House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffTrump official releases unverified Russian intel on Clinton previously rejected by Senate panel Schiff subpoenas Homeland Security, charges ‘unlawful obstruction’ Schiff to subpoena top DHS official, alleges whistleblower deposition is being stonewalled MORE (D-Calif.) issued two subpoenas to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Tuesday, alleging that agency officials are “unlawfully obstructing” his panel’s investigation related to a whistleblower complaint.

Schiff is seeking public testimony from Joseph Maher, the top official carrying out the duties of the under secretary for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, related to charges from a whistleblower that top political appointees at the department sought to politicize intelligence. 

“After weeks, and in some cases months, of attempted accommodation with the Department, we were left with no choice but to issue two subpoenas today,” Schiff said in a statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Simply put, the Committee will no longer tolerate the obstruction and attempts to run out the clock by the Department,” Schiff added.

Democrats want Maher to testify Friday about why the whistleblower, Brian Murphy, was not granted access to classified records related to his complaint. 

Schiff also issued a subpoena to compel DHS to produce the records the panel is seeking by next Tuesday.

The subpoenas come after Schiff twice postponed scheduled depositions with Murphy, who was formerly the acting under secretary for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis.

Murphy’s legal team said it had not received access to documents related to his complaint, which detailed allegations that top department officials repeatedly sought to politicize intelligence to match President Trump’s public remarks, including about threats like Russian interference.

ADVERTISEMENT

Murphy alleges in his complaint that there was a pattern of misconduct in which top political appointees repeatedly pressed him to modify or alter intelligence on key issues.

Perhaps the most alarming allegation Murphy makes is his claim that acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad WolfChad WolfTrump administration preparing targeted ICE arrests in sanctuary cities: report Schiff subpoenas Homeland Security, charges ‘unlawful obstruction’ Schiff to subpoena top DHS official, alleges whistleblower deposition is being stonewalled MORE, under the direction of White House national security adviser Robert O’Brien, instructed him earlier this year to stop producing intelligence reports centered on Russian interference efforts and instead focus on the threats posed by China and Iran.

Murphy says he declined multiple orders to alter or modify intelligence products to help support the administration’s agenda, which he claims recently led to a retaliatory demotion.

DHS has denied any wrongdoing by Wolf, who has been formally nominated to serve as head of the agency. 

A DHS spokesman denied that the agency was stonewalling Schiff, instead chalking up his subpoenas to being “obvious political theater.”  

“The department has produced nearly 3,000 pages of documents and has provided two briefings and three transcribed interviews to date,” the spokesman said in a statement.

The spokesperson also claimed that Schiff is “apparently willing to risk national security” to push forward with his investigation ahead of the 2020 election.

The agency has argued that Murphy, in his current role in DHS’s management division, does not have the “need to know” to access the records he is seeking. They also have defended their efforts to get security clearances for Murphy’s lawyers, arguing that the vetting process takes time and rushing it will jeopardize national security.

Schiff revealed last week that he would move forward with a subpoena if the issues over access to records and Murphy’s lawyers were not resolved, alleging that DHS is stonewalling his committee by blocking Murphy’s deposition by preventing him from being able to properly prepare.

While the deposition was originally slated for Monday, the committee postponed it to Friday, before again postponing it. The new date of when Schiff’s panel is aiming to hear from Murphy is not yet clear.

Still, Democrats on the panel are eager to hear from Murphy, who will be able to discuss the underlying, classified details related to his allegations that could not be included in an unclassified submission to Congress.

This story was updated at 6:57 p.m.

Americans feeling the economic weight of the coronavirus are about to enter their third month without crucial government aid that helped keep millions of households afloat during the recession.

Two months have passed since Congress and the White House allowed emergency COVID-19 protections and safety net programs to expire. Those provisions, enacted in late March under the CARES Act, were credited with preventing an even worse economic downturn.

Now, families are struggling to get by without supplemental unemployment funding, and many small businesses are reaching the end of financial lifelines that were extended by the federal government in the spring and summer.

ADVERTISEMENT

The lapse of emergency measures is expected to create lasting damage to the economy, making it even harder to return to pre-pandemic levels of growth and unemployment.

“The damage on these families can scar for years,” said Andrew Stettner, an unemployment expert at the left-leaning Century Foundation.

One of the biggest losses is the $600 in additional weekly benefits that Congress approved in the CARES Act. Economists across the political spectrum credit that provision with keeping consumer spending from cratering during one of the sharpest and most destructive downturns in the nation’s history.

That benefit expired at the end of July, leaving some 30 million recipients with only state-level benefits, which on average cover about a third of pre-unemployment income.

Despite broad bipartisan support for the CARES Act, Republicans have argued that the federal benefit was too high, pointing to some studies that showed 68 percent of recipients were earning more with the benefit than they did while working. GOP lawmakers said that discrepancy was a disincentive for people to go back to work, further slowing the recovery.

Democrats countered with a slew of studies showing the benefit was having no tangible effect on the labor market at a time when unemployment was at historic highs.

ADVERTISEMENT

After negotiations between the Trump administration and congressional Democrats stalled in August, President TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Biden campaign ad jabs at Trump’s reported 0 income tax payments Ocasio-Cortez: Trump contributed less in taxes ‘than waitresses and undocumented immigrants’ Third judge orders Postal Service to halt delivery cuts MORE issued an executive order for $300 in additional weekly benefits that would be provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). But it took weeks for most states to get those new payments out the door, and about half have already depleted their funds.

Meanwhile, household bills are piling up for the hardest hit members of the labor force.

“We’re already in a situation where people have been forced to deplete savings, go into their 401(k), and so on. That’s damage you can’t undo,” said Stettner.

Polls have indicated that the percentage of families able to make ends meet with unemployment insurance fell from 80 percent early on in the pandemic to about 50 percent more recently.

Some provisions in the CARE Act remain in place, including more time for people to collect unemployment and a broadening of eligibility requirements to include self-employed and gig workers.

But another key provision that expired at the end of July was the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offered forgivable loans to small businesses to cover wages and other fixed expenses during the pandemic.

“The longer Congress takes to pass and allow for a second PPP program, the more likely it will be that small business owners will have to make the tough decision of closing their doors. And that’s what we’re trying to avoid,” said Holly Wade, who directs research for the National Federation of Independent Business, a right-leaning group.

Wade said any update to the program should be more targeted, given that large chunks of the economy have reopened since the lockdowns in March and April.

But entire industries, she added, are expected to remain in limbo until a vaccine is widely distributed.

“We’re seeing that about a fifth of small businesses now are really still struggling to get through this pandemic, and are really in need of financial assistance. And these are businesses that would be healthy otherwise,” she said.

Travel and tourism, along with restaurants and retail stores, are among the hardest hit.

“Those industries that rely on consumer spending from the public, anything where you’d go inside a shop or businesses are still struggling,” she said.

John Arensmeyer, CEO of the left-leaning Small Business Majority, said a new round of PPP would need to ensure loans can easily get out the door to companies that don’t have strong existing relationships with banks, an issue early on in the emergency lending program.

Surveys by SBM have found that a quarter of small business owners said they did not expect to survive three months, while another 20 percent didn’t expect to last half a year.

“We really need for these small businesses to continue to exist. It’s much easier to rebuild with something that still exists than starting over again,” Arensmeyer said.

With just days left before Congress is set to recess until after the November elections, Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinHouseholds, businesses fall into financial holes as COVID aid dries up Centrist Democrats got their COVID bill, now they want a vote The Hill’s Morning Report – Sponsored by Facebook – Republicans lawmakers rebuke Trump on election MORE and Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiPelosi preparing for House to decide presidency if neither Trump or Biden win electoral college: report Trump seeks boost from seniors with 0 drug discount coupons GOP senators confident Trump pick to be confirmed by November MORE (D-Calif.) indicated they were prepared to reopen negotiations on another COVID-19 relief bill.

Pelosi, feeling pressure from vulnerable Democrats, has called for a scaled-back version of the $3.4 trillion HEROES Act the House passed in May. The package is still expected to be in the $2 trillion range, well above the $1 trillion the White House wanted and the $600 billion that Senate Republicans agreed on, lowering the odds that the bill finds its way to President Trump’s desk.

Much of the difference in their positions comes down to how much money should go to state and local governments, though a handful of other difficult issues remain as well.

Arensmeyer said passing an imperfect program is still preferable to no action.

“Quite frankly we’ll take any of it rather than the nothing that has passed for months,” he said.

Click Here: cd universidad catolica

Former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) MuellerCNN’s Toobin warns McCabe is in ‘perilous condition’ with emboldened Trump CNN anchor rips Trump over Stone while evoking Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting The Hill’s 12:30 Report: New Hampshire fallout MORE issued a rare statement Tuesday pushing back against criticism after a former aide argued in a book that investigators could have done more in their investigation into President TrumpDonald John TrumpFive takeaways from Trump-Biden debate clash The Memo: Debate or debacle? Democrats rip Trump for not condemning white supremacists, Proud Boys at debate MORE.

Andrew Weissmann, one of the lead prosecutors on Mueller’s team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election, released a book Tuesday titled “Where Law Ends” that alleges the group failed to fully investigate Trump’s financial ties and should have explicitly stated that they believed he obstructed justice.

Mueller detailed a number of “episodes” of potentially obstructive behavior amid his probe but ultimately drew no conclusion as to whether Trump obstructed justice.

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: camisetas de futbol baratas

“It is not surprising that members of the Special Counsel’s Office did not always agree, but it is disappointing to hear criticism of our team based on incomplete information,” Mueller said in a statement Tuesday obtained by multiple outlets, including NPR and The Washington Post.

Mueller’s statement did not explicitly name Weissmann’s book, though it did appear to address central claims made in the former aide’s book. The former special counsel defended his top deputy, Aaron Zebley, who Weissmann claimed was not aggressive enough in the investigation.

“He was an invaluable and trusted counselor to me from start to finish,” Mueller said of Zebley.

Among other claims, Weissmann said in his book that the investigation was dwindled by fears that Trump would either fire those leading the investigation or pardon anyone indicted by prosecutors.

“The office’s mission was to follow the facts and to act with integrity,” Mueller said. “That is what we did, knowing that our work would be scrutinized from all sides. When important decisions had to be made, I made them.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I did so as I have always done, without any interest in currying favor or fear of the consequences. I stand by those decisions and by the conclusions of our investigation.”

Mueller wrapped up his sprawling nearly two-year probe into the Trump campaign and its contacts with Russian officials in March 2019. The former special counsel found that while Russia actively tried to help Trump win the 2016 election that campaign aides were either unaware or not fully receptive to the efforts.

The special counsel said he did not reach a conclusion on the question of obstruction, though Attorney General William BarrBill BarrMueller in rare statement pushes back on top aide’s criticism of investigation Flynn’s attorney says she recently discussed case with Trump Juan Williams: Trump’s Supreme Court power grab MORE later said he and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod RosensteinRod RosensteinMueller in rare statement pushes back on top aide’s criticism of investigation This week: Senate kicks off Supreme Court fight DOJ kept investigators from completing probe of Trump ties to Russia: report MORE reviewed evidence laid out in the report and found it insufficient to accuse the president of obstructing the probe.

South Carolina Republicans are asking the Supreme Court to reinstate witness signature requirements for mail-in ballots after an appellate court ruling upheld a federal judge’s decision to waive the requirement for the Nov. 3 election amid the coronavirus pandemic. 

South Carolina Democrats brought a lawsuit over the requirement, highlighting concerns about voter participation due to the coronavirus, The State reported. 

U.S. District Judge Michelle Childs, in an order on Sept. 18, had waived the voter witness signature for this election. However, the decision was appealed to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. 

ADVERTISEMENT

There, the appellate court last week reinstated the ruling by Childs that would allow voters in the state who vote absentee to do so without a signature. 

The South Carolina GOP’s filing Thursday seeks to block Childs’s order. 

The filing to the high court comes just weeks ahead of Election Day, and as Senate Republicans are looking to confirm President TrumpDonald John TrumpPresident Trump, Melania Trump test positive for COVID-19 Trump, first lady to quarantine after top aide tests positive for coronavirus Secret recordings show Melania Trump was frustrated about criticism of Trump 2018 border separation policy: CNN MORE’s Supreme Court nominee before November.

Click Here: los jaguares argentina

Last month, Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, to fill the vacancy left by the late Justice Ruth Bader GinsburgRuth Bader GinsburgPresident Trump, Melania Trump test positive for COVID-19 Barrett participated in ‘mock’ Supreme Court ruling exercise on Affordable Care Act before Ginsburg’s death: report Manchin becomes first Democrat to meet with Trump’s Supreme Court pick MORE. Ginsburg died in late September. 

A Supreme Court ruling on the South Carolina case could set the tone for further calls for the justices to intervene in the upcoming election.

The South Carolina Republicans’ filing comes just days after Pennsylvania Republicans asked the Supreme Court to halt a state court order that extended the due date for mail ballots in the battleground state.

Mexico has lost or discarded 93,803 results from COVID-19 tests throughout the pandemic, health officials announced this week. 

Mexico’s Health Ministry epidemiology director José Luis Alomía announced the missing tests at a press conference Tuesday. 

The missing results make up about 5 percent of total tests for the country, which is already struggling with low testing capacity.

ADVERTISEMENT

As of Tuesday, health officials have notified 1,935,334 people of their results, Alomia said.

Health officials in Mexico have forgone mass testing initiatives and instead focused available tests on symptomatic patients. Mexico’s reduced testing has led the country to a 41 percent positivity rate, the second highest in the world, according to Our World in Data. 

As of Thursda,y Mexico has reported 743,216 cases and more than 77,600 deaths, according to a count by Johns Hopkins University. They have the ninth-highest cases reported, behind three other Latin American countries: Brazil, Peru and Argentina. 

The U.S. has the highest number of cases in the world at 7.2 million, followed by India at 6.3 million.

Top Senate Republicans said on Friday that President TrumpDonald John TrumpPresident Trump, Melania Trump test positive for COVID-19 Trump, first lady to quarantine after top aide tests positive for coronavirus Secret recordings show Melania Trump was frustrated about criticism of Trump 2018 border separation policy: CNN MORE‘s coronavirus diagnosis would not impact their timeline for Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcConnell: Next Trump-Biden debate should be more respectful McConnell signals he’s open to confirming Supreme Court pick in lame duck House approves .2T COVID-19 relief bill as White House talks stall MORE (R-Ky.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamOvernight Health Care: Six Republicans break with party on ObamaCare vote | Pfizer CEO ‘disappointed’ vaccine discussed ‘in political terms’ | Trump Supreme Court pick signed ‘right to life’ statement in 2006 Third-party candidate in SC senate race drops out, throws support behind Graham GOP super PAC preparing M ad blitz in South Carolina to boost Graham MORE (R-S.C.), in separate events on Friday, both indicated that they expect Barrett’s nomination to proceed as scheduled, with a days-long high profile hearing set to start on Oct. 12.

“We can move forward. Our biggest enemy obviously is … the coronavirus, keeping everybody healthy and well and in place to do our job,” McConnell told radio Hugh Hewitt. “We don’t anticipate any kind of unanticipated event that could throw us off schedule.”

Click Here: Golf special

ADVERTISEMENT

McConnell was more direct in a tweet on Friday, saying that he had spoken with Trump and it was “full steam ahead” on Barrett’s nomination.

Graham, speaking in South Carolina on Friday, said Barrett’s nomination was “on track.” A GOP aide confirmed that there is no change to the Judiciary Committee timeline, where a hearing will start on Oct. 12. The committee will then vote on sending her nomination to the full Senate on Oct. 22. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Judd Deere, a spokesperson for the White House, said on Friday that Barrett had been tested, and her results came back negative. Barrett was with Trump at the White House on Saturday, and met with approximately 30 senators in the Capitol this week as part of one-on-one sitdowns about her nomination.

McConnell did float that Trump’s diagnosis could renew discussions about taking part in the Judiciary Committee hearings remotely. Committee hearings have already been scaled down, with limit staff and press, due to the coronavirus.

“The members have some of them done their interviews in previous hearings remotely. This sort of underscores the need to do that. I think every precaution needs to be taken because we don’t anticipate any Democratic support at all … and therefore everybody needs to be in an all hands on deck mindset,” McConnell added.

McConnell reiterated on Friday that he expects the Judiciary Committee hearings to start on Oct. 12 and the committee to vote on Oct. 22.

“We will be voting on the nominee you know very soon. I haven’t picked an exact point to bring the nomination up, but it’s front and center for the American people and as we move ahead I’ll be more specific” about the timeline, McConnell said.

—Updated at 11:28 a.m.

Major corporations are laying off thousands of workers as the U.S. heads into fall facing a resurgent pandemic and deepening economic damage.

Disney, American Airlines and Allstate are among the prominent companies axing thousands of workers at a time when new federal aid and a vaccine are both unlikely anytime soon. The pain is even sharper among small businesses that have fewer resources or access to capital to weather the prolonged coronavirus recession.

“Companies held on to workers expecting a much more rapid recovery than has been possible,” said Julia Pollak, labor economist at job posting and recruitment website ZipRecruiter.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It’s clear now to many of these companies that a swift recovery is not possible.”

Disney announced Tuesday that it would lay off 28,000 workers as the entertainment conglomerate suffers from a sharp decline in resort and theme park revenue.

American Airlines and United Airlines announced Wednesday they would lay off a combined 21,000 workers the following day without a bipartisan agreement for further aid.

Oil companies like Shell, Marathon and Halliburton have announced plans to cut thousands of workers as the energy sector reels from falling demand.

And the damage has extended to the financial sector, where insurer Allstate plans to cut 3,800 jobs and Wall Street investment bank Goldman Sachs plans to cut staff by 400 workers.

Those job losses will not be reflected in Friday’s employment report for September, the last one to be released before Election Day, but the pain they bring may be front of mind for voters as they head to the polls and mail in their ballots.

ADVERTISEMENT

Before the pandemic, President TrumpDonald John TrumpPresident Trump, Melania Trump test positive for COVID-19 Trump, first lady to quarantine after top aide tests positive for coronavirus Secret recordings show Melania Trump was frustrated about criticism of Trump 2018 border separation policy: CNN MORE was well positioned to make the economy has strongest argument for a second term. That all changed with the coronavirus recession, but the Trump campaign has argued the recovery is moving in the right direction and that the president is a better steward of the economy than Democratic nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenPresident Trump, Melania Trump test positive for COVID-19 Poll: Biden notches 7-point lead ahead of Trump in New Hampshire Jim Carrey to make his SNL debut as Joe Biden this week MORE.

But the rise in job losses comes as the labor market was already showing signs of weakness, and as millions of Americans who have already lost their jobs are in danger of losing government support systems.

“If you pull away someone’s flotation device, they usually don’t sink immediately,” said Martha Gimbel, senior manager of economic research at Schmidt Futures.

“But eventually, they’re going to start drowning, and you’re just seeing companies accepting the fact that they are not going to be able to get through another six months, year, year and a half — however long this takes — without permanent changes to staffing and how they do business,” she added. 

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the quickest and deepest economic collapse since the Great Depression. The effects of the virus claimed more than 20 million jobs in March and April, wiping out a decade of job gains, and shrank the U.S. economy by an annualized rate of 31.4 percent between April and June.

The U.S. has since recovered 10.7 million of the jobs lost and the unemployment rate has retreated to 8.4 percent after spiking to 14.7 percent in April. Before the pandemic, the jobless rate was 3.5 percent.

The early stages of the recovery exceeded the expectations of some economists and policymakers, many of whom credit the record-breaking $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act signed by Trump in late March.

The CARES Act was intended to cushion the economic blow of the pandemic by expanding and increasing unemployment benefits, providing direct payments to households, and offering emergency loans to small businesses long enough to contain the virus. But most of that aid has washed out of the economy as the pandemic continues to rage, forcing some companies to cut workers they hoped to bring back.

Policymakers and economists have warned for months about the risk of permanent job losses piling up as major sectors of the economy remain closed. ZipRecruiter’s Pollak noted that while some industries such as home entertainment, medical products and home goods have benefited from the COVID economy, the overall labor market will likely decline as long as the virus persists.

“It’s sad for workers, who lose leverage in the labor market. It’s difficult for companies and employers that were expecting to see revenue and sales grow 20, 30 percent and are now facing a decline in revenues for the first time in many years,” she said.

Democrats and Republicans generally agree that some further support is needed for jobless workers and the struggling businesses that have laid them off. But while Democrats and liberal economists support another sweeping round of aid, Republicans and right-leaning analysts prefer a scaled-down package focused on reopening businesses as quickly as possible.

“The really tricky thing here is trying to find the right balance — saving lives and livelihoods,” said Rachel Greszler, a research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

“Allowing society to open in ways that are safe has proved a lot more helpful than the states that are imposing these excessive lockdowns that aren’t actually rooted in the data,” she added. 

But Gimbel argues that economic activity remains depressed in states with fewer restrictions and higher coronavirus cases, underscoring the need for generous support until the health crisis is under control.

“You can reopen, but you can’t force customers to show up, and people aren’t going to consume services the way that we did before this pandemic until they feel safe,” she said.

Click Here: Golf special

The worst quarterly economic contraction on record was marginally less bad than first thought, coming in at an annualized 31.4 percent drop for the second quarter of the year.

The third and final estimate from the Bureau of Economic Analysis was an upward revision of 0.3 points from the second estimate, which itself was an upward revision from the 32.9 percent put forth in July’s advance estimate. The economy shrank an annualized 5 percent in the first quarter.

Still, the economic contraction that stemmed from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was over triple the worst quarterly contraction on record, which dates back to 1958. Stay-at-home orders, social distancing measures and fear of contracting the virus dramatically scaled back economic activity.

ADVERTISEMENT

Economists expect that the third quarter will be met with its own record-breaking surge, as large swaths of the economy reopened and the government poured trillions of dollars of emergency relief and stimulus into homes and businesses.

That figure will be released on Oct. 29, just five days before November’s elections.

But the increase is not expected to put the economy back on its pre-COVID footing, a process which is expected to take years.

Click Here: cheap sydney roosters jersey

A sub-source used to compile the so-called Steele Dossier, a controversial opposition research document against then-candidate Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpSteele Dossier sub-source was subject of FBI counterintelligence probe Pelosi slams Trump executive order on pre-existing conditions: It ‘isn’t worth the paper it’s signed on’ Trump ‘no longer angry’ at Romney because of Supreme Court stance MORE, was previously the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation, Attorney General William Barr disclosed in a letter released on Thursday. 

The detail was previously redacted from a footnote in Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz’s 2019 report on four Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court warrant applications.

But U.S. Attorney John DurhamJohn DurhamSteele Dossier sub-source was subject of FBI counterintelligence probe Barr’s Russia investigator has put some focus on Clinton Foundation: report Top Democrats call for DOJ watchdog to probe Barr over possible 2020 election influence MORE, tapped by Barr to review the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe, signed off on Barr releasing the detail to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamSteele Dossier sub-source was subject of FBI counterintelligence probe Hillicon Valley: Subpoenas for Facebook, Google and Twitter on the cards | Wray rebuffs mail-in voting conspiracies | Reps. raise mass surveillance concerns Key Democrat opposes GOP Section 230 subpoena for Facebook, Twitter, Google MORE (R-S.C.), who is doing his own investigation into the FBI’s probe into Russia’s 2016 election meddling and the Trump campaign.

“I have consulted with Mr. Durham, who originally brought this information to my attention in the course of his investigation, and he has informed me that disclosure of the information will not interfere with his criminal investigation,” Barr wrote in the letter to Graham. 

Durham allowing the detail to be publicly released is a signal that he is unlikely to be planning criminal indictments related to this part of his investigation. 

The declassified footnote states that the “primary sub-source was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his/her documented contacts with suspected Russian counterintelligence officers.” 

A two-page document compiled by the FBI and Barr and sent to Graham along with the declassified footnote adds that the investigation was opened “based on information by the FBI indicating that the Primary Sub-source may be a threat to national security.” The investigation was closed in 2011 and not reopened. 

Click Here: camiseta river plate

The letter to Graham comes as Trump and his allies have lashed out at the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, the name for the probe into Russia’s election meddling and the 2016 campaign, as a “witch hunt.” 

Administration officials, including Barr, have aided GOP senators in releasing new information as they’ve sought to use their committees to dig into the FBI’s previous probe heading into the November election. 

Graham is expected to have former FBI Director James ComeyJames Brien ComeySteele Dossier sub-source was subject of FBI counterintelligence probe Judge will not dismiss McCabe’s case against DOJ Democrats fear Russia interference could spoil bid to retake Senate MORE before his committee next Wednesday, and has vowed to release a report next month on his investigation into the FBI and subsequent former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) MuellerCNN’s Toobin warns McCabe is in ‘perilous condition’ with emboldened Trump CNN anchor rips Trump over Stone while evoking Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting The Hill’s 12:30 Report: New Hampshire fallout MORE‘s probe. 

Graham said on Thursday that he would be forwarding the information to the FISA court, arguing that it was the latest example of the FBI not including exculpatory material from its warrant applications.

“To me, failure of the FBI to inform the court that the Primary Sub-source was suspected of being a Russian agent is a breach of every duty owed by law enforcement to the judicial system,” Graham said. 

Barr has also come under scrutiny from top congressional Democrats because of his public remarks about Durham’s probe. Barr has teased that he could release some findings from the investigation before the November election.

“We’ll develop this case to the extent we can before the election, and we’ll use our prudent judgment to decide what’s appropriate before the election and what should wait until after the election,” Barr said.

Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to Durham, resigned from the Justice Department probe earlier this month with sources telling the Hartford Courant she was concerned about political pressure from Barr.

–Updated at 11:58 p.m.

The White House blocked a February extension of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) “no sail” order for cruise ships, The New York Times and Axios reported.

CDC Director Robert Redfield reportedly recommended an extension of the current order, which is set to expire on Wednesday, during a coronavirus task force meeting on Tuesday. 

But a senior health official told the Times and sources told Axios that Redfield was ultimately overruled as the administration plans to extend the order until Oct. 31 and then allow ships to sail. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Public health officials have reportedly said the rejection of Redfield’s recommendation is politically motivated to avoid upsetting the cruise industry in Florida, a swing state ahead of the presidential election that a number of polls show is a neck-and-neck race between Trump and Joe BidenJoe BidenPrivacy, civil rights groups demand transparency from Amazon on election data breaches Facebook takes down Trump campaign ads tying refugees to coronavirus Trump crowd chants ‘lock her up’ about Omar as president warns of refugees in Minnesota MORE. 

The administration’s timeline aligns with what the cruise industry came up with in its voluntary plan, which former Utah Gov. Michael Leavitt (R) and former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb led. The industry plan calls for a gradual return to normal with its first trips taking crew members acting as guests and testing guests twice — before arrival and before boarding, according to the Times. 

White House spokesperson Brian Morganstern told Axios in a statement, “The president, the vice president and the task force follow the science and data to implement policies that protect the public health and also facilitate the safe reopening of our country.”

“It is not about politics,” he added. “It is about saving lives.”

The CDC did not immediately return a request from The Hill for comment. 

Industry representatives are scheduled to meet officials on Friday to “describe their transformation and dozens of ways that they will mitigate risk and ensure public health,” a White House official told Axios

ADVERTISEMENT

“And in that meeting there will be a discussion and afterwards a decision will need to be made about whether the order needs to be extended,” the official added.

Axios first reported the task force’s rejection of Redfield’s “no sail” order extension on Tuesday. 

The coronavirus pandemic has already hit the industry hard as it has virtually shut down since March after cruise ships became hotspots for coronavirus, including the Diamond Princess, which recorded more than 700 positive cases and at least 14 deaths. 

The CDC reports 2,973 cruise-related COVID-19 or COVID-19-like cases and 34 deaths from March 1 to July 10, according to the Times. 

The rejection of Redfield’s recommendation also comes as tensions between the CDC and White House have increased as some health experts accuse the Trump administration of reopening too quickly and not following the science to stem the spread of the virus.

A senior administration official told the Times that Redfield was worried before the taskforce decision that he could get fired and considered resigning if the administration’s actions would risk public health.

The CDC director told a Senate panel earlier this month that a vaccine might not be available until the middle of next year and that masks were more important than a vaccine. Trump quickly refuted Redfield’s comments saying he “made a mistake” and “under no circumstance will it be as late as the doctor said.”