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.

The Trump administration on Wednesday announced over a dozen new sanctions on government and military officials and business leaders tied to Syrian President Bashar Assad, blacklisting human rights abusers for atrocities against civilians throughout the nine-year civil war in that country.

Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoUse of ‘China virus’ led to spike in anti-Asian bias: study China’s actions present several potential debate questions The Hill’s Morning Report – Sponsored by JobsOhio – Showdown: Trump-Biden debate likely to be nasty MORE said the U.S. campaign of sanctions against the Syrian government will not end until Assad implements a United Nations political resolution to the civil war.

“Thus far, Assad’s foreign enablers have only emboldened his regime’s cronies and deepened their involvement in the exploitative financial and military apparatus that underpins the regime’s survival,” Pompeo said in a statement. “There is a clear path forward.  The Syrian people have suffered enough.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The sanctions, 17 in total, target the current head of the Syrian General Intelligence Directorate, Husam Muhammad Louka, and Khodr Taher Bin Ali, a well-connected and close business associate of Assad and his wife Asma Asma al  Akhras.

The U.S. is also sanctioning the head of the Central Bank of Syria, Hazem Younes Kafroul, and parts of the Syrian military, including the 5th Corps of the Syrian Arab Army, and its commander Milad Jedid for obstructing a cease-fire in the country.

Also blacklisted are Nasreen and Rana Ibrahim, the adult sisters of Yasser Ibrahim, who is identified as a financier of Assad.

“The Ibrahim family, led by Yasser Ibrahim, acts as a front for Bashar al-Assad and his wife Asma al  Akhras,” Pompeo said. “ While millions of Syrians face hunger, the Ibrahims are on a spending spree to expand Assad’s and Akhras’s personal stranglehold on the Syrian economy.”  

The secretary added that the sanctions do not target humanitarian assistance to affected civilians, including $720 million most recently announced on Sept. 24, part of over $12 billion provided by the U.S. to the Syrian people since 2011.
 
The administration’s sanctions are authorized under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, named for the pseudonym of the Syrian military photographer who defected from Assad’s army and smuggled out thousands of photos of evidence of crimes against humanity showing dead prisoners who were tortured, starved and burnt.

ADVERTISEMENT

The sanctions also come on the third anniversary of the Armanaz massacre, a brutal attack by Syrian and Russian forces on civilians in the Syrian town, where successive airstrikes on the same town, in the same area, hit rescue workers helping civilians.

At least 34 people were killed, including eight women and seven children.

Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinTreasury offers coronavirus relief loans to seven major US airlines House GOP leaders rally opposition to Democrats’ scaled-down COVID bill On The Money: Biden releases 2019 tax returns hours before first debate | COVID relief talks hit do-or-die moment | Disney to layoff 28K workers MORE said the sanctions target those that enable Assad and further his corruption and human rights abuses.

“As we mark three years since the regime’s slaughter of Syrian civilians in Armanaz, Syria, the United States will continue to employ all of its tools and authorities to target the finances of anyone who profits from or facilitates the Assad regime’s abuse of the Syrian people,” he said.

The politically-explosive revelation that Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonWhite House accuses Biden of pushing ‘conspiracy theories’ with Trump election claim Biden courts younger voters — who have been a weakness Trayvon Martin’s mother Sybrina Fulton qualifies to run for county commissioner in Florida MORE’s campaign and the Democratic Party paid for some of the research that produced an uncorroborated election-year dossier connecting President Trump to Russia may have broken campaign laws.

Election law experts said candidates and their committees are required to report expenses accurately and in detail, and that civil or criminal penalties can be imposed for failing to do so.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign funded some of the research by the firm Fusion GPS, but routed the monies through a law firm. Their campaign reports listed no payments to Fusion GPS and the expenses attributed to the law firm Perkins Coie are described as legal work, not opposition research, the paper noted.

Federal Election Commission expert Jan Baran told The Hill that while it is not illegal and improper for campaigns to hire opposition research, questions are raised when they fail to accurately report the money they spend on it.

“The issue is number one, did the campaigns pay for this service? And apparently, based on press reports, they did,” Baran said. “And number two, if they did, then it should have been accurately reported in some fashion on their FEC reports.”

Baran added that thus far, there are no signs of a FEC filing by the Clinton campaign or DNC for the opposition research expenses incurred for this dossier.

On Tuesday evening, the first legal complaints were filed accusing Clinton’s campaign and the DNC of filing misleading campaign finance reports.

The nonprofit watchdog group Campaign Legal Center asked the FEC to investigate whether Clinton and the DNC’s reporting of the dossier funding as legal bills violated federal election laws.

“By failing to file accurate reports, the DNC and Hillary For America undermined the vital public information role that reporting is intended to serve,” CLC said in its complaint.

The FEC declined to comment on the specifics of the Clinton campaign, but noted that rules passed in 2013 reinforced the obligation that expenditures be filed with accurate descriptions.

Clinton’s office did not return a call seeking comment. Former Clinton campaign press secretary Brian Fallon on Twitter said he had not known about the campaign’s role in funding the dossier but suggested it was a good idea anyways. 

“I have no idea what Fusion or Steele were paid but if even a shred of that dossier ends up helping (Justice Department special counsel Robert) Mueller, it will prove money well spent,” he tweeted.

The DNC also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Legal expenses and research are identified in the FEC rules as two separate categories for the purpose of describing expenditures.

Baran said that the law allows for civil penalties if an expenditure is misreported unintentionally, but a criminal case could be brought if the misrepresentation is shown to be willful and knowing.

“Whether there was intentional false filing of the information would depend on all the facts,” he added. “Depends on who knew how the money was being spent, how the committee decided to report the purpose of particular bill.”

The Department of Justice didn’t return The Hill’s request for comment on whether it plans to investigate the Clinton campaign’s dossier funding and disclosure.

– Updated 7:20 p.m.

A federal judge on Monday ordered state officials in Georgia to provide backup paper poll books with lists of all eligible voters to precincts in an effort to prevent long lines and improve procedures during November’s general election. 

The poll books are used to check voter registration at polling sites and were partially responsible for voting difficulties in some districts in Georgia during the June primaries. 

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg, who was nominated by former President Obama, ruled that Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) must immediately send paper formats of all the information contained in electronic poll books and require election officials to use this paper backup in the case of a machine malfunction. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Totenberg also ordered Raffensperger to ensure that emergency paper ballots are available at precincts to ensure Georgia voters can cast a ballot in the case of a malfunction, and additionally to ensure election officials are trained in how to handle both paper poll books and emergency ballots. 

“The narrowly tailored relief ordered directs that the State Defendants provide at least a modicum of the voting backup plan tools essential to protecting voters’ constitutionally protected ability and right to cast a ballot that is counted and given the same weight as any other on this coming November 3rd general election day and thereafter,” Totenberg wrote in the 67-page order. 

Totenberg noted that “it is not too late” for state officials to “take these reasonable concrete measures to mitigate the real potential harms that would otherwise likely transpire at precinct polling locations grappling with the boiling brew created by the combination of new voting equipment issues and old voter data system deficiencies.”

The Associated Press reported that Raffensperger plans to appeal the ruling. Raffensperger stated that his office and election officials “are preparing Georgia for the biggest election turnout in history, and it will do so successfully despite the constant distraction of litigation filed by activists determined to undermine the credibility of our elections.”

The ruling comes after voters in some precincts in Georgia were forced to wait in line for hours during the June primary elections due to a smaller amount of polling locations during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as issues with polling pads. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The state awarded a $107 million contract to Dominion Voting Systems to implement a “verified paper ballot system” following a previous ruling from Totenberg last year that required state officials to phase out paperless voting machines ahead of the 2020 elections in order to increase election security. 

Dominion’s KnowInk PollPads are the equipment the order applies to, with Dominion providing technical support to election officials using its equipment during elections. 

The plaintiffs — made up of a coalition of voting rights advocates — cited multiple incidents with the poll books during both the June 9 and Aug. 11 Georgia elections in asking Totenberg to require backup paper poll books, with voters in some cases sent to different polling locations or being denied a ballot due to poll book issues. 

The Coalition for Good Governance, one of the plaintiffs in the case, tweeted its support for Totenberg’s ruling on Monday, noting that “updated paper backup poll books in every precinct is a simple solution that will help prevent long lines caused by check in delays and potential errors from electronic poll books.”

Totenberg noted in the order Monday that the ruling on backup paper poll books was meant to be a portion of a larger case brought by the plaintiffs targeting voting machines in the state. 

Totenberg wrote that due to new evidence submitted by the voting rights plaintiffs last week, the larger ruling was delayed, and the narrower ruling was rolled out to “avoid delay” and give state officials time to implement the ordered measures ahead of Election Day. 

The Coalition for Good Governance on Friday filed a court document alleging that there is a serious error in Georgia voting databases, citing a message sent by a Georgia state election official to counties warning of the error and noting that the error would require “every county to get a new database” prior to Election Day. 

Totenberg wrote Monday that “the relief that the Coalition Plaintiffs seek here is a limited common sense remedy to the real and repetitive voting impediments Plaintiffs have experienced at the precinct threshold and the substantial threat that they will face from these impediments anew in the 2020 general election if preliminary injunctive relief is not granted.”

The State Department’s internal watchdog confirmed that the Trump administration rescinded an award from a Finnish journalist after discovering she had criticized the president in social media posts.

The State Department initially told journalist Jessikka Aro that she would receive the International Women of Courage (IWOC) Award, but plans were later revised.

The watchdog report from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) notes Aro’s remarks about the president concerned some senior U.S. officials and prompted a withdrawal from her receiving the award due to a possible public relations dilemma.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Inspector General’s report is another somber example of how fear and partisanship have permeated our nation’s foreign policy and diplomacy under the Trump administration,” said Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Menendez and seven other senators including Sens. Ed MarkeyEdward (Ed) John MarkeyA game theorist’s advice to President Trump on filling the Supreme Court seat Watchdog confirms State Dept. canceled award for journalist who criticized Trump 3 reasons why Biden is misreading the politics of court packing MORE (D-Mass.) and Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerThe movement to reform animal agriculture has reached a tipping point Watchdog confirms State Dept. canceled award for journalist who criticized Trump 3 reasons why Biden is misreading the politics of court packing MORE (D-N.J.) requested the investigation into rescinding Aro’s award.

Aro was selected for the award for her reporting on Russian propaganda activities dating to 2014, The Washington Post reported.

She was informed of her selection and offered flight options before the award selection was rescinded.

“Trump constantly labels journalists as ‘enemy’ and ‘fake news,’ ” she said on social media in 2018, according to the report. 

ADVERTISEMENT

In another post, she said that Trump and Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinWatchdog confirms State Dept. canceled award for journalist who criticized Trump Former intelligence agency director Robert Cardillo speaks out against ‘erratic’ Trump Kremlin: Putin calls for reset between US and Russia on cyber relations before elections MORE would meet in Helsinki, where “Finnish people can protest them both. Sweet.”

According to notes obtained by the inspector general, U.S. officials and the acting director of the Office of Global Women’s Issues argued Aro’s award invitation should be withdrawn on Feb. 15 last year.

The director’s concerns included that the “media could highlight the tweets and Facebook posts during the ceremony,” causing “potential embarrassment to the Department, particularly given the involvement of the Secretary and the First Lady,” referencing Melania TrumpMelania TrumpWatchdog confirms State Dept. canceled award for journalist who criticized Trump Ginsburg becomes the first woman to lie in state in the Capitol Rabbi memorializes Ginsburg: Her dissents were ‘blueprints for the future’ MORE.

“Every person OIG interviewed in connection with this matter acknowledged” that had her posts not been flagged, “Ms. Aro would have received the IWOC Award,” the report said.

Before her award’s rescission, Aro’s name was included as an awardee in a memo that was approved by Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoWatchdog confirms State Dept. canceled award for journalist who criticized Trump Trump’s push for win with Sudan amps up pressure on Congress  Putin nominated for Nobel Peace Prize MORE, the report added.

The report’s findings could dampen already shaky tensions between the department’s leadership and the OIG following the firing of Inspector General Steve Linick this spring at Pompeo’s request.

The Hill contacted the State Department but did not immediately receive a response.

Sen. Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinHillicon Valley: Biden calls on Facebook to change political speech rules | Dems demand hearings after Georgia election chaos | Microsoft stops selling facial recognition tech to police Democrats demand Republican leaders examine election challenges after Georgia voting chaos GOP votes to give Graham broad subpoena power in Obama-era probe MORE (D-Calif.) leads her top progressive challenger by a double-digit margin, according to a new poll.

A new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California found that Feinstein leads her challenger, California Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (D), 45 percent to 21 percent among likely voters. Thirty-three percent are undecided.

Feinstein has a commanding lead in every region of the state and has a more than 2-to-1 lead in de León’s home region of Los Angeles. Feinstein, a former mayor of San Francisco, also has a huge lead in the Bay area: 54 to 17 percent.

ADVERTISEMENTFeinstein has been a long-time staple in California politics, but she has come under fire from progressives who argue she hasn’t held President Trump accountable. Many progressives and groups have rallied around de León since he entered the race.

But de León and any other Democrat looking to jump into the race will have an uphill battle since Feinstein has served in the Senate since 1992.

De León isn’t the only Democratic challenger trying to unseat Feinstein.

Justice Democrats, a group led by the progressive journalist Cenk Uygur, announced in early November they would support Alison Hartson (D), a community organizer and former teacher.

Democratic mega-donor and environmental activist Tom Steyer is also considering a bid. Steyer has been running a multimillion-dollar ad campaign encouraging Democrats to support impeaching Trump.

California features a top-two primary, where all candidates face off in a single primary, regardless of party affiliation. The top two finishers advance to a general election runoff.

The poll was conducted from Nov. 10 to 19 and surveyed 1,704 California residents by mobile phones and landlines. The crosstabs in the poll surveyed a group of 1,070 likely voters. The margin of error of that group was 4.3 percentage points.

A top official at the Interior Department has slowed the release of a study on the number of polar bears that give birth on land overlapping an area recently opened to oil and gas drilling, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

The study has been ready for at least three months, but has been held up by U.S. Geological Survey Director James Reilly, The Post reported, noting that Reilly has raised questions about it, including why it uses data from a former scientist and why polar bear dens aren’t counted individually. 

The study reportedly looks at the number of bears that give birth in an area near the southern Beaufort Sea, which is part of an area the administration has moved toward opening up for oil and gas drilling. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The Post reported that the Fish and Wildlife Service needs to use the study in determining if drilling can proceed ahead of the approval of a $3 billion drilling project on the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska (NPR-A), but that Reilly has questioned why it needs a “published version of this report.”

The study also reportedly found that 34 percent of polar bear dens are located within the coastal plain area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), which the administration has also separately opened for drilling in its entirety. 

Both drilling at ANWR and NPR-A are among dozens of projects that were recently fast-tracked, benefitting from a June order from President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump signs bill averting shutdown after brief funding lapse Privacy, civil rights groups demand transparency from Amazon on election data breaches Facebook takes down Trump campaign ads tying refugees to coronavirus MORE waiving environmental reviews to speed construction. 

The U.S. Geological Service did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment, but told The Post in a statement that its leadership “routinely reviews and requests additional information on scientific reports to best understand the technical data of key references that are used in the model conclusions.”

“This is a longstanding practice to review scientific reports prior to publication to verify the strength of the science presented,” the agency said. “Our scientists are working to address requests for additional information.”

However, an official, speaking anonymously, told the newspaper that the slowdown was “unprecedented” and problematic. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The reported move follows another controversial administration action involving polar bear studies and the department’s advancement of drilling in Alaska. 

In February, the Fish and Wildlife Service opened a study up for public comment, which critics characterized as an attempt to undermine science. 

And Reilly himself has previously faced scrutiny over his treatment of science, particularly climate science. 

Last year he reportedly ordered the Geological Survey to limit its climate models to just 21 years away and also reportedly removed mentions of climate change from agency press releases.