Subject: FW: Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for Tuesday, June 5, 2018
From: "Kathy Chung" <[email-masked]>
To: "Ashley Blazer Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Jill Tracy Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Jimmy Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Valerie Biden Owens" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 09:27:24 -0400

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing

*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <[email-masked]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 5, 2018 7:57 AM
*To:* [email-masked]
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Tuesday, June 5, 2018

*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=000-9d8&t=c>
mobile-optimized online version, including download options and an audio
reader.*

[image: Image removed by sender. Office of Vice President Biden
Intelligence Briefing]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=001-e5c&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

*Tuesday, June 5, 2018 8:00 AM EDT*
Today's Table of Contents

*Leading the News <#SECTION_1>*

• Trump Says He Has “Absolute Right” To Pardon Himself. <#S1>

*Foreign Policy <#SECTION_2>*

• Trump: Chinese, Canadian Trade Barriers On Ag Products “Not Acceptable.”
<#S2>

• White House: North Korea Sanctions To Remain As Summit Planning
Progresses. <#S3>

• Iran Threatens Increased Enrichment Capacity If Nuclear Deal Collapses.
<#S4>

• US, Turkey Reach Agreement On Removal Of Kurdish Troops From Syrian Town.
<#S5>

• Suicide Bomber Targets Afghan Religious Gathering, Killing 14. <#S6>

• US Ambassador To Germany Criticized For Praising European Conservatives.
<#S7>

• Pompeo Urges OAS To Suspend Venezuela. <#S8>

*Domestic Policy <#SECTION_3>*

• By 7-2, High Court Rules Narrowly For Baker In Gay Marriage Cake Case.
<#S9>

• Supreme Court Dismisses Ruling That Allowed Immigrant Teen Access To
Abortion. <#S10>

• Trump Says Eagles Won’t Visit White House Due To National Anthem Dispute.
<#S11>

• CMS Unveils Medicaid “Scorecard.” <#S12>

• Clinton Says He Does Not Owe Lewinsky An Apology. <#S13>

• Durbin Says He Would Support Commutation Of Blagojevich’s Sentence. <#S14>

• California Primary Today; Cox, Villaraigosa Battling For Second Spot In
Governor’s Race. <#S15>

*Cancer Research <#SECTION_4>*

• Immunotherapy Eliminates All Evidence Of Patient’s Advanced-Stage Breast
Cancer. <#S16>

• US Postal Service Breast Cancer Stamps Help Fund New Study. <#S17>

*Editorials/Op-Eds <#SECTION_5>*

• New York Times. <#S18>

• Washington Post. <#S19>

*Biden in the News <#SECTION_6>*

• Biden Delivers “Inspirational Speech” During Visit To St. Petersburg.
<#S20>
Leading the News
Trump Says He Has “Absolute Right” To Pardon Himself.

In a pair of tweets Monday morning, President Trump asserted that he has
the “absolute right” to pardon himself, and declared that Special Counsel
Robert Mueller’s investigation is unconstitutional. Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=002-e32&t=c>,
“As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right
to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong?
In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and
Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!” Later, he
tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=003-ebb&t=c>,
“The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done
nothing wrong!” Media reports cast Trump’s tweets as part of his legal
team’s strategy to raise questions about the constitutional legitimacy of
Mueller’s investigation. In addition, Trump’s tweet about whether he has
the power to pardon himself sparked additional discussion on the potential
constitutional struggle between Trump and Mueller, with some experts coming
down on Trump’s side.

        On ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=004-14a&t=c>
(6/4, story 4, 2:10, Muir), Jonathan Karl said “a defiant President Trump
declared himself effectively immune from prosecution,” and Lester Holt said
on NBC Nightly News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=005-f9e&t=c>
(6/4, lead story, 2:40) that while Trump “has waged a campaign to discredit
the work of a special counsel...what he tweeted [Monday] reached well
beyond that, suggesting impunity from justice, opening a debate that may
give many Americans pause.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=006-e1c&t=c>
(6/4, Lemire, Lucey) reports that Trump “asserted his presidential power
and escalated his efforts to discredit the special counsel Russia probe.”
The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=007-ea7&t=c>
(6/4, Shear) says the tweets “went further than before in attempting to
undermine the legal basis for the investigation.” The Times says Trump had
“avoided directly challenging the special counsel,” but “that strategy
changed after Mr. Trump overhauled his legal team.” In a separate analysis,
the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=008-221&t=c>
(6/4, Savage) sees Trump’s declaration of an “absolute right” to pardon
himself as “the latest in an aggressive series of moves to assert his
control over federal law enforcement.”

        Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=009-cea&t=c>
(6/4, Pettypiece, Strohm) reports that Solomon Wisenberg, “who served as
deputy independent counsel investigating” former President Bill Clinton
believes that Trump’s legal team is trying “to prepare the public for
what’s going to may well be a battle over executive privilege.” Wisenberg
says “both sides would be taking a gamble if Mueller decides to subpoena
Trump,” according to Bloomberg. Wisenberg is quoted as saying, “A lot of
people just assume that it’s going to be a slam dunk for Mueller. I just
don’t think it necessarily is.” Bloomberg reports that Wisenberg says “it
isn’t clear...if Mueller has the legal authority to challenge executive
privilege because he’s operating under a Justice Department regulation that
doesn’t explicitly give him such power.”

        The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00a-e5f&t=c>
(6/4, Stokols) says that while “some congressional Republicans have said
that firing the special counsel or pardoning himself would be red lines
that the president should not cross,” most “have also been noticeably blasé
about Trump’s increasingly explicit public musings that he continues to
consider both options.” However, on ABC’s Good Morning America[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00b-df1&t=c>
(6/4, 7:10 a.m. EDT, Stephanopoulos), Cecilia Vega reported that “even the
President’s own Republican allies are now sounding the alarm about this
notion that the President can pardon himself,” and the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00c-17a&t=c>
(6/4, Wagner) says “even some Republicans question the reading of the law
by Trump’s legal team.” According to the Post, Senate Judiciary Chairman
Charles Grassley “suggested” that Trump “should hire a new lawyer if he is
being told he can pardon himself.” Grassley is quoted as saying, “If I were
president of the United States, and I had a lawyer that told me I could
pardon myself, I think I would hire a new lawyer.” On the other hand,
Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington, “said
he believes a president can pardon himself.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00d-53d&t=c>
(6/4, Fabian, Shelbourne) says Democrats argued that Trump’s discussion “of
a self-pardon...shows the president believes he is above the law.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00e-954&t=c>
(6/4, Cheney, Nelson, Lima) reports that after Trump’s tweets, “top
Democratic lawmakers are countering with their own message: ‘You are not a
king.’” House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Steve Cohen (D) tweeted, “The
restoration of King George lll without his splendid education, morals, or
grace.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=00f-611&t=c>
(6/4, Swoyer) reports that Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D), the ranking Democrat on
the panel, “said the president is wrong about the ability to pardon himself
and about the illegality of the special counsel probe,” and he “said the
special counsel’s investigation is ‘clearly constitutional.” Sen. Richard
Blumenthal said on CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=010-6b9&t=c>
(6/4), “Legally, there’s absolutely no question...that the President of the
United States cannot pardon himself.”

        Meanwhile, the New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=011-9ae&t=c>
(6/4, Schwab, Moore) says “legal experts” were “split on whether Trump
could pardon himself.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=012-f5f&t=c>
(6/4, Freifeld) reports that the US Constitution “is silent on the issue of
whether the president’s broad power to grant pardons extends to himself,
and some lawyers say that supports Trump’s position.” Paula Reid said on
the CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=013-f56&t=c>
(6/4, story 4, 2:05, Glor) that the matter “has never been tested in the
court” and “the only official guidance we have on that issue is a 1974
Justice Department memo issued shortly before President Nixon resigned, and
that memo says that a president cannot pardon himself under the fundamental
legal principle that you can’t be the judge in you own case.”

        Brit Hume said on Fox News Special Report[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=014-39b&t=c>
(6/4), “The question of whether he can pardon himself remains an open
question in the sense that pardon power is pretty sweeping and the
President can exercise it pretty much as he sees fit. However, it has never
been exercised that anybody knows of in a case where...a president is
pardoning himself and the constitution is silent on it. There is a
principle int he law that we all kind of recognize which is that no person
shall be the judge of his or her own case. This would seem to fly in the
face of that. So, it’s a doubtful proposition that he could actually pardon
himself.” Jeffrey Toobin said on CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=015-d0e&t=c>
(6/4), “I think it is an uncertain legal question about whether a president
can pardon himself. That has never been resolved.”

        Sean Hannity took a different view, arguing on Fox News’ Hannity[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=016-3e1&t=c>
(6/4), “This phony, feigned, so-called outrage from the left and the media
and other anti-Trump groupies is over something that has not happened and
something that will not happen because President Trump has done nothing
wrong and it was a hypothetical that Rudy Giuliani was actually laughing
at. Still, the media’s echo chamber blowing up over something rooted, in
legal precedents, backed up by real constitutional scholars, and yet
something that has not ever happened and probably won’t.”

        *Giuliani Says Trump Isn’t Going To Pardon Himself. *Giuliani said
on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=017-ce3&t=c>
(6/4), “I can tell you as a lawyer, the pardon power is complete and there
is no limitation on it. Would somebody impose a practical limitation on it?
Absolutely. The practical limitation is it would be suicide to pardon
himself. ... And pardon doesn’t get you off impeachment. ... He’s not going
to pardon himself.”

        *In Tweet Today, Trump Blames Sessions For “Russian Witch Hunt
Hoax.” *Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=018-cf3&t=c>
this morning, “The Russian Witch Hunt Hoax continues, all because Jeff
Sessions didn’t tell me he was going to recuse himself...I would have
quickly picked someone else. So much time and money wasted, so many lives
ruined...and Sessions knew better than most that there was No Collusion!”

        *Mueller Team Accuses Manafort Of Witness Tampering. *The New York
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=019-df7&t=c>
(6/4, Apuzzo) reports that prosecutors working for Mueller have accused
Manafort “of attempting to tamper with witnesses in his federal tax and
lobbying case.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01a-23c&t=c>
(6/4, Hsu) reports that prosecutors “accused Manafort and a longtime
associate they previously linked to Russian intelligence of repeatedly
contacting two members of a public-relations firm since February to secure
false testimony about their collective work involving a group of former
senior European politicians.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01b-5c0&t=c>
(6/4) reports that the court filing says Manafort “began messaging and
calling one of the witnesses in February shortly after a federal grand jury
in Washington returned a superseding indictment against him that included
allegations of unregistered lobbying related to the Hapsburg Group.
Manafort messaged and called one of the witnesses the day after his
co-defendant and business partner, Rick Gates, pleaded guilty and continued
reaching out over the next several days, according to a sworn affidavit
filed by an FBI agent in the case.” Law.com
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01c-85e&t=c>
(6/4, Kim) says Mueller has “asked U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson
of the District of Columbia to revoke or revise Manafort’s pretrial
release.”

        *Special Master Says Most Documents Seized From Cohen Are Not
Privileged. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01d-19d&t=c>
(6/4, Feuer, Weiser) reports that Barbara Jones, the special master
reviewing documents and electronic files seized from Michael Cohen, “said
on Monday that, at least so far, only a tiny fraction of the materials are
protected by the attorney-client privilege, meaning that most can be used
by the federal prosecutors who are conducting a wide-ranging criminal
investigation into Mr. Cohen.” In a report submitted to federal judge Kimba
Wood, Jones “said that only 14 paper documents out of the 639 that she had
looked at are privileged, or partly privileged, and would be withheld from
the prosecutors’ inquiry. Of the 291,770 electronic files contained on two
of Mr. Cohen’s cellphones and on one of his iPads, 148 are privileged and
will be withheld if the judge approves, Ms. Jones said.”

        *Media Analyses: White House Declines To Explain Changing Account
Of Trump Tower Meeting Statement. *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01e-5ed&t=c>
(6/4, Morin) reports that the White House “declined to explain why
officials’ accounts changed over time about President Donald Trump’s
involvement in a July 2017 statement about his oldest son’s meeting with a
Kremlin-connected lawyer during the 2016 campaign.” In a letter that became
public last weekend, Trump’s legal team said that “Trump had dictated the
statement.” However, “official explanations of the statement’s
origin...have changed over the last year.” In July 2017, Trump attorney Jay
Sekulow said “that the president was not involved in crafting the statement
about it,” and in August, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said
that Trump “certainly didn’t dictate” the statement but that he weighed in
“like any father would do.” On Monday, Sanders “dodged questions about the
shifting explanations.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=01f-8b8&t=c>
(6/4, Parker) says that while Trump’s “legal and political teams were
vigorous in their denials,” it “wasn’t the truth.” It is, the Post says,
“the latest example of where on a number of key issues – especially pegged
to Mueller’s ongoing Russia probe and Trump’s legal difficulties – the
White House and the president’s lawyers have offered contradicting stories
and whipsaw about-faces, often revealing the truth only weeks later, when
confronted with their inconsistencies.” Similarly, the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=020-a81&t=c>
(6/4, Apuzzo) says the “misleading statement” highlights “a communication
strategy that the White House has used repeatedly: deny facts, attack news
outlets and dismiss journalism as ‘fake news.’”

        Giuliani said on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=021-543&t=c>
(6/4), “I don’t think anybody’s lying. I think a mistake was made at the
very early stages of an investigation. I don’t mean an investigation – very
early stages of a representation by a lawyer, which happens all the time.
So, I don’t think it’s a significant fact. The most important thing is,
there was no testimony under oath to that effect. And then when a written
statement was put in, it was completely accurate.” Karl also said on ABC
World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=022-867&t=c>
(6/4, story 4, 2:10, Muir) that Giuliani “says the conflicting accounts is
one reason the President is now unlikely to agree to an interview with the
special counsel.”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=023-da0&t=c>
(6/4, Kasperowicz) says White House reporters were “angry and frustrated”
after Sanders “dodged questions” about the statement and “otherwise cut
short several reporters who were looking to ask more follow-up questions.”
Jim Acosta said on CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=024-e3c&t=c>
(6/4) that Sanders does not take follow-up questions from reporters
“because they just don’t want to answer these questions. And this has been
happening gradually over time, where we are having fewer briefings and the
briefings are shorter and then Sarah Sanders is just going around the room
and taking one question from each reporter. I think what we need is perhaps
a new strategy on the part of the White House press corps to start asking
the question from the previous reporter who was cut off by the press
secretary because clearly this is a strategy designed to not give
information to the American people.”

        *Trump: Media Using Russia Probe To Distract From Strong Economy. *The
Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=025-a49&t=c>
(6/4, Lim) reports that after “reporters clashed” with Sanders “for dodging
questions about the controversial 2016 Trump Tower meeting,” Trump
“blasted” the media “for being ‘desperate to distract’ from his effective
stewardship of the economy.” Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=026-408&t=c>,
“The Fake News Media is desperate to distract from the economy and record
setting economic numbers and so they keep talking about the phony Russian
Witch Hunt.” Trump followed that tweet with another
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=027-cb8&t=c>
saying, “In many ways this is the greatest economy in the HISTORY of
America and the best time EVER to look for a job!”

        Sanders echoed that sentiment on Fox News’ Hannity[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=028-c8d&t=c>
(6/4), saying, “I think the biggest story that is being missed tonight, and
I saw today in that room, they asked me 100 questions on the fake witch
hunt that they have been fixated on for these last 500 days, but they
forgot to mention the things that Americans actually care about. ... They
ignore all of the successes of this president and it is to their detriment.
I think the American people have seen it and that is why the media’s
numbers continue to tank and the President’s numbers continue to go up.”

        In an analysis, the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=029-cce&t=c>
(6/4, Salam) fact checks a White House fact sheet
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02a-6a1&t=c>
touting President Trump’s accomplishments in his first 500 days in office.

        *Media Analyses: Giuliani Stressing That Presidents Can Be
Impeached, But Not Indicted. *Media coverage of Giuliani’s round of
interviews over the weekend focuses on his contentions that a sitting
president cannot be indicted and has the power to pardon himself. While
those claims are cast as controversial and potentially dubious, reports
also note that Giuliani emphasized that President Trump would almost
certainly never pardon himself, and that, if he did, his impeachment would
be a foregone conclusion.

        On NBC’s Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02b-e8c&t=c>
(6/4, 7:12 a.m. EDT, Guthrie), Kristen Welker said Giuliani is “making
headlines after telling The Huffington Post that the President could shoot
James Comey and not be prosecuted,” although he would be “impeached the
next day.” Welker said Giuliani was “making the extremely hypothetical
point that, legally, impeachment is the only way to hold the President
accountable.” Welker added that Giuliani is also “saying the President
probably has the power to pardon himself, but stressed that President Trump
has no plans to do so.” On CBS This Morning[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02c-7d4&t=c>
(6/4, 7:12 a.m. EDT), Paula Reid reported that Giuliani said a sitting
president “cannot be indicted for any crime, including murder,” and
“wouldn’t pardon himself, but...could.” Reid noted that Giuliani also said
that “Trump’s team would likely request the President refrain from speaking
with Robert Mueller’s investigators.”

        On ABC’s Good Morning America
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02d-441&t=c>
(6/4, 7:10 a.m. EDT, Stephanopoulos), legal analyst Dan Abrams said he does
not anticipate that Trump will be subpoenaed, but added that he does not
agree with the President’s lawyers claim that a sitting president can
ignore subpoenas. Abrams said, “I think that almost no one in the legal
community would agree with that. There are Supreme Court cases that are
relevant to this...which would certainly indicate that the President likely
would have to testify.”

        *White House Highlights Scholar’s Case That Mueller Should Have
Gone Through Confirmation. *David Martosko of the Daily Mail (UK)
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02e-75c&t=c>
(6/4) reports that an unnamed “White House official” pointed him to “a
legal scholar’s blueprint for such an argument that has been making the
rounds inside the West Wing.” According to Martosko, “Northwestern
University law professor Steven Calabresi wrote last month in The Wall
Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=02f-90f&t=c>
that the special counsel probe is unconstitutional because Mueller’s job
mirrors that of a U.S. Attorney,” and “prosecutors at that level...can’t
wield power unless the president himself appoints them and the U.S. Senate
confirms them.” Martosko adds that “also of concern to some legal experts
is the status of four of Mueller’s prosecutors handling various components
of the Paul Manafort case in a Virginia federal court.” Martosko writes
that DOJ “has given them the title ‘Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys,’ but
those ‘assistant’ prosecutors don’t report to a U.S. attorney. They report
to Mueller.” Martosko says “that may provide the White House with another
argument that Mueller should be considered a ‘principal’ officer whose work
is invalid without Senate confirmation.”

        House Majority Whip Scalise said on Fox News’ Hannity[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=030-bc2&t=c>
(6/4), “If they got facts about collusion with Russia – that’s what this is
supposed to be about – we have never seen any, but if they’ve got some,
they ought to show the American people. If not, it starts to look like a
witch hunt.”

        *Conway: Discussion Of Trump’s Power To Pardon Himself Is
“Ridiculous.” *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=031-bdc&t=c>
(6/4, Cheney, Nelson, Lima) reports that on Fox News’ Fox & Friends[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=032-fda&t=c>,
Kellyanne Conway “echoed the president’s tweets,” saying, “This whole
exercise of whether he’ll pardon himself is a ridiculous question on its
face because you would pardon yourself if you’ve done something wrong.”

        *AP: Trump’s Pardon Powers Do Not Extend To Impeachment. *In an
analysis, the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=033-81f&t=c>
(6/4, Flaherty) says there is “a big limit in the world of presidential
pardons: Impeachment.” Trump “retains his pardoning powers up until a
possible impeachment. And considering that impeachment trials tend to be
wildly partisan affairs, it is unlikely Trump would be ousted so long as
the GOP still controls the House and Senate.”

        *Trump’s Legal Team Preparing For Confrontation With Mueller.
*The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=034-fc7&t=c>
(6/4, Leonnig, Costa, Helderman, Dawsey) reports that Trump’s legal team is
“preparing for the possibility of a presidential interview, or a legally
precarious subpoena battle over such a sit-down.” According to the Post,
“private moves by Trump’s attorneys and advisers indicate that – despite
the president’s public bravado – they are readying for a fraught legal
confrontation that could have far-reaching consequences.”

        *Christie: Trump Was Ill-Served By His Former Legal Team. *On ABC’s
Good Morning America
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=035-084&t=c>
(6/4, 7:10 a.m. EDT, Stephanopoulos), Chris Christie said, “There’s not
going to be an interview. There just can’t be for a whole variety of
reasons. There shouldn’t be. So the President, as much as he may think he
wants to testify and meet with Bob Mueller, he shouldn’t.” Christie added,
“What you’re seeing now is a change in not only legal strategy but in the
quality of the legal team. That kind of letter indicates to you that the
President was operating with a ‘b’ team of legal representatives before
this and now he’s got people who really understand...much better what his
liabilities are, and also what the opportunities are from both a legal and
a public relations perspective to move this thing in his direction.”

        *Papadopoulos’ Wife Says He Wasn’t Involved In Collusion. *In an
interview with the Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=036-47d&t=c>
(6/4, Ross), George Papadopoulos’ wife, Simona Mangiante, “said her husband
was not involved in collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian
government and that he pleaded guilty in the special counsel’s
investigation to avoid facing charges that he was an agent of the Israeli
government.” Mangiante said her husband was “absolutely not” involved in
collusion. She said, “George had nothing to do with Russia,” adding that he
“pled guilty because [Mueller’s prosecutors] threatened to charge him with
being an Israeli agent.” Asked on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=037-cc8&t=c>
(6/4) if she thinks her husband is going to prison, Mangiante said, “I know
how much dedicated and committed he was to the Trump campaign. I know he
did an excellent job. I know because of this incident, his freedom is
challenged, so I trust and hope and ask President Trump to pardon him. I
hope he will.”

        *Judge Rules BuzzFeed May Have Legal Protection For Decision To
Publish Trump Dossier. *In what Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=038-a7b&t=c>
(6/4, Gerstein) says is a “significant victory” for BuzzFeed, US District
Court Judge Ursula Ungaro ruled Monday “that the online outlet appears to
have legal protection for its decision to publish the so-called dossier
about President Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia.” Ruling in a libel
suit brought by Russian businessman Aleksej Gubarev, Ungaro ruled “that
BuzzFeed could claim the ‘fair report privilege’ for its brief article and
the accompanying release of the dossier online in January 2017.”

        *Former Navy Sailor Plans Lawsuit Against Obama, Comey. *The Washington
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=039-14f&t=c>
(6/4, Ernst) reports that former President Obama, former FBI Director James
Comey, and the Justice Department “are in the legal cross-hairs of” former
Navy sailor Kristian Saucier, who “spent one year in federal prison for
unauthorized photos taken aboard a nuclear submarine.” Saucier, who was
pardoned by President Trump, claims “prosecuting authorities made an
example of him...while legally excusing former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton’s decision to maintain a secret email server.” Saucier’s attorney
told Fox News “that a lawsuit will likely be filed in Manhattan as soon as
a six-month waiting period passes.”

        *In Tweet Today, Trump Complains About Delay In IG Report Of
Clinton FBI Probe. *Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03a-1c8&t=c>
this morning, “What is taking so long with the Inspector General’s Report
on Crooked Hillary and Slippery James Comey. Numerous delays. Hope Report
is not being changed and made weaker! There are so many horrible things to
tell, the public has the right to know. Transparency!”
Foreign Policy
Trump: Chinese, Canadian Trade Barriers On Ag Products “Not Acceptable.”

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03b-352&t=c>
(6/4, Chiacu) reports that President Trump said in a tweet Monday “that
Chinese and Canadian trade barriers on agricultural products are
unacceptable, as he continues to push Beijing to open its economy further
and address its large trade imbalance with the United States.” Trump wrote
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03c-d61&t=c>,
“China already charges a tax of 16% on soybeans. Canada has all sorts of
trade barriers on our Agricultural products. Not acceptable!” Later in the
morning, Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03d-85c&t=c>,
“Farmers have not been doing well for 15 years. Mexico, Canada, China and
others have treated them unfairly. By the time I finish trade talks, that
will change. Big trade barriers against U.S. farmers, and other businesses,
will finally be broken. Massive trade deficits no longer!” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03e-649&t=c>
(6/4, Thomas) casts Trump’s tweets as a defense of “his tough trade
negotiations with China, Canada and Mexico.” Later Monday, in a conference
call with “grassroots supporters,” Trump said, “We will be in a very strong
position very soon. We don’t want to be taken advantage of anymore.”

        *Koch Brothers Announce Campaign Against Trump Trade Policies. *The
AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=03f-084&t=c>
(6/4, Thomas) reports that “groups backed by the influential Koch brothers’
network” have “announced they [are] launching a new multimillion dollar
campaign to oppose tariffs and highlight the benefits of free trade.”
Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, Americans for Prosperity and The
LIBRE Initiative “called on Congress to exert oversight by requiring House
and Senate votes on any new tariffs and urged the lifting of the recent
steel and aluminum tariffs as well as those being proposed on goods from
China.” Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=040-6fd&t=c>
(6/4, McCormick) reports that the groups said they are “planning a
‘multi-year, multi-million-dollar’ campaign to promote free trade and
oppose...Trump’s moves to impose tariffs on billions of dollars worth of
imports.” According to Bloomberg, the “effort will include advertising,
voter mobilization and lobbying.” Bloomberg says the “Koch network isn’t
expected to start the paid advertising related to tariffs until later in
the summer, although Americans for Prosperity is already one of the
nation’s most active television advertisers in this year’s midterm
congressional campaign.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=041-5a7&t=c>
(6/4, Chiacu) says the “infusion of money into media, grassroots
mobilization, lobbying and policy analysis into the domestic debate on free
trade could embolden Republican candidates in the November congressional
elections to part ways with the president on the issue.” Reuters notes that
“Republican lawmakers, already grumbling about some of Trump’s trade
initiatives, outright condemned the Commerce Department announcement last
week on impending tariffs on steel imports and aluminum to be imposed on
the European Union, Canada and Mexico.” The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=042-370&t=c>
(6/4, Tankersley) runs a similar story under the headline “Conservative
Koch Groups Plan Pro-Trade Blitz, As The Issue Splits Republicans.”

        *WSJournal A1: China Moves Steel Production Abroad, Evading
Tariffs. *In a front-page article, the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=043-c36&t=c>
(6/4, Dalton, Wei) reports that even as the Trump Administration increases
its efforts to fight against Chinese steel, US officials have to deal with
a strategic shift by China’s state-backed manufacturers, which have been
shutting down domestic production in favor of overseas expansion.
Unconstrained by tariffs imposed on domestic Chinese factories to prevent
dumping, the foreign steel plants have largely unfettered access to global
markets. Analysts, as well as Western government and industry officials,
say Chinese is giving its manufacturers hundreds of billions of dollars in
state support to build and purchase plants on foreign soil. Consulting firm
Future Risk Research Director Tristan Kenderdine said China is continuing
to overproduce steel, aluminum, and other goods at these foreign factories,
a move that is only economically viable with state subsidies.

        *Mulvaney: Trump Trade Policies Not Ruining Relations With Allies. *OMB
Director Mulvaney was asked on CNN’s The Lead[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=044-cd4&t=c>
(6/4) if the tariffs are ruining US relationships with allies. Mulvaney
said, “The answer to your question is no, we are not ruining these
relationships. ... But the bottom line is this, the President has said a
couple of things. He said he is going to protect American industry, he is
going to protect American families and that is part and parcel of this. So
I don’t think anybody should be surprised at this.”

        *Reuters Analysis: Anger Over Trump Tariffs To Be Focus Of G7
Meeting. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=045-bb2&t=c>
(6/4) reports that on Monday, UK Prime Minister Theresa May spoke with
Trump, telling him that “U.S. tariffs imposed on European Union steel and
aluminum imports were ‘unjustified and deeply disappointing.’” According to
Reuters, “The leaders spoke for the first time since the announcement in a
30-minute call and agreed to discuss the issue further at the G7 summit in
Canada later this week.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=046-7d3&t=c>
(6/4) reports that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will “play...host
to a summit of the Group of Seven...with six of the seven members outraged
at the United States over a slew of recent moves by” President Trump.
According to Reuters, Trudeau, “who wants the June 8-9 meeting to focus on
economic growth, insists he can handle the challenge, though insiders and
analysts say he will have to fight to keep the grouping together at a time
when Trump’s trade and diplomatic moves have isolated the United States and
risk undermining the G7’s relevance.”

        *EU Could Impose Retaliatory Measures In July. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=047-c6f&t=c>
(6/4) reports that EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said today that
the EU “could impose preliminary measures to safeguard its steel and
aluminum industries as early as July, although a full investigation will
take nine months.” Malmstrom is quoted as saying, “We can take pre-measures
in July already. This is what we are going to discuss. We want to see the
preliminary outcomes of the investigation.” According to Reuters, “Under
WTO rules, the EU could impose ‘provisional safeguard’ tariffs for up to
200 days if it makes a preliminary finding that increased imports have
caused or are threatening to cause serious injury to its steel and aluminum
sectors.”

        *Mexico Says It Will Start WTO Dispute Process. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=048-5a5&t=c>
(6/4) reports that the Mexican government announced today that it “will
start a dispute settlement process at the World Trade Organization over
U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum...joining the European Union in seeking
WTO involvement against the new measures.” Reuters says Mexico “previously
said it would hit back against the U.S. tariffs with ‘equivalent’ measures,
by targeting U.S. farm and industrial products ranging from pork legs and
fruit to steel.”

        *Corker Plans Bill To Subject Tariffs To Congressional Approval. *The
Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=049-2a7&t=c>
(6/4, Werner, Kim) reports that Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob
Corker says he is “preparing legislation to subject tariffs to
congressional approval, in response to President Trump’s new levies on
steel and aluminum imports from the European Union, Canada and Mexico.”
Corker said Monday that the bill is intended “to make sure that before
those things could even occur, you’d have to get congressional approval.
... I think it’s inappropriate just to be willy-nilly throwing tariffs
around and changing your mind. ... That’s not the way you deal with
economic issues like that.”
White House: North Korea Sanctions To Remain As Summit Planning Progresses.

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04a-2c8&t=c>
(6/4, Jacobs, Sink) reports White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told
reporters Monday that President Trump’s first meeting with North Korean
leader Kim Jong-un has been scheduled for June 12 at 9 a.m. Singapore time.
Sanders also “said there has been no change in what Trump has described as
a ‘maximum pressure’ campaign on the North Korean regime.” She told
reporters, “We have sanctions on, they are very powerful and we would not
take those sanctions off unless North Korea denuclearized,” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04b-6cb&t=c>
(6/4, Staff) reports. She added that summit preparations are going well,
and “we feel like things are continuing to move forward and good progress
has been made.” Sanders reiterated on [image: Image removed by sender.
Video]Fox News’ Hannity
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04c-66d&t=c>
(6/4), “The President has conceded nothing and the sanctions that have been
in place will continue to be on place. As the President said on Friday,
this is part of the discussion, and he looks forward to this meeting. He
thinks it’s going to be a very good and productive meeting and it’s going
to be part of this process, but he certainly things that June 12 is going
to be a good meeting and he certainly is looking forward to doing that here
in the next week.”

        Meanwhile, Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04d-554&t=c>
(6/4, Bhavan Jaipragas |, Post) says, Singapore has officially declared
“its leafy diplomatic district near the popular Orchard Road shopping belt
a ‘special event area,’ fueling speculation that the landmark summit” will
be held “at the Shangri-La Hotel.” Diplomatic sources said Monday “that
Pyongyang was insistent that the June 12 event could not be held in an
American or European owned venue.” The sources “also indicated that if
everything went smoothly, the two leaders would stay at separate hotels and
convene at another hotel for the summit,” although none “of the three
premises would be owned by a Western company.”

        Summit planning may be “picking up steam,” [image: Image removed by
sender. Video]Fox News Special Report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04e-50e&t=c>
(6/4) said, but North Korea has yet to commit to denuclearization. There
are, however, “reports that South Korean President Moon Jae-in, with
President Trump and Kim, will declare an end to the Korean War.”

        “When it comes to the specifics of that meeting, Trump (and Kim)
are getting plenty of advice, most of which links the issues of
denuclearization and sanctions relief,” but a USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=04f-8b1&t=c>
(6/4, Jackson) analysis says “the best they can probably hope for is a
general statement pledging work on an overall agreement regarding North
Korea’s nuclear weapons.” The summit “is drawing global media scrutiny,”
but there are many “reasons that Trump and his aides have played down
expectations.” Many analysts are skeptical that “Kim will ever commit to
denuclearization, because he sees nuclear weapons as a guarantee of
security for his regime.” Even if he accepted “those demands – a big if –
they could not be carried out overnight,” the analysts say. Still, the two
leaders are “under pressure to get something out of the summit that is
drawing global media scrutiny, with Kim seeking ways to reduce economic
sanctions on his impoverished country.”

        Jim Sciutto similarly said on [image: Image removed by sender.
Video]CNN’s Situation Room
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=050-69b&t=c>
(6/4) that there “has been a massive downgrading of expectations” regarding
the upcoming summit, which is “now described by the President as largely a
meet and greet,” according to a “source familiar with the discussions.” The
“plan, a source tells CNN, is to come to a broad agreement on North Korea
dismantling its nuclear program. Then negotiations would be handed over to
Secretary of State Pompeo for discussions that could take years. This even
as the US still has received no assurances that North Korea will give up
its nuclear weapons.” CNN then showed Pompeo saying, “I believe they are
contemplating a path forward where they can make a strategic shift, one
their country has not been prepared to make before. This will obviously be
their decision.”

        On MSNBC’s Morning Joe
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=051-92c&t=c>
(6/4), former NATO Supreme Commander James Stavridis said that in regards
to the June 12 summit, “The key will be let the diplomats get in the room
and try to close that gap between what the Administration is at least
saying – ‘complete, verifiable, independently validated, all nuclear
weapons gone’ – and what Kim Jong-un is saying, which is, ‘yes, over time,
I would like to get rid of my nuclear weapons.’ That’s a pretty big gap
that is going to take at least a year, year and a half to close.” Stavridis
added, “Having said all that, we are vastly better off than we were six
months ago when many of us thought there was a significant chance of
hostilities on the peninsula.”

        *In Tweet Today, Trump Says He Hopes Singapore Meeting Will Lead To
“Something Big.” *Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=052-9fc&t=c>
this morning, “Meeting in Singapore with North Korea will hopefully be the
start of something big...we will soon see!”

        *Mattis Dismisses Reports Of US Military Withdrawal From Korea. *The
Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=053-c80&t=c>
(6/4, Muñoz) reports Defense Secretary Mattis said the prospect of a
drawdown or full withdrawal of US troops from the Korean Peninsula is “not
even a subject of the discussions” between US and North Korean officials
who are solidifying details ahead of the summit. Mattis told reporters,
“Five years from now, 10 years from now, it could be up for review [but]
that would be between a democracy called the Republic of Korea and a
democracy called the United States of America.” The Times says “reports
surfaced last month that the Trump administration requested options from
the Pentagon on” the possible removal of US troops, but “none of those
concerns were evident during Mr. Mattis’ meetings with his Asian
counterparts in Singapore this week.”

        At the opening of Fox News’
Fox & Friends
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=054-1c2&t=c>
(6/4), Garrett Tenney said Mattis, who is “always a good place to go for a
reality check,” told his counterparts in Singapore “that he anticipates the
road ahead for negotiations with North Korea will be bumpy at best.” He
“also warned defense officials from South Korea and Japan that the US
allies need to keep the pressure on Pyongyang and maintain a strong
defensive stance so that diplomats can negotiate from a position of
strength.” Mattis was shown saying, “We must remain vigilant and we will
continue to implement all UN Security Council resolutions on North Korea.
North Korea will receive relief only when it demonstrates verifiable and
irreversible steps to denuclearization.”

        *Senate Democrats Vow To Block Korean Peace Deal That Doesn’t Meet
Their Demands. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=055-dcc&t=c>
(6/4) reports Senate Democrats released a letter Friday addressed to
President Trump, calling on him to avoid agreeing to any deal “that leaves
North Korea with nuclear weapons.” Those “demands include North Korea
dismantling and removing every nuclear, chemical and biological weapon,
ending production and enrichment of uranium for weapons purposes and
permanently dismantling its nuclear weapons infrastructure.” The Democrats
“threatened to maintain or toughen sanctions on Pyongyang if that condition
is not met,” according to Reuters, which says “easing sanctions...would
likely need approval from Congress.”

        Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=056-8ef&t=c>
(6/4, Schor) reports Senate Minority Leader Schumer, one of the seven
senators behind the demands, told reporters, “If the deal doesn’t live up
to these standards, then the President should not expect Democratic support
in the Senate if he tries to lift sanctions.” Schumer “later added that, if
Trump reaches a deal that offers sanctions relief without sufficient
denuclearization commitments, ‘we hope’ that Republicans would also
consider blocking the president.” Democratic lawmakers “also urged Trump to
engage lawmakers throughout the process, including by providing ‘regular
and substantive briefings’ through both the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and the National Security Working Group.”

        According to the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=057-9fc&t=c>
(6/4, Demirjian), Schumer said “the stakes of the potential talks with
North Korea are far higher than those with Iran, which ‘did not have
nuclear weapons or a functional ICBM.’” The Post adds that “Congressional
Democrats have given their cautious blessing to the talks, while expressing
deep concerns that Trump may be too keen on making a deal to make certain
that it achieves the results the United States wants.”

        Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=058-0c5&t=c>
(6/4) reports “recent polls show public backing for Trump’s pursuit of a
summit meeting with” Kim, and that support may be “contributing to an
uptick in the Republican president’s overall approval ratings, which could
diminish Democrats’ prospects of taking control of one or both chambers of
Congress in November elections.”

        *Kim Reportedly Purges Top Military Officials Ahead Of Summit With
Trump. *ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=059-b9e&t=c>
(6/4, story 6, 0:22, Muir) reported that with just over a week before the
summit between Trump and Kim, South Korean media is reporting that Kim “has
replaced his top three military officials.” While the reason for the “major
shakeup” is “unclear,” some “observers believe Kim may be tightening
control and sidelining officials who might resist change in order to give
himself more room to negotiate” with Trump. USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05a-325&t=c>
(6/4, Michaels). explains the level of the threat posed by the ousted
officials “could have a direct impact on the summit” and “limit how far Kim
is willing to go in dismantling his nuclear arsenal.” Therefore, the
overhaul “may be a sign that the North Korean leader is worried about
opposition from the country’s powerful armed forces as he heads into the
talks, some analysts said Monday.”

        Brian Todd reported on CNN’s
Situation Room
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05b-cec&t=c>
(6/4) that Kim has “purged” the three generals and replaced them with
“younger men believed to be loyalists” to the North Korean leader. Todd
said US officials say “Kim was concerned about potential corruption among
the three generals and wanted to get rid of them in anticipation of
investment coming into” the country. If Kim “can strike a nuclear deal with
President Trump. ... US officials tell CNN Kim also wants to make sure he
and his loyalists get their cut.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05c-880&t=c>
(6/4, Shin) reports the three new “military officers are known for their
unquestioning support of leader Kim,” and they are “flexible enough to
accept the massive changes that may come from any deal” reached at the
summit, “people who follow the secretive country say.” US officials
suggested that “there was some dissent in the military about Kim’s
negotiations with South Korea and the United States, a complete reversal of
the North’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and historic hostility,” although it
was unclear “if the sacked officers were responsible.” While the leadership
changes are “a shock because they take place so close to each other and
come just ahead” of the summit, they are also “in line with Kim’s
years-long efforts to consolidate power by purging senior officers and
promoting trusted younger advisers to the politburo and other core
positions.”

        *Putin Also Seeking Summit With Kim. *Meanwhile, Greg Palkot
reported on Fox News Special Report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05d-0b6&t=c>
(6/4), Kim’s “diplomatic dance card might be filling up.” Russian President
Vladimir Putin has invited Kim to a summit, and Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad “reportedly wants to meet” with the North Korean leader.

        *NYTimes: US Silent About Kim-Assad Meeting. *In an analysis, the New
York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05e-f56&t=c>
(6/4, Sanger, Landler) writes Kim’s planned meeting with Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad has not elicited a protest from Trump, who “raised a red
flag” on a previous meeting with Chinese and Russian officials. The silence
comes despite Syria and North Korea’s “longstanding shared history of
nuclear proliferation.” Meanwhile, “administration officials are now silent
on demands they made just a week ago” that before President Trump meets
with Kim, “there must be assurances that ‘complete, verifiable,
irreversible disarmament’ is underway.” That meeting “increasingly...is
shaping up as a get-to-know-you exercise” that may include the announcement
of plans for a peace treaty that would replace the armistice ending the
Korean War. However, such a move could “further erode the sanctions
campaign against the North and make it almost impossible for Mr. Trump to
return to the threat of military action.”
Iran Threatens Increased Enrichment Capacity If Nuclear Deal Collapses.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=05f-431&t=c>
(6/4, Hafezi) reports Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said
Monday that “he had ordered preparations to increase uranium enrichment
capacity if a nuclear deal with world powers falls apart after the US
withdrawal, and he vowed never to accept limits on Tehran’s ballistic
missile program.” Khamenei reiterated that a renegotiation of the deal was
not an option, and rejected broader discussions to address Iran’s
involvement in Yemen and Syria as “economic and psychological... warfare
against us, and new American sanctions are part of it.” Khamenei “urged
Arab youth to stand up to US pressure” and “again warned of a harsh
response if Iran came under attack.”

        *Peugeot To Suspend Iran Investments. *The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=060-685&t=c>
(6/4, Dalton) reports the French auto manufacturer Peugeot announced Monday
that it is suspending investments in Iran to comply with US law and avoid
possible fines for associated with the Administration’s reinstatement of
sanctions in coming months. Peugeot’s announcement not only delivers a
major setback to European leaders’ efforts to salvage the nuclear deal and
keep European businesses operating in Iran, but also signals that large
corporations view the threat of US sanctions as too burdensome to continue
doing business in Iran.

        *Netanyahu: Iran-Sponsored Upheaval Could Cause Further Influx Of
Migrants Into Europe. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=061-61d&t=c>
(6/4) reports that after speaking with German Chancellor Angela Merkel
today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that “Iran’s
activities across the Middle East threaten to drive another wave of
refugees to Europe.” Reuters says Netanyahu is “on a tour to persuade
European countries to follow” the Trump Administration “in tearing up a
nuclear non-proliferation deal with Iran,” and claims Iran “was using
proceeds from eased sanctions to finance conflict.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=062-78f&t=c>
(6/4) reports that Merkel said “she condemns a tweet from Iran’s top leader
saying that Israel is a ‘cancerous tumor’ that needs to be removed and
pledged to increase pressure on Tehran to scale back its military influence
in the region.” However, Merkel also “reiterated her view that the nuclear
agreement was the best way to prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons.”
US, Turkey Reach Agreement On Removal Of Kurdish Troops From Syrian Town.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=063-22d&t=c>
(6/4, Lederman, Fraser) reports that Turkish officials announced today that
“U.S.-backed Kurdish fighters will withdraw from the key Syrian town of
Manbij under a deal reached with the Trump administration...potentially
easing a serious rift between the U.S. and Turkey.” According to the AP,
“If successful, a deal to resolve the future of Manbij, a strategic town in
north Syria, could avert a tense standoff in northern Syria between
Kurdish-led militias and Turkish-backed Syrian fighters.” The AP says
Turkey “considers the Kurdish fighters to be terrorists who threaten
Turkish sovereignty.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=064-0d1&t=c>
(6/4) reports that in Washington, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu
and Secretary of State Pompeo “also discussed cooperation in Syria.”
According to Reuters, Cavusoglu “said Turkish and U.S. units would together
implement security and stability in Manbij, and the removal of all YPG
organizations from Manbij would be completed.”
Suicide Bomber Targets Afghan Religious Gathering, Killing 14.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=065-b24&t=c>
(6/4, Salahuddin) reports a suicide bomber attacked a gathering of about
2,000 Muslim clerics in Kabul on Monday, the same day that the group, the
Afghan Ulema Council, had “issued an unprecedented religious edict”
condemning “suicide attacks as violations of Islam.” The assailant killed
14 people, including seven “clerics who had been invited from various parts
of Afghanistan by President Ashraf Ghani’s government, which has been
seeking ways to make peace with the Taliban with the strong support of the
US government and Western donors.” No group claimed responsibility for the
attack, and the Taliban “distanced itself” from the incident. The Post
notes the attack “occurred after several months of frequent bombings and
other attacks in Kabul and elsewhere in the country.”

        *UNICEF: Afghanistan’s Out-Of-School Population Increases,
Reversing Trend. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=066-c3a&t=c>
(6/4, Gladstone) reports UNICEF released a study Monday suggesting “that
Afghanistan’s out-of-school population has risen to 3.7 million, or 44
percent of the school-age population, compared with 3.5 million, or 40
percent of the school-age population, a few years ago.” The figures mark
“the first time the number of out-of-school children in Afghanistan had
risen since the ouster of the Taliban government by the American-led
invasion in 2001.” UNICEF “attributed the change, particularly for girls,
partly to family displacements caused by the war and the enduring practice
of child marriages.” The report “also said shortages of female teachers,
poor school facilities and the basic dangers of going to school in conflict
zones ‘are also factors driving children – particularly girls – away from
the classroom.’”
US Ambassador To Germany Criticized For Praising European Conservatives.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=067-00f&t=c>
(6/4, Noack) reports that Richard Grenell, the new US ambassador to
Germany, “is being criticized over an interview with hard-right news site
Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=068-408&t=c>,
in which he said he wants to ‘empower’ conservatives in Europe.” According
to the Post, “His remarks leave room for interpretation, but they were
criticized both in the United States and in Europe for politicizing
diplomacy with a core U.S. ally and as a further blow to transatlantic
relations.” Earlier today, Grenell “rejected the criticism on Twitter,” and
the German foreign ministry said “it was seeking ‘clarification on whether
the statements were actually made in the form they were given.’”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=069-36b&t=c>
(6/4, Eddy) says Grenell’s comments “were condemned on both sides of the
Atlantic as lacking the neutrality expected of a diplomat.” Sen.
Christopher Murphy “called the interview ‘awful,’ insisting that Mr.
Grenell had pledged that he would ‘stay out of politics’ once he was
appointed.” The Times also reports that Grenell “praise[d] Austria’s young
chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, as a ‘rock star’ of the right in the Breitbart
interview.” According to the Times, “Kurz rose to power as foreign minister
by criticizing” German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s “open-door immigration
policies, and banded together with Balkan nations to put a halt to the
practice of waving illegal migrants over national borders.”

        Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06a-27a&t=c>
(6/4, Lane, Tomlinson) reports that during his sit-down interview, Grenell
“spoke out as the latest high-profile figure to denounce the influence of
left-wing billionaire George Soros.” In reference to “recent news that Mr.
Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) was moving from Budapest to Berlin
in the wake of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s landslide election
win,” Grenell remarked: “Look, I think his policies are failed policies”
that are “very geared towards the elites, not for the silent majority.”
Breitbart notes that earlier this year, “Orbán called on other patriotic
and conservative European allies to counter the agenda of Mr. Soros,
saying: ‘We will fight together to stop Soros’s plan in Brussels and the
United Nations.’”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06b-d1f&t=c>
(6/4, Kingsley) reports Orban “has recognized the huge power of media and
now seems intent on trying to expand his sphere of influence.” According to
the Times, “Last year, one of his closest advisers, Arpad Habony, met with
Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, in
Washington.” The Times adds that “the purpose of the visit, according to a
person familiar with the meeting, was to discuss starting an outlet in
Eastern Europe like Breitbart News, a platform often used to promote
hard-edge nationalist ideas.”
Pompeo Urges OAS To Suspend Venezuela.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06c-dba&t=c>
(6/4, Lee, Lugo) reports that on Friday, Secretary of State Pompeo called
on the Organization of American States “to suspend Venezuela,” and urged
member nations “to step up pressure on the country’s government to restore
constitutional order.” Pompeo said the government of President Nicolas
Maduro is “in the process of a ‘full-scale dismantling’ of democracy,” and
“again condemned last month’s disputed elections, in which Maduro was
returned to power, as a ‘sham.’” Pompeo continued, “The suspension is not a
goal by itself, but it will show that the OAS backs its words with
actions.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06d-db0&t=c>
(6/4) reports Pompeo said suspension would also “send a powerful signal to
the Maduro regime: Only real elections will allow your government to be
included in the family of nations.” He told the 34-member OAS general
assembly, “We seek only what all the nations of the OAS want for our
people: A return to the constitutional order, free and fair elections with
international observation, and the release of political prisoners.” After
Pompeo’s address, “Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza accused the US
of violating international law.” He told the assembly, “The aggression
against Venezuela is brutal, it’s economic, it’s financial, it’s
commercial, it’s political, it’s media, and we are going to press on and we
will triumph.” McClatchy
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06e-65b&t=c>
(6/4, Ordoñez) reports that in his “emotional” and “strong rebuke,” Arreaza
accused the Secretary of leading a coup against Maduro’s government and
vowed to fight the “imperialists.” He asserted, “We are an independent
nation. We are sovereign. We are free and no imperialist will be
intervening in our country.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=06f-527&t=c>
(6/4, Morello) says “Pompeo’s remarks at the opening of the OAS general
assembly reflected a renewed push to increase the economic and diplomatic
cost” for “crushing democracy and causing a humanitarian crisis that has
driven millions of people from the country.” The Post adds that while
“previous efforts to pressure Maduro have failed, the anger by the United
States and other countries in the region sharpened after Maduro won
reelection last month in what was widely regarded as a vote marked by low
turnout and improprieties.” The US “has increasingly turned to sanctions
against Venezuelan government and oil officials, and Pompeo urged other OAS
countries to do the same.”
Domestic Policy
By 7-2, High Court Rules Narrowly For Baker In Gay Marriage Cake Case.

The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=070-c3f&t=c>
(6/4, Savage) reports “the Supreme Court ruled narrowly Monday” for
Christian baker Jack Phillips, “who refused to make a wedding cake for a
same-sex couple, deciding that he was a victim of religious bias on the
part of the state’s civil rights commission.” However, “the 7-2 ruling,
written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, made no judgment over whether the
baker had a religious-freedom right to refuse service to the couple, and it
stressed the importance of maintaining equal rights for gays and lesbians.”
Like many other news outlets, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=071-915&t=c>
(6/4, Barnes) also highlights that “to achieve a wide majority, the opinion
withholds judgment on how future cases might be decided in instances where
the state displays no religious animosity.”

        USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=072-cb5&t=c>
(6/4, Wolf) reports that Kennedy “wrote the court’s decision against the
same-sex couple, Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins, departing from his long
history of opinions in favor of gay rights dating back a generation.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=073-435&t=c>
(6/4, Sherman) notes “liberal justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan
joined the conservative justices in the outcome,” though “Kagan wrote
separately to emphasize the limited ruling.” Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg
and Sonia Sotomayor, meanwhile, “dissented.” The AP adds that the
Administration “intervened in the case on Phillips’ behalf,” and Attorney
General Sessions “praised the decision,” saying, “The First Amendment
prohibits governments from discriminating against citizens on the basis of
religious beliefs. The Supreme Court rightly concluded that the Colorado
Civil Rights Commission failed to show tolerance and respect for Mr.
Phillips’ religious beliefs.”

        All three major network newscasts reported the story last night. ABC
World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=074-e5e&t=c>
(6/4, story 3, 2:17, Thomas) said “the issue is left unresolved,” a
“there’s a case involved a florist refusing service to a same-sex couple
that the Supreme Court could decide to take up as soon as next fall.” NBC
Nightly News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=075-9c7&t=c>
(6/4, story 3, 2:10, Williams) said “the court is closely divided on this
religious freedom issue,” and “when the next case comes, it will depend
whether...Kennedy retires or stays on,” and the CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=076-ec1&t=c>
(6/4, story 3, 2:30, Crowford) reported “the court’s ruling was narrow,”
and that “the Justices made a plea for civility in future cases, writing,
‘These disputes must b resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to
sincere religious beliefs and without subjecting gay persons to
indignities.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=077-92f&t=c>
(6/4, Liptak) similarly reports that the justices “strongly reaffirmed
protections for gay rights and left open the possibility that other cases
raising similar issues could be decided differently.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=078-cb6&t=c>
(6/4, Swoyer) indicates, however, that “the ruling also seemed to set
limits on how far states can go in forcing non-discrimination,” as Kennedy
“said a priest or minister cannot be forced to perform a marriage or
ceremony his faith would not sanction.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=079-972&t=c>
(6/4, Bravin), The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07a-b70&t=c>
(6/4, Wheeler), Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07b-136&t=c>
(6/4, Daley) and Townhall
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07c-88d&t=c>
(6/4, Benson), among other news outlets, also report the story.

        As Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07d-ae5&t=c>
(6/4, Hurley) puts it, “both sides claimed a measure of victory.” The New
York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07e-3ee&t=c>
(6/4, Moore) reports Phillips’ lawyer “lauded the decision in a statement.”
Said Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom,
“Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society,
yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack’s religious
beliefs about marriage. The court was right to condemn that.” Phillips
expressed relief in an op-ed for USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=07f-4ef&t=c>
(6/4), writing that the court “affirmed that the government must respect my
religious beliefs about marriage. It welcomed me back from the outskirts
where the state had pushed me. At least for the moment, it has brought an
end to my storm.”

        ACLU national legal director David Cole, who argued the case before
the court, writes in the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=080-350&t=c>
(6/4) that “in law, as in less civil arenas of conflict, you can lose a
battle but win the war,” and “that’s what happened in Masterpiece Cakeshop
v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.” The court “ruled Monday in favor of
the baker, but on the exceedingly narrow ground that the state civil rights
commission’s consideration was biased by hostility toward religion.”
Moreover, “the court declined to adopt the baker’s principal argument – and
the only argument made by the Trump administration – that ‘expressive’
businesses that object to gay and lesbian weddings have a First Amendment
right to discriminate.” To Cole, “what’s critical is that this reasoning is
a one-time ruling for this case only.”

        Along similar lines, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=081-e95&t=c>
(6/4) editorializes that while “avoiding a sweeping decision, the justices
nevertheless laid the foundations for a more ambitious ruling in the
future,” ordaining that “businesses cannot pick and choose their customers
based on race. States should be able to extend that simple fairness to LGBT
people, too. The court on Monday came closer to saying so.” The Post adds
that “it might take more time, but the court is heading in the right
direction.”

        USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=082-046&t=c>
(6/4) editorializes that the ruling was “a win for conservatives and
religious groups that oppose same-sex marriage,” but “a narrow one and not
the slam-dunk some had hoped for.” Moreover, it was not “the major defeat
that supporters of gay marriage had feared, one that might have opened the
way for broad discrimination against same-sex couples.” In an editorial,
the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=083-04f&t=c>
(6/4) takes issue with the court for putting off a decision on the larger
issue, because while that happens lower courts will continue to force
religious people to make business decisions that conflict with their faith.

        Jennifer Finney Boylan, professor of English at Barnard College of
Columbia University, writes in a New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=084-dc3&t=c>
(6/4) op-ed that “the ruling is relatively narrow,” and leaves “the
question of how to balance religious freedom with the rights of queer
people...unresolved.” To Boylan, “this, more than the case itself, is the
greater loss for L.G.B.T.Q. people. We lose when our rights are considered
debatable,” and “the only thing that will truly enshrine equal protection
under the law for all Americans, including L.G.B.T.Q. people, is an
amendment to the Constitution. Call it the Dignity Amendment,” which “might
read: ‘Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged by the United
States or by any state on account of sex, sexual orientation or gender
identity.”’

        *Poll: 72% Say Religious Objections Don’t Justify Denying LGBTQ
Customers Service. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=085-2e1&t=c>
(6/4, Chung) reports “nearly three quarters of US adults believe that
businesses should not have the right on religious grounds to deny services
to customers based on their sexual orientation, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion
poll released on Monday showed.” In the poll, 72 percent of respondents
“said business owners, because of their religious beliefs, should not be
allowed to refuse to serve customers based on sexual orientation, while 14
percent said they do have that right.” Reuters adds “another 9 percent said
businesses have the right ‘only in certain circumstances’ and 6 percent
said they do not know.”
Supreme Court Dismisses Ruling That Allowed Immigrant Teen Access To
Abortion.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=086-7df&t=c>
(6/4, Barnes, Marimow) reports that the Supreme Court on Monday “dismissed
a lower court’s decision that allowed an undocumented immigrant teenager to
obtain an abortion over the protests of the Trump administration.” The
court’s action, “which came in an unsigned opinion without noted dissents,
throws out a precedent that might allow other teenagers in the same
circumstance to obtain an abortion.” The order “directs the lower courts to
dismiss as moot the teen’s individual claim seeking access to abortion
services.” The girl, known in court papers as Jane Doe, “was able to
terminate her pregnancy before the high court got involved.” She “has since
turned 18 and is no longer in federal custody.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=087-b75&t=c>
(6/4, Wheeler) reports that the court “granted the Trump administration’s
request to toss out a lower court ruling that allowed an undocumented
immigrant teen in federal custody to receive an abortion.” The Justice
Department “had asked the court not only to vacate the ruling from the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, but to punish the
attorneys for the plaintiff in the case either directly or through a
referral to their respective state bars,” arguing that “it was misled by
the opposing lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for
sneaking the teen off in the early morning hours – 4:15 a.m. – to get an
abortion before the government could appeal the court’s ruling,” but “the
justices decided not to go that far.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=088-cf0&t=c>
(6/4, Liptak) reports that the Justice Department said the ACLU “had misled
it about the timing of the abortion, frustrating its ability to seek a stay
from the Supreme Court.” The ACLU “denied the accusations and said it had
acted properly and diligently. ‘The Trump administration blocked Jane Doe
from getting constitutionally protected care for a month and subjected her
to illegal obstruction, coercion and shaming as she waited,’ David Cole,
the A.C.L.U.’s legal director, said at the time. ‘After the courts cleared
the way for her to get her abortion, it was the A.C.L.U.’s job as her
lawyers to see that she wasn’t delayed any further – not to give the
government another chance to stand in her way.’”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=089-9ed&t=c>
(6/4, Dinan) reports that the action “does not settle the big
constitutional issues, but it does reset the playing field, erasing a
precedent that had said illegal immigrants had abortion rights similar to
an American held in government custody.” The Times notes that the case “is
one of a series of legal battles that erupted from the surge of illegal
immigrant families and Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) over the past
five years.”

        *White House Slams Merkley Over Detention Center Video. *The Washington
Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08a-878&t=c>
(6/4, Morrongiello) reports White House officials “tore into” Sen. Jeff
Merkley, who released a video of police turning him away from an
immigration detention center in Texas. Merkley also said “that he witnessed
‘hundreds of children locked up in cages’ at a separate facility in
McAllen, Texas.” The White House said Merkley is “irresponsibly spreading
blatant lies,” and White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley accused
him of “smearing hardworking, dedicated law enforcement officials.” Gidley
added that Merkley’s “policies endanger children, empower human smugglers
and drug cartels, and allow violent criminal aliens to flood into American
communities.”

        *Government Statistics Suggest Border Wall Won’t Address Opioid
Crisis. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08b-e55&t=c>
(6/4, Miroff) reports San Diego “is the place Trump and his top Homeland
Security officials point to as proof that ‘walls work,’” with its border
fencing making it “one of the most difficult places to cross for illegal
migrants along the entire” border. However, while “Trump has promoted a
border wall as a solution to the opioid crisis,” Homeland Security
statistics show that border walls and fences “do not necessarily work in
the way the president says,” stopping people more effectively than stopping
drugs. Government statistics show that “more heroin, cocaine and
methamphetamine come through the San Diego border than anywhere else,” and
“most of the drugs come directly through U.S. ports of entry – the official
border crossings.”
Trump Says Eagles Won’t Visit White House Due To National Anthem Dispute.

Fox News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08c-b52&t=c>
(6/4, Darrah) reports on its website that President Trump said in a
statement on Monday that “the Philadelphia Eagles will not visit the White
House this week to celebrate the team’s Super Bowl win amid the national
anthem dispute.” The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08d-bcf&t=c>
(6/4, Caralle) says Trump acknowledged in a statement that “the team wanted
to send a smaller delegation of players and staff to the White House,” but
said “that such a showing would be an affront to fans planning to attend.”
The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08e-c41&t=c>
(6/4, Zielonka) reports that a statement released by the White House said,
“They disagree with their President because he insists that they proudly
stand for the National Anthem, hand on heart, in honor of the great men and
women of our military and the people of our country.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=08f-313&t=c>
(6/4, Dawsey) reports that Trump said that he will instead “celebrate with
Eagles fans and the United States Marine Band and the United States Army
Chorus at the White House. It is unclear how many fans will attend without
the team present.”

        *In Tweet Today, Trump Touts Anthem Celebration, Past Championship
Team Visits. *Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=090-543&t=c>
this morning, “We will proudly be playing the National Anthem and other
wonderful music celebrating our Country today at 3 P.M., The White House,
with the United States Marine Band and the United States Army Chorus.
Honoring America! NFL, no escaping to Locker Rooms!” Trump said in a second
tweet
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=091-dfd&t=c>
on the subject, “We have had many Championship teams recently at the White
House including the Chicago Cubs, Houston Astros, Pittsburgh Penguins, New
England Patriots, Alabama and Clemson National Champions, and many others.
National Anthem & more great music today at 3:00 P.M.”

        *Democrats Tweet Criticism Of Trump Move. *Philadelphia Mayor Jim
Kenney (D) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=092-0ad&t=c>,
“I’m proud of the Eagles on & off the field. Our players represent the
diversity of our nation – a nation where we’re free to express our
opinions. Disinviting them only proves the President is not a true
patriot.” Rep. Brendan Boyle (D) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=093-f6a&t=c>,
“Trump wasn’t welcome at Barbara Bush’s funeral. He’s not welcome at John
McCain’s funeral. And only 10 Eagles players were planning to attend the
White House ceremony. He’s just that much of an embarrassment.” Rep. Ro
Khanna (D) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=094-3ff&t=c>,
“Appalling that Trump has canceled the Philadelphia Eagles invite to the
White House because some of the players weren’t going to attend. At the
core of Trump’s reasoning – because they disagree with him. Despite our
differences everyone should be treated with respect.”
CMS Unveils Medicaid “Scorecard.”

The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=095-b20&t=c>
(6/4, Howell) reports that on Monday, the Trump Administration debuted a
web-based Medicaid “scorecard” that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services Administrator Seema Verma said would, in the Times’ words, “light
on where states are excelling or falling behind other states, as President
Trump gives states a free hand to tailor the insurance program for the poor
to their own populations.” She explained, “We want to give them more
flexibility. In return, we want more accountability.” The dashboard
includes 14 health measures, but relies upon data voluntarily reported by
the states. Verma said, “By having the scorecard and having the
information, at least we get to start those conversations, which we haven’t
been having.”

        *Price Lauds Upcoming AHPs Rule. *Former HHS Secretary Tom Price,
in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=096-5d2&t=c>
(6/4), welcomes an upcoming Labor Department rule that is expected to
expand association health plans (AHPs). Price argues that this will help
address the ills resulting from the Affordable Care Act, which he argues
led to full-time employees becoming part-time, workers losing company
health insurance, and small businesses not expanding, against a backdrop of
increasing health insurance costs. While Price calls for repealing the ACA,
he argues that AHPs will help mitigate and warns that opposition to them is
rooted in insurance companies desire to avoid competition.

        *Judge Orders Maine Governor To Follow Voter-Approved Plan To
Expand Medicaid. *The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=097-cbc&t=c>
(6/4, Howell) reports Maine Superior Court Judge Michaela Murphy ordered
Republican Gov. Paul LePage’s Administration to submit to the US Department
of Health and Human Services, by June 11, a plan for implementing a
voter-approved plan to expand Medicaid. LePage, who resisted expanding
Medicaid for years, “said he wouldn’t move ahead until state lawmakers
found a way to fund the state’s share of the cost...without raising taxes
on families or businesses, using one-time budget ‘gimmicks’ or raiding a
budget-stabilization fund.” However, Murphy wrote, “The Court is not
persuaded that the executive branch is excused from clear statutory
obligations by the legislature’s failure to follow through with legislative
obligations – as defined by the executive branch.”

        *WPost Editorial: Nation Faces Healthcare Challenges That GOP Is
Worsening. *In an editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=098-75b&t=c>
(6/4, Board) draws on the Congressional Budget Office’s projections about
healthcare coverage to argue “the nation still faces huge cost and coverage
challenges, and Republicans are making some of the direst problems worse.”
The CBO’s estimate of the non-elderly population lacking health insurance
in 2027 increased by about five million people “because Republicans are
sabotaging Obamacare.” The Post attributes the “substantial uncertainty” in
the market, which the CBO warns of, to “purposeful mismanagement or
incompetence on the part of the Trump administration and congressional
Republicans.” The Post calls for bipartisan groups of lawmakers “to agree
on market-stabilizing programs such as reinsurance.”
Clinton Says He Does Not Owe Lewinsky An Apology.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=099-e5e&t=c>
(6/4, Cummings) reports that “during an interview Monday, former president
Bill Clinton said he does not owe an apology to Monica Lewinsky, the woman
with whom he had an infamous affair when she was a 22-year-old White House
intern.” Clinton “made the remark on NBC’s Today in response to a question
from host Craig Melvin about a recent op-ed from Lewinsky in which she
reevaluates the question of consent in her relationship with the former
president in light of the #MeToo movement.” NBC Nightly News[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09a-575&t=c>
(6/4, story 5, 2:35, Holt) showed Clinton saying, “I apologized to
everybody in the world. It is important to me that everybody who has been
hurt know that the sorrow I feel is genuine. First and most important, my
family. Also, my friends. My staff. My Cabinet. Monica Lewinsky and her
family.” Asked if he had “apologize to her,” Clinton said, “I have not
talked to her,” and pressed on whether he feels he owes “her an apology,”
he retorted, “I do not – I’ve never talked to her. But I did say publicly
on more than one occasion that I was sorry. That’s very different. The
apology was public.”

        The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09b-75e&t=c>
(6/4, story 6, 2:10, O'Keefe) referred to “a combative interview” in which
“Clinton said the #MeToo movement has not changed how he views his affair
with...Lewinsky.” ABC World News Tonight[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09c-fb3&t=c>
(6/4, story 7, 2:25, Vega) noted Clinton also said “he likes the #MeToo
movement, but that he doesn’t always agree with everything in it.” ABC
added that “you saw the former president there in those clips – he is
clearly very frustrated by the fact that this #MeToo movement has reignited
questions about his 20-year-old scandal.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09d-b04&t=c>
(6/4, Swoyer) reports “Clinton appeared on the ‘Today’ show to discuss his
new book, a political thriller he co-authored with James Patterson, titled
‘The President is Missing.’”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09e-781&t=c>
(6/4, Chokshi) says that “in the run-up to this year’s midterm elections,
Mr. Clinton has been virtually invisible on the campaign trail because of
new scrutiny of his past treatment of women, including Ms. Lewinsky.” The
Times also reports that “for years, he had deflected allegations of sexual
harassment and assault from several women, but several of his accusers have
felt empowered recently as the #MeToo movement gained momentum.”

        *Woman Who Accused Clinton Of Rape Says His Behavior May Have
Sparked #MeToo Movement. *The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=09f-921&t=c>
(6/4, Kruta) reports Juanita Broaddrick “told The Daily Caller on Monday
that without...Clinton, there may have been no #MeToo movement at all – and
that Clinton is the reason that she has effectively been shut out of that
movement.” The Daily Caller adds that “nearly four decades after Broaddrick
says Clinton raped her, she says that she feels like more people believe
her story now than when she first came forward.” Broaddrick said “some of
that is because of Donald Trump, who during the campaign described her
encounter with Clinton using the word ‘rape.’” Said Broadrick, “When he
said the word ‘rape’ on Hannity, it was like he was speaking directly to
me. It was like he gave me permission to use the word too.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a0-f7c&t=c>
(6/4, Chokshi) says Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, and Paula Jones are “three
of the women who have accused Mr. Clinton of sexual harassment.”

        *Milbank: Clinton Was Trump’s “Precursor,” But His Offenses Were
“Far Less Serious.” *Dana Milbank writes in the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a1-d89&t=c>
(6/4), “We didn’t know it at the time, of course. But in...Clinton were the
seeds of...Trump.” Clinton was “a precursor of the monstrosity we presently
have in the White House: dismissing unpleasant facts as ‘fake news,’
self-righteously claiming victimhood, attacking the press and cloaking
personal misbehavior in claims to be upholding the Constitution.” However,
“the former president’s offenses were far less serious than...Trump’s,”
whose “many misdeeds – against women, law, facts, democracy and decency –
are in a category of their own. But Clinton set us on the path.”

        *Group Tasked With Examining Judicial Harassment Recommends
Sweeping Changes. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a2-9cf&t=c>
(6/4, Zapotosky) reports that the group tasked by Chief Justice John
Roberts “with examining harassment in the federal judiciary found
inappropriate conduct, while not pervasive, is also ‘not limited to a few
isolated instances’ and recommended sweeping changes to help ferret out
wrongdoing, according to a report made public Monday.” The report from the
group “did not detail specific instances of wrongdoing but laid out how
policies and procedures left concerning gaps in how courthouse misconduct
could be reported and policed,” and “it recommended revising written codes
in several key respects, as well as creating offices at the national level
and in each judicial circuit to help employees navigate the process of
complaining about workplace malfeasance.” The Post adds that the report “is
the latest in the judiciary’s effort to impose changes in the wake of
sexual misconduct allegations against Alex Kozinski, a once powerful and
well-known judge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.”
Durbin Says He Would Support Commutation Of Blagojevich’s Sentence.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a3-f24&t=c>
(6/4, Wagner) reports that Senate Minority Whip Durbin “said Monday that he
would support a move by President Trump to commute the prison sentence of
former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.” Trump last week “said he is
considering a commutation of the Democrat’s 14-year sentence for
convictions in 2010 related to trying to sell President Barack Obama’s
Senate seat, among other campaign finance violations. ‘I think that the
sentence imposed on Rod Blagojevich was definitely way too long,’ Durbin
told reporters in Chicago. ‘Fourteen years, it didn’t make sense.’” Durbin
“said he would not comment on Blagojevich’s culpability but said he
believes the length of his sentence was ‘outrageous.’ ‘If there’s a way to
reduce the sentence for him and his family, I would support it,’ Durbin
said.”
California Primary Today; Cox, Villaraigosa Battling For Second Spot In
Governor’s Race.

In today’s open gubernatorial primary election in California, the top two
vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, will advance to the general
election. Polls have shown Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is a virtual lock to
finish atop the primary field. However, those same polls have shown a tight
race for second place between businessman John Cox (R) and ex-Los Angeles
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (D), with several other candidates lagging
behind. The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a4-d6a&t=c>
(6/5, Cooper) reports that “recent polls showed a surge by...Cox, who was
endorsed by President Donald Trump.” At the same time, Villaraigosa, “seen
as a major threat to Newsom when the campaign started, has tailed off. He
campaigned furiously in the final days to try to close the gap.” The AP
adds that Newsom “gave Cox a boost with ads attacking him as a supporter of
Trump and gun rights, using language likely to bolster Cox’s standing in
the eyes of conservatives. The thinking was that if Cox finishes second he
presents an easier opponent than a Democrat.”

        *Democrats Hope To Avoid Being Shut Out Of General Election In Key
House Seats. *A big question in the lead-up to today’s primary elections is
whether Democrats will get shut out of the general election in critical
races. In California, the top two vote-getters in each primary, regardless
of party affiliation, advance to the general election. And the glut of
Democratic hopefuls running in a number of the primary contests has raised
the prospect of those candidates splitting the vote, allowing two
Republicans to move on to the general election. A number of media outlets
focus on that possibility. The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a5-60b&t=c>
(6/5, Mai-Duc) for example, reports that today’s primary elections “could
make or break Democrats’ chances of taking back the House this fall. The
most pressing concern for Democrats is whether their wide, boisterous field
of candidates means the party will be locked out of multiple races thanks
to the state’s top-two primary” The possibility “has forced Democratic
groups to spend more than $7 million in the closing weeks of the campaign
to avert disaster.”

        TIME
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a6-762&t=c>
(6/5, Abramson) reports that “in three of these targeted districts” – those
held by retiring CA39 Rep. Ed Royce (R); CA48 Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R),
who is seeking reelection; and retiring CA49 Rep. Darrell Issa (R) –
“Democratic enthusiasm could end up hurting” the party. Times adds that “in
these three districts, where multiple Democratic candidates are vying
against each other, they can split the votes in a way that enables their
Republican counterparts to surpass them” and advance to the general
election. The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a7-95d&t=c>
(6/4, Peoples, Blood) reports that the possibility of being shut out of the
general election in some key races is “a nightmare scenario for Democrats
in particular, who claim momentum in some suburban districts but feature
packed fields in many cases. National Democrats have spent more than $7
million trying to avoid that fate in” the CA39, CA48, and CA49 – “money
that Democrats would have preferred to save for this fall.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a8-136&t=c>
(6/4, Martin) reports that ahead of today’s primary elections, “state and
national Democrats were anxiously watching” Orange County’s CA39, CA48, and
CA49. “After pouring millions into television commercials, digital
advertising and mailers in” those “districts...Democrats remained uncertain
that one of their own would emerge as one of the two leaders.” The Times
adds, “With seven Republican-held seats that Hillary Clinton carried in
2016, California is a linchpin to Democratic hopes for taking back control
of the House. But the liberal backlash to President Trump here has prompted
so many to pursue office that Democrats fear their candidates will divide
the vote and leave the party...without a general election candidate, in
what should be winnable races.”

        The San Francisco Chronicle
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0a9-140&t=c>
(6/4, Wildermuth) reports that in the CA39, CA48, and CA49, “there’s a real
chance Republicans could finish one-two in Tuesday’s primary, shutting
Democrats out of the November election for what they are convinced are
winnable seats. ‘None of this would be an issue if we didn’t have this
ridiculous top-two system,’ said Katie Merrill, a Democratic consultant in
Berkeley who is working with Fight Back California to flip those GOP seats.
‘Now we’re fighting to get a major party candidate into a wide-open
election in a competitive district.’”

        USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0aa-743&t=c>
(6/4, Shesgreen) reports that in the CA39 primary, there is “a cornucopia
of Democratic candidates – sparking fears that Democratic voters may spread
their support so thin that the top two slots on the general election ballot
will go to Republican candidates. Democrats have a similar glut of
candidates in at least two other California districts,” the CA48 and CA49.
In an online article, NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ab-471&t=c>
(6/4), focusing on the CA39 contest, reported that “observers now believe
this might be the toughest for Democrats to crack the Top 2, with early
turnout more Republican than in the” the CA48 and CA49.

        However, The Guardian (UK)
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ac-14f&t=c>
(6/4, Jacobs) reports, “Democrats are most worried about the” CA48. The
Guardian adds, “In polling, Rohrabacher is currently holding steady in the
low 30s according to one national Democratic strategist. The result is that
there was room for [GOP ex-state Assemblyman Scott] Baugh to finish second
and squeeze out a Democrat from appearing on the ballot in November.” In an
online article, ABC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ad-06b&t=c>
(6/5, Castillejo) reported that with Rohrabacher a virtual lock to finish
atop the CA48 primary, “Democrats are fighting for dear life to avoid
getting shut out of the race. National Democrats and progressive groups
have spent nearly $200,000 propping up lesser-known Republican candidate
John Gabbard in a ploy to splinter Republican votes for Baugh, who is
closing in on that second spot in the primary.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ae-ddb&t=c>
(6/4, Hagen) reported that the CA49, currently held by the retiring Issa,
is “one of three GOP-held districts in the state where a split electorate
could give Republicans a shot at advancing a pair of candidates to the
November midterms. That scenario is giving heartburn to Democrats, who once
viewed” the CA49 “as a prime pickup opportunity in the fall.” The New Yorker
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0af-0e7&t=c>
(6/5, Heller) reports that in the CA49 contest, a trio of “Democrats – the
former marine Doug Applegate, the nonprofit founder Sara Jacobs, and the
environmental-compliance attorney Mike Levin – have bobbed within a few
percentage points of one another; the race is so close that the Democratic
Party has issued no endorsement. Two of eight Republicans also have a crack
at the general slots.”

        The Huffington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b0-d30&t=c>
(6/4, Robillard) reported that Democratic concerns about being shut out of
the general election have “led to a wave of spending – at least $8 million
from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Priorities USA,
Patriot Majority and House Majority PAC” – in key districts. HuffPost added
that a number of “Democrats in California and Washington, D.C., think the
threat of their party being locked out of the general election has been
overhyped, considering how Democrats have exceeded turnout expectations in
election after election during Donald Trump’s presidency. But the spending
shows how dire leading Democratic strategists think the consequences could
be.” CQ Roll Call (DC)
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b1-85d&t=c>
(6/4, Bowman) offered an overview of the various primary contest.

        *Crowded Primaries Could Cause Delays In Results. *Meanwhile, USA
Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b2-bf1&t=c>
(6/5, Shesgreen) reports, “Crowded races, narrow margins, and millions of
absentee ballots” could mean that “the results in some key” contests will
“take days – or even weeks – to determine.” USA Today adds, “One reason the
ballot-counting could drag into Wednesday or later: many Californians vote
by mail. And their ballots can arrive up to three days after Election Day
and still be counted.”

        *Montana Voters To Choose Nominees Today To Face Off Against
Tester, Gianforte. *Primary voters in Montana head to the polls today to
choose a GOP nominee to face off against Sen. Jon Tester (D) this fall and
a Democratic nominee to battle MT-AL Rep. Greg Gianforte (R) in November’s
general election. The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b3-a8f&t=c>
(6/4, Volz) reports that in the GOP Senate primary, state Auditor Matt
Rosendale (R) “declared himself the front-runner early, but in a sign that
lead may not be as comfortable as it once was, a pro-Rosendale group has
spent $1.2 million attacking two” of his rivals, businessman Troy Downing
(R) and retired Judge Russ Fagg (R). In the Democratic House primary, five
candidates are running.

        *South Dakota GOP Senate Primary Battle To Be Decided Today. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b4-a38&t=c>
(6/4, Nord) reports that GOP primary voters in South Dakota today will
choose a nominee in this fall’s race to succeed term-limited Gov. Dennis
Daugaard (R). The contest pits state Attorney General Marty Jackley (R)
against Rep. Kristi Noem (R). The AP says, “Elected to Congress in 2010,
Noem has emphasized her role negotiating the 2014 farm bill and the GOP’s
recent federal tax cuts. As attorney general since 2009, Jackley has pushed
a wide range of legislation through the statehouse, listing as
accomplishments laws addressing public corruption, fighting human
trafficking and imposing harsher penalties for meth dealing and
manufacturing.” State Sen. Billie Sutton (D) is the presumptive Democratic
nominee.
Cancer Research
Immunotherapy Eliminates All Evidence Of Patient’s Advanced-Stage Breast
Cancer.

The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b5-483&t=c>
(6/4, story 2, 2:55, Glor) reported, “A new treatment for breast cancer has
saved a woman’s life.” CBS News chief medical correspondent Jon LaPook, MD,
“calls it a game changer.” Dr. Steven Rosenberg at the National Institutes
of Health is “a pioneer in harnessing the immune system to fight cancer.
Genetic mutations cause cells to grow out of control.” Dr. “Rosenberg’s new
approach,” however, “is to find the few immune cells already in the body
that can see those genetic mutations and multiply those cells into an army
of cancer killers.”

        In “Science Now,” the Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b6-0ef&t=c>
(6/4, Healy) reports, “In the all-hands effort to harness the powers of the
immune system to fight cancer, scientists have reported that a new approach
has eliminated all evidence of advanced-stage breast cancer in a
49-year-old woman who had run out of treatment options.” The woman’s
“‘complete durable cancer regression’ followed a single infusion of her own
immune cells, which were painstakingly chosen for their ability to
recognize and fight her tumors – then expanded into an army of nearly 100
billion identical cells.” Now, “more than three years later, the
patient...is not only alive, but seemingly cancer-free, according to a
report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b7-82e&t=c>
published” in Nature Medicine. The Times adds that “Dr. Steven A.
Rosenberg, an immunotherapy pioneer at the National Cancer Institute...led
the team that treated” the woman.

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b8-8c2&t=c>
(6/4, Burton) reports that in an interview, Dr. Rosenberg said that
“because this new approach to immunotherapy is dependent on mutations, not
on cancer type, it is in a sense a blueprint we can use for the treatment
of many types of cancer.” He added, “This could be the future of
immunotherapy.” Among the media outlets also covering the story are
the Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0b9-389&t=c>
(6/3, McGinley), Forbes
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ba-8f3&t=c>
(6/4, Forster), and Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0bb-f64&t=c>
(6/4, Cortez).
US Postal Service Breast Cancer Stamps Help Fund New Study.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0bc-d6b&t=c>
(6/4, Marchione) reports the US Postal Service used proceeds from its
breast cancer stamp to assist recent research finding that “genetic testing
can reveal which women with early-stage breast cancer need chemo and which
do not.” The National Cancer Institute also sponsored the research – the
“largest study ever done of breast cancer treatment” – by contributing $36
million, the piece says, adding that “the Cancer Institute has used its
$59.8 million in proceeds” from the stamps “for studies trying to improve
early detection and to determine which cancers are most dangerous and need
heaviest treatment and which are less so.”
Editorials/Op-Eds
New York Times.

*“Trump Wants To Pardon Himself For Blowing The Midterms.”* In an
editorial, the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0bd-081&t=c>
(6/4) describes an “emerging effort” by President Trump to “pre-emptively
place the blame for what promises to be a tough election cycle for
congressional Republicans” on special counsel Robert Mueller’s
investigation. Trump is selling the idea that “all of government and
politics and culture are rotten, and that only he can be trusted to get
things back on track. But on those occasions when he fails to deliver,
don’t look for him to accept responsibility. He’ll just find another reason
to blame the system.”
Washington Post.

*“Healthcare Is Still A Mess. Republicans Are Making It Worse.”* In an
editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0be-bc1&t=c>
(6/4, Board) draws on the Congressional Budget Office’s projections about
healthcare coverage to argue “the nation still faces huge cost and coverage
challenges, and Republicans are making some of the direst problems worse.”
The CBO’s estimate of the non-elderly population lacking health insurance
in 2027 increased by about five million people “because Republicans are
sabotaging Obamacare.” The Post attributes the “substantial uncertainty” in
the market, which the CBO warns of, to “purposeful mismanagement or
incompetence on the part of the Trump administration and congressional
Republicans.” The Post calls for bipartisan groups of lawmakers “to agree
on market-stabilizing programs such as reinsurance.”

        *“Maryland’s Governor Stands Up To A Misguided Effort From Teachers
Unions.” *In an editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0bf-1ec&t=c>
(6/4) lauds Gov. Larry Hogan for vetoing a “misguided effort to give
special interests a direct hand in setting education policy” by adding
three seats to the Maryland State Board of Education and requiring they be
picked from lists by the Maryland State Education Association and Baltimore
Teachers Union and the Maryland Parent Teacher Association. The Post adds,
“there’s no question about whose interests would really be represented by
appointees hand-picked by lobbying organizations.” The Post concludes by
arguing that Democratic lawmakers “need to be reminded that Maryland
education has been well-served by having a strong board insulated from
political influence.”

        *“The Supreme Court’s Narrow Ruling On A Wedding Cake Is A Step In
The Right Direction.” *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c0-26b&t=c>
(6/4) editorializes that while “avoiding a sweeping decision” in the case
of a Christian baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex
couple, the Supreme Court “nevertheless laid the foundations for a more
ambitious ruling in the future,” ordaining that “businesses cannot pick and
choose their customers based on race. States should be able to extend that
simple fairness to LGBT people, too. The court on Monday came closer to
saying so.” The Post adds that “it might take more time, but the court is
heading in the right direction.”
Biden in the News
Biden Delivers “Inspirational Speech” During Visit To St. Petersburg.

Former Vice President Joe Biden on Monday took his “American Promise Tour”
to St. Petersburg, Florida. In an online article, WFTS-TV
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c1-f56&t=c>
Tampa, FL (6/4, Salomone) reported that Biden addressed “a sold-out crowd
at Mahaffey Theater,” where he promoted “his book, published in 2017,
entitled ‘Promise Me, Dad: A Year of Hope, Hardship and Purpose.’” WFTS-TV
said that a number of those who attended the event called “Biden’s speech
inspirational. ‘Everything he’s gone through, yet he still stands up and
has hope and respect for everybody,’ said Harry Bellman who attended the
event. Guests say Biden didn’t answer when the crowd asked him if he’ll run
in 2020 for president – but many say they would support him. ‘Absolutely, I
would do everything I can financially. I’d go door to door to help him. We
need him,’ said Bellman.”

        In a broadcast, Julie Salomone of WFTS-TV[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c2-ed8&t=c>
Tampa (FL)'s News at 11PM (6/5) reported that “the crowd was chanting for
him to run to president in 2020.” WFTS-TV played a clip of one of the
audience members saying of Biden after the event, “You can’t come out of
there and not think he’s the most wonderful person around and capable of
being a president who leads other people.” Salomone added that Biden’s book
“chronicles the most challenging year in Biden’s life, juggling his
political career as his son, Beau, fought brain cancer.” WTSP-TV[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c3-dc7&t=c>
St. Petersburg, FL (6/5) reports that Biden “was in St. Pete last night –
just another stop on his book tour/early campaign stop for what many say
will be an unprecedented run for the presidency in 2020.” In a brief
broadcast, WTVT-TV
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c4-1ff&t=c>
Tampa (FL)'s News at 10PM (6/5) reported that Biden touched “on a few big
political moments of his career. He made no mention, though, about a
potential 2020 presidential run.”

        Under the headline “Now An Author, Joe Biden Gets An Enthusiastic
Welcome In St. Pete,” the Tampa Bay (FL) Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c5-d1b&t=c>
(6/5) reports that Rep. Charlie Crist (D) introduced Biden at Monday’s
event and “said – maybe just a bit coyly – ‘Who knows what the future holds
for Joe Biden?’ Judging by the standing ovation that greeted” Biden “from a
near-capacity crowd of about 2,000, it might not be a quiet retirement.”
The Times adds, “From folksy stories about his working-class childhood to
an account of a long diplomatic meeting with Vladimir Putin that culminated
in him telling the Russian leader, ‘You have no soul,’ Biden sounded as
much like a candidate as an author.”

        *Biden To Promote Memoir During Stop In New Orleans Today.
*WDSU-TV[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c6-5a8&t=c>
New Orleans (6/5) reports that Biden “will be at the Saenger Theatre” in
New Orleans today as “part of his ‘American Promise Tour,’ where he
discusses his best-selling memoir ‘Promise Me, Dad: A Year of Hope,
Hardship and Purpose.’ This book tour comes as there’s growing speculation
now that Biden could put his hat in the ring for the 2020 presidential
election.” WGNO-TV
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c7-f37&t=c>
New Orleans (6/5) reports that Biden “will be interviewed by journalist and
New Orleans-native Cokie Roberts.” WVUE-TV[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c8-69a&t=c>
New Orleans (6/5) reports that Biden’s “event tonight comes as his name has
been tossed around as a potential Democratic candidate for president in
2020.”

*Copyright 2018 by Bulletin Intelligence LLC* Reproduction or
redistribution without permission prohibited. Content is drawn from
thousands of newspapers, national magazines, national and local television
programs, radio broadcasts, social-media platforms and additional forms of
open-source data. Sources for Bulletin Intelligence audience-size estimates
include Scarborough, GfK MRI, comScore, Nielsen, and the Audit Bureau of
Circulation. Data from and access to third party social media platforms,
including but not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and others, is
subject to the respective platform’s terms of use. Services that include
Factiva content are governed by Factiva’s terms of use
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0c9-74f&t=c>.
Services including embedded Tweets are also subject to Twitter for
Website's information and privacy policies
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018060501biden&r=email-01ff&l=0ca-e33&t=c>.
The Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing is published five
days a week by Bulletin Intelligence, which creates custom briefings for
government and corporate leaders. We can be found on the Web at
BulletinIntelligence.com, or called at (703) 483-6100