleagues with his sharp-edged conservative populism.

Sen. Josh Hawley makes no apologies for bringing down a Republican judicial nominee — even if his tactics irritate some of his own GOP colleagues.

Michael Bogren’s withdrawal Tuesday from consideration to serve on a federal district court was a striking knockout for the Senate’s youngest member, a 39-year-old freshman with slicked-back hair and an unrepentant conservative populism.

Story Continued Below

The moment also signaled the Missouri Republican’s brand of conservatism is something to be reckoned with in today’s Senate as the GOP wrestles with its identity in the Donald Trump era.

“One of the things that has been so painful for conservative voters over the years is to see people like former Justice David Souter put on the bench, who wasn’t really vetted,” Hawley said in an interview Wednesday, referring to the center-left Supreme Court pick appointed by a Republican. “People ask how could it happen over time? One of the ways it happens is that Republican senators don’t actually take the job seriously.”

But Hawley’s verdict against Bogren was not unanimous.

Several Republicans said Bogren was merely defending his client and that it would be wrong to bring down nominees for that alone. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said Wednesday she was “disturbed” by the events. And The Wall Street Journal recently wrote its third editorial condemning Hawley in barely three months, arguing he set a “precedent that conservatives will regret.”

Hawley’s response to the influential conservative editorial board: “I apparently take up a lot of their brain space.”

Hawley’s inquisition of Bogren during his May confirmation hearing was little noticed at the time, with the hearing room mostly empty and no hint the hopeful for a District court in Michigan was in danger. But Hawley quickly accused Bogren of “anti-religious animus” in his defense of the city of East Lansing’s anti-discriminatory laws by comparing a “Catholic family’s adherence to their religious beliefs with the views of the KKK,” as Hawley summed up the case.

Within days of Hawley’s confrontation with Bogren, GOP Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina turned on the nominee. Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said the opposition of those senators “was indicative that there might have been deeper problems.”

Meanwhile, senior White House officials made no efforts to get Hawley to back off in order to save Bogren, according to people familiar with the matter. The administration may not have been willing to expend the political energy for an intraparty fight; the nomination had its origin in a bipartisan agreement between Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Michigan’s two Democratic senators.

While the White House has seen the majority of its judicial appointments breeze through the Senate, Bogren joins a small group of Trump nominees, including Brett Talley, Jeff Mateer, Ryan Bounds and Thomas Farr, who tanked amid opposition from Republicans.

The episode also underscored Hawley’s willingness to absorb criticism from within the GOP and conservative allies.

After he considered opposing Naomi Rao’s nomination to the D.C. Circuit over her views on abortion, Hawley took heat from the conservative legal establishment and eventually supported her after receiving private assurances of her stance. This time, a well-organized faction of social conservatives supported Hawley and helped him weather initial pushback from the center-right.

Still, Hawley’s questioning of Bogren’s legal strategies in a case that involved a Catholic family getting barred from the city’s farmers market after refusing to host a same-sex marriage on their farm has opened an ugly split in the GOP over Hawley’s tactics.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said of Hawley’s approach: “We need to be real careful going down this rabbit trail.”

“Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have repeatedly expressed our concern with our Democratic colleagues for condemning nominees for positions that their clients take. So if we’re going to be consistent, we shouldn’t do it either,” Kennedy said. “I don’t think it’s fair.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a former state Supreme Court justice, agreed.

“I don’t think lawyers should be disqualified for positions they’ve taken on behalf of a client in court,” he said.

But Cornyn conceded that if Bogren didn’t have the votes to get confirmed, “it’s important to avoid unnecessary embarrassment.” And some Republican colleagues praised Hawley for his performance at the hearing.

“I actually approached him, and I told him I thought his line of questioning was great and the response was unacceptable,” said Tillis, who’s facing a conservative primary challenger.

Hawley argued that he never quibbled with Bogren defending the city’s anti-discrimination laws, merely how he did it. And he said that Bogren might have saved his nomination by admitting fault. But that didn’t happen: Instead the two engaged in a testy exchange that ran for a full six minutes.

“This gentleman chose to engage in frankly anti-religious slurs and things that conveyed anti-religious animus and he did it repeatedly. And it wasn’t a slip of the tongue,” Hawley said on Wednesday. “It was really nasty, really personal. And it’s exactly what the United States Supreme Court said government officials shouldn’t do.”

Bogren argued in a statement Wednesday that lawyers in Michigan, under ethics rules, must “zealously advocate the client’s best interests” and hit back at Hawley without naming him.

“My family had to witness an unfounded personal attack on me, as well as ensuing personal attacks in the media,” Bogren said. “It is truly unfortunate that what used to be a dignified process has sunk to this level.”

Hawley has also sought to distinguish himself by taking on large tech companies like Google. Already, he’s drawn comparisons to Cruz and Tom Cotton of Arkansas, all young senators who made their marks through high-profile battles with their own party and are considered to have their eye on higher office.

And to social conservatives who have viewed the GOP as too compliant to the center-right, Hawley’s victory on Bogren was welcome news.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, compared Hawley’s position on judicial nominees to that of the late North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms, “one of the few Republicans who would oppose judicial nominees and would lead the charge against them if they were not right when it comes to the Constitution.”

Future nominees “cannot adopt the rhetoric of the left and attack people of faith and use the talking points of the Southern Poverty Law Center and think they will be confirmed,” Perkins said.

“It’s a breath of fresh air for conservatives… he’s unbending,” said Rachel Bovard of the Conservative Partnership Institute, which took a leading role in organizing opposition to Bogren.

The torpedoing of Bogren’s nomination also calls into question the future of the “blue-slip” process; under the GOP majority, home-state senators can veto a district court nominee, though they can’t block circuit court nominees like under Democrats.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow called Bogren’s treatment “very unfair” and Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who introduced Bogren at his hearing, observed curtly: “President Trump wanted him, he wasn’t my nominee.”

Now, Graham needs to weigh whether he can replace Bogren with someone who will satisfy the White House, Democrats and the Senate GOP. He said in an interview he’s willing to try.

“I’m very big on keeping our deals with our Democratic friends on district judges,” Graham said.

Hawley seemed unconcerned with nomination “side deals” with Democrats. And while he praised the White House for largely doing a “tremendous job” on judges, he also made clear that he won’t change his approach.

“Whoever they nominate, I’m going to ask the same questions of all these judges,” Hawley said. “Doesn’t matter to me what the background may be.”

2020 elections

Sitting down with an ABC News anchor is a sharp departure from the president’s usual habit of dialing into friendly opinion shows.

Donald Trump had an unusual entourage this week as George Stephanopoulos and an ABC News crew followed him to Iowa and met him at the White House for the president’s first network news interview in more than four months, a sign that Trump may be hoping to reach beyond his base ahead of his formal 2020 campaign launch next week.

Trump has given dozens of interviews to Fox News and Fox Business hosts, but he’s largely ignored the broadcast networks since taking office. As president, Trump has only done two interviews for Sunday shows, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS correspondent who tracks Trump’s appearances.

Story Continued Below

In most presidential administrations, an interview with a major network news anchor wouldn’t warrant much surprise. But Trump’s decision to give extensive access to Stephanopoulos — ABC News’ chief anchor, co-host of “Good Morning America” and host of “This Week” — is a sharp departure from his usual habit of dialing into friendly opinion shows.

The ABC News team traveled to Iowa Tuesday on Air Force One and sat in one of the front cabins, separate from the rest of the press corps, according to a White House pool report. One of ABC’s cameramen rode in the president’s helicopter from the White House to Joint Base Andrews, a trip that journalists almost never make. And Stephanopoulos rode in the president’s limousine, known as “The Beast,” according to a source familiar with the trip.

A White House official told the press pool that Stephanopoulos was conducting an interview that will air Sunday; the White House did not respond to further questions on Wednesday. An ABC News spokesperson declined to comment Wednesday, and Stephanopoulos declined to comment when asked about traveling with the president Tuesday by a White House reporter.

ABC has had a long-standing request for an interview with Trump, network sources said. But Trump waited until now, a week before he formally relaunches his re-election bid next Tuesday in Orlando, to grant Stephanopoulos access.

The interview, which is likely to air in part or in full across several ABC News programs, could reach Americans who don’t tune in nightly to sympathetic Trump interviewers like Fox News’ Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. It comes at a time when the crowd of Democrats seeking to take on Trump in 2020 is increasingly dominating the airwaves, especially with the first party debates approaching in late June.

“As much as social media has played a role in his rise politically, the president is a legacy media guy,” said one former administration official. “To him, Time Magazine and ABC News — those are the cool things.”

Trump appears to have a good rapport with Stephanopoulos, who, decades earlier, served as one of the most high-profile officials in President Bill Clinton’s White House.

Trump made a cameo in a 2011 “Good Morning America” segment as one of several “Manhattan wise men” offering Stephanopoulos encouragement as he raced up the stairs of the Empire State Building.

“George, I know you well,” Trump said. “I know you’ll have no trouble with this race. Don’t disappoint me.”

While Trump has repeatedly knocked TV news stars on Twitter, such “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd, he’s only once jabbed at Stephanopoulos. “@GStephanopoulos stupidly believes that Hillary wants to run against me because she said so,” Trump tweeted in December 2015, referring to Hillary Clinton. Stephanopoulos replied, “See you tomorrow on @ThisWeekABC!”

The then-GOP nominee also defended Stephanopoulos after a tough interview during the 2016 campaign.

“I thought that George Stephanopoulos gave a fair interview,” Trump told Hannity at the time. “I didn’t see anything wrong with the interview.”

Since becoming president, Trump sat down with Stephanopoulos for an interview in Singapore after he met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

And although Trump routinely bashes the news media on stage in front of supporters, he had nothing negative to say about the ABC News star at the Tuesday event in West Des Moines.

“You know who’s here tonight? George Stephanopoulos. The great George Stephanopoulos,” Trump said at the Iowa Republican Party’s “America First” dinner.

Trump pantomimed as if searching the room for the ABC News anchor, who was sitting to one side of the ballroom. Stephanopoulos, Trump assured the crowd, “happens to be a nice guy.”

Bernie Sanders argued Wednesday that the United States is at a moment as urgent as the one it found itself in during the 1930s: Authoritarianism and oligarchy are on the march across the world, he said, and the best way to defeat them is with an emphatic break from the mainstream politics of either party.

In a major campaign speech designed to counter critics of his democratic socialist ideology, the Vermont senator proposed a “21st century economic Bill of Rights” that would ensure the right to a decent job, health care, affordable housing, higher education, secure retirement and a clean environment.

Story Continued Below

Sanders, whose family members were killed in the Holocaust, also reminded audience members that tens of thousands of Nazis gathered in 1939 “not in Berlin, not in Rome — but in Madison Square Garden, in front of a 30-foot-tall banner of George Washington bordered with swastikas.” But instead of falling for fascism, he said, Americans followed the path of New Deal liberalism.

“We rejected the ideology of Mussolini and Hitler. We instead embraced the bold and visionary leadership of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt,” he said. “Together with organized labor, leaders in the African-American community, and progressives inside and outside the party, Roosevelt led a transformation of the American government and the American economy.”

Sanders drew a line between the Nazis who gathered in New York City in 1939 to the neo-Nazis who marched in Charlottesville in 2017. At the same time, he tied himself to Roosevelt: One of his biggest applause lines came when he recalled a well-known campaign speech that Roosevelt delivered in 1936.

Sanders repeated Roosevelt’s famous words that he had to struggle against “class antagonism,” “sectionalism,” “war-profiteering” and other foes: “Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred,” Sanders said.

The audience erupted, chanting “Bernie! Bernie! Bernie!” Some of them wore red T-shirts boosting Sanders’ proposed “Medicare for All.”

Sanders replied, “I must say, it does sound a little contemporary, doesn’t it?”

The independent presidential candidate also used the speech to tie himself to the Democratic Party, rattling off numerous examples of times that Democratic presidents, from FDR to John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton, were derided as socialists. And he said that, in embracing a new “economic Bill of Rights” like FDR proposed shortly before he died, he was trying to complete the unfinished business of the Democratic Party.

“Today, our Bill of Rights guarantees the American people a number of constitutionally protected political rights,” Sanders said. “Now, we must take the next step forward and guarantee every man, woman and child in our country basic economic rights — the right to quality health care, the right to as much education as one needs to succeed in our society, the right to a decent job, the right to affordable housing, the right to a secure retirement and the right to live in a clean environment.”

In trying to tie his campaign to Roosevelt, Sanders was also making an implicit argument about his electability, a question mark that’s hovered over both his campaigns for president. “FDR and his progressive coalition created the New Deal, won four terms, and created an economy that worked for all and not just the few,” he said.

Sanders’ speech triggered a response from some of his most unpopular rivals. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said that “socialism means that the government owns and controls companies,” and uses them for “political purposes, for jobs and votes.”

Meanwhile, Republican leaders saw an opportunity to use Sanders’ speech to hitch all Democratic presidential candidates to socialism. Sen. Marco Rubio released a video today blasting democratic socialism, saying it “hasn’t worked anywhere in the world” and “is incompatible with our American values.” The Republican National Committee also continued its series of emails titled “Bernie socialism,” with today’s missive ending with the line “so do his 2020 comrades.”

In an interview with POLITICO before the speech, Sanders said conservatives have long misled Americans about democratic socialism.

“Over the years, you have right-wing politicians who are trying to lump socialism into authoritarianism and into communism,” he said. “They are very different ideologies.”