Subject: FW: Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for Wednesday, December 19, 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: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:54:09 -0500

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing

*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <[email-masked]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 19, 2018 7:55 AM
*To:* [email-masked]
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Wednesday, December 19, 2018

*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=000-13b&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=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=001-cb0&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

*Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:00 AM EST*
Today's Table of Contents

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

• The Hill: Biden Allies View O’Rourke As “Significant Threat.” <#S1>

• Vox’s Iglesias Lauds Biden’s “Agenda For The Middle Class.” <#S2>

• The Economist: “It Would Be A Mistake” For Biden To Mount 2020 Bid. <#S3>

• NYTimes’ Bruni Urges Readers Not To Put Much Stock In Early 2020 Polls.
<#S4>

• WPost’s Weigel Discusses Tiers Of Potential 2020 Democratic Hopefuls.
<#S5>

• Media Outlets Highlight Op-Ed Biden Penned For America’s Quarterly. <#S6>

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

• Senate Overwhelmingly Approves Trump-Backed Criminal Justice Overhaul.
<#S7>

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

• Mnuchin: US, China Planning For Trade Talks In January. <#S8>

• Taliban: US Officials Discussing “Future Withdrawal Of Foreign Troops”
From Afghanistan. <#S9>

• White House: Trump Told Turkish President He Would “Look At” Possibly
Extraditing Cleric. <#S10>

• Trump Urges Kosovo To Reach Deal With Serbia. <#S11>

• UK Begins Preparations For No-Deal Brexit. <#S12>

• Hacked European Cables Show Concerns About Trump, Russia, China. <#S13>

• Mexico Welcomes US Commitment To Spend More Than $10 Billion In Aid To
Central America. <#S14>

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

• Media Analyses: White House Signaling Retreat On Full Border Wall Funding
To Avoid Shutdown. <#S15>

• Sentencing Delayed As Judge Blasts Flynn, Suggests Prison Is A
Possibility. <#S16>

• Trump Foundation Will Dissolve As Part Of A Deal With New York’s Attorney
General. <#S17>

• House Democrats Visit Border Patrol Station Where Migrant Girl Died,
Denounce Conditions. <#S18>

• DOJ Orders Americans To Destroy Bump Stocks Within 90 Days. <#S19>

• Mnuchin: Democrats Share Blame For Growing Deficit. <#S20>

• Lawmakers Push For Language Prohibiting Corporate Israel Boycotts In
Spending Bill. <#S21>

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

• Survivors Of Childhood Hodgkin Lymphoma Face Increased Long-Term Risk Of
Solid Tumors, Study Suggests. <#S22>

• Study Finds Women Who Receive “False Positive” From Mammogram Are Twice
As Likely To End Up With Cancer, Compared To Those With Negative Result.
<#S23>

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S24>

• Washington Post. <#S25>
Biden in the News
The Hill: Biden Allies View O’Rourke As “Significant Threat.”

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=002-bc5&t=c>
(12/19, Parnes) reports, “Allies to Joe Biden say Rep. Beto O’Rourke could
pose a significant threat to the former vice president if both men choose
to” mount 2020 presidential bids. The Hill quotes a “longtime aide to”
Biden as saying, “If both of them run, and there’s a good chance they both
will, I think it spells trouble for Biden.” The Hill says, “There are a
series of reasons why political observers think” O’Rourke “could represent
an existential threat to Biden’s presidential hopes. The biggest is that
O’Rourke appeals to former President Obama’s network of former aides and
donors.” The Hill adds that Biden “had hoped to win support from” those in
Obama’s orbit – “and he is still likely to draw support from that network.
But O’Rourke would clearly offer some competition.”
Vox’s Iglesias Lauds Biden’s “Agenda For The Middle Class.”

Writing for Vox
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=003-b60&t=c>
(12/18), Matthew Iglesias says that as former Vice President Joe Biden has
moved toward a possible 2020 bid, “he’s begun to outline a policy agenda
that – while in some ways less dramatic than other 2020 contenders – is an
important glimpse at what a Democratic agenda laser-focused on the working
class could look like,” one that “offers true back-to-basics economic
populism. It’s an agenda that’s progressive and could be genuinely
transformative for low-wage workers but also cautious in key respects –
focused on workers and students rather than the poorest of the poor, and
careful to avoid any hint of middle-class tax hikes or racial divisiveness.
It’s less about expensive new expansions of the welfare state than shifting
the underlying rules of the economic game to take the government’s thumb
off the bosses’ side of the scale and put it on the side of workers.”
Iglesias goes on to detail Biden’s “agenda for the middle class.”
The Economist: “It Would Be A Mistake” For Biden To Mount 2020 Bid.

The Economist
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=004-4ea&t=c>
(12/18) says in its “Lexington” column, “It would be a mistake if” former
Vice President Joe Biden runs for president in 2020, saying that while he
“could certainly have beaten Donald Trump” in 2016, “now Mr Biden seems too
old. His supporters say his faculties are as sharp as ever. But his
audiences would be as likely to remember him as the Democrat vying to be
the oldest man ever elected president.” The writer adds that “it is unwise
to think that Mr Biden’s long-ago working-class roots are a substitute for
the serious reappraisal of economic policy that the Trump insurgency makes
urgent. Democrats need new blood. They also need new ideas. The admirable
Mr Biden offers neither.”
NYTimes’ Bruni Urges Readers Not To Put Much Stock In Early 2020 Polls.

In his New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=005-573&t=c>
(12/18) column, Frank Bruni urges readers not to put much stock in the
early 2020 Democratic presidential polls, saying that in 2014, an early
CNN/ORC poll on the 2016 GOP presidential race showed Jeb Bush as the
leader. Bruni said a recent CNN poll showed former Vice President Joe Biden
leading a hypothetical 2020 Democratic presidential field, followed by Sen.
Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX). Bruni adds that those
three “shouldn’t be too encouraged by it. And the rest of us shouldn’t use
it to write off other candidates.”
WPost’s Weigel Discusses Tiers Of Potential 2020 Democratic Hopefuls.

Writing in “The Trailer” on the website of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=006-4ce&t=c>
(12/18), David Weigel said that in coverage of the potential 2020
Democratic presidential field, “some candidates earn the designation ‘top
tier,’ usually based on the strength of early polling. Most candidates get
plunked into a ‘second tier’ or ‘lower tier.’” Weigel went on to identify
“the most popular ways that observers broke down the Democratic field, one
month before it’s expected to start filling in.” For example, Weigel wrote,
“Old White Guys/Everybody Else. Several people, including a senator,”
suggested “some version of this rubric. Three male candidates looking at
2020 have already celebrated their 70th birthdays: [former Vice President
Joe] Biden, Mike Bloomberg and Bernie Sanders.” And “many early-state
Democrats have already said that older candidates will struggle once the
race is underway and they’re stacked up against young, fresh faces.”
Media Outlets Highlight Op-Ed Biden Penned For America’s Quarterly.

A couple of media outlets on Tuesday highlighted the op-ed
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=007-e6c&t=c>
(12/17) – covered in yesterday’s briefing – that former Vice President Joe
Biden penned for Americas Quarterly. Newsweek
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=008-782&t=c>
(12/18, Valencia) reported Biden wrote “that relations between the US and
Latin America have been ‘determinedly destroyed’ by the Trump
administration in the past two years, adding that such a disengagement
comes at a time when other powers are willing to wield more influence in
the region.” Biden wrote that “US allies and trading partners in the
hemisphere have faced a ‘torrent of antagonism’ from President Donald
Trump.” The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=009-961&t=c>
(12/18, Birnbaum) reported that Biden called “for the US to take a leading
role in the Western hemisphere, touting his and former President Obama’s
foreign policy achievements. ‘By the time President Obama and I left the
White House, we had established a new foundation of cooperation for our
region built around shared responsibility, respect and partnership,’ he
wrote, adding that the ‘cooperation’ included strengthened ties with
Mexico, Brazil, Central America, Cuba and others.”
Leading the News
Senate Overwhelmingly Approves Trump-Backed Criminal Justice Overhaul.

Shortly after the Senate voted 87-12 on Tuesday evening to pass the First
Step Act, the President took to Twitter
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00a-98e&t=c>
to write, “America is the greatest Country in the world and my job is to
fight for ALL citizens, even those who have made mistakes. Congratulations
to the Senate on the bi-partisan passing of a historic Criminal Justice
Reform Bill....
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00b-028&t=c>
This will keep our communities safer, and provide hope and a second chance,
to those who earn it. In addition to everything else, billions of dollars
will be saved. I look forward to signing this into law!”

        Media reports cast yesterday’s vote as a victory for the President.
The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00c-a32&t=c>
(12/18, Freking), for example, says the bill’s passage “culminates years of
negotiations and gives...Trump a signature policy victory, with the outcome
hailed by scores of conservative and liberal advocacy groups.” The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00d-965&t=c>
(12/18, A1, Wagner, Demirjian) likewise says the bill’s passage “hand[s] a
rare bipartisan victory to President Trump,” and the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00e-726&t=c>
(12/18, Fandos) calls the measure “the most substantial changes in a
generation to the tough-on-crime prison and sentencing laws that ballooned
the federal prison population and created a criminal justice system that
many conservatives and liberals view as costly and unfair.” Its passage, it
adds, “offered one final victory on their own terms and handed Mr. Trump a
bipartisan policy achievement that he can tout as he seeks re-election.”

        The New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=00f-45f&t=c>
(12/18, Feuerherd) says the bill “was boosted by an endorsement by Trump,
who was influenced by his son-in-law Jared Kushner in backing the reforms,”
and the Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=010-e1c&t=c>
(12/18, Haberkorn) likewise says it was an “initiative pushed by President
Trump’s aide and son-in-law, Jared Kushner,” and is now “expected to be
passed by the House and signed by the president.” Sen. Chuck Grassley, the
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, called it an “overwhelmingly
bipartisan piece of legislation that is going to be the first major change
in criminal justice legislation since the Clinton era.” USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=011-ec6&t=c>
(12/18, Berry) reports that while “groups have been working on criminal
justice reforms for years...supporters said the effort got a boost earlier
this year with the help of Jared Kushner.”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=012-2e5&t=c>
(12/18, Dinan) says the bill “drew a stunning coalition, with even Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell” — who “had been the chief hurdle to
getting the bill on the floor” — signing on, but Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=013-b0b&t=c>
(12/18, Moran) notes that all 12 votes against the bill were cast by
Republicans: Sens. Tom Cotton, John Kennedy, Jon Kyl, Lisa Murkowksi, Mike
Rounds, Ben Sasse, Marco Rubio, Richard Shelby, Dan Sullivan, Jim Risch,
John Barrasso, and Mike Enzi. Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=014-e07&t=c>
(12/19, Cowan) reports that before passing the bill, the Senate defeated
amendments by Cotton and Kennedy “that would have further tightened
requirements.”

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=015-510&t=c>
(12/18, Andrews) reports that House Speaker Ryan has promised to take up
the bill before the current session of Congress ends. Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=016-121&t=c>
(12/18, Levine), meanwhile, says “advocates were quick to praised the
passage of the bill.” Holly Harris, executive director of Justice Action
Network, said, “Today was a resounding win for second chances,
bipartisanship, and most importantly, for the thousands of Americans
families who are burdened by our broken justice system.”
Foreign Policy
Mnuchin: US, China Planning For Trade Talks In January.

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=017-f0f&t=c>
(12/18, Donnan, Jacobs, Wayne, Mohsin) reports Treasury Secretary Mnuchin
said Tuesday that the US and China are “planning to hold meetings in
January to negotiate a broader truce in their trade wars but are unlikely
to have any face-to-face contact before then.” Mnuchin, speaking in a
roundtable interview with Bloomberg News, “said the two sides had held
several phone conversations in recent weeks and were still in the process
of planning further formal discussions.” Said Mnuchin, “We’re in the
process of confirming the logistics of several meetings and we’re
determined to make sure that we use the time wisely, to try to resolve
this. ... We expect there will be meetings in January.”

        *China Makes Second Round Of Soybean Purchases Since Trump-Xi
Talks. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=018-31a&t=c>
(12/18, Plume) reports Chinese importers “returned to the US soy market on
Tuesday for their second round of purchases since the two countries agreed
to a truce in their trade war, four traders with knowledge of the deals and
the US Soybean Export Council said.” Reuters says the purchases are “the
latest evidence that China is making good on pledges to buy US agricultural
goods as part of the 90-day trade détente” agreed to by President Trump and
Chinese President Xi Jinping.

        *Media Analyses: In Major Speech, Xi Signals No Intention Of Caving
In Trade War With US. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=019-bdd&t=c>
(12/18, Buckley, Myers) reports Chinese President Xi Jinping “delivered an
unabashed defense of his policies on Tuesday, using a key anniversary to
argue that his recipe of guided growth under strong Communist Party control
must not waver.” In a speech commemorating 40 years “since China embarked
on far-reaching economic changes after decades of upheaval and malaise
under Mao Zedong,” Xi was expected to “give clearer priorities to counter
economic headwinds and trade tensions that have flared with the United
States,” but “offered none, referring only obliquely to the economic and
diplomatic challenges confronting China.” Instead, the Times says he
“stress[ed] that only the party’s dominance would allow China to continue
its stunning transformation.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01a-8a1&t=c>
(12/18, Buckley, Myers) says Xi “used the speech to defend policies that he
had forged over the past six years to make the Communist Party even more
powerful, strengthen the state-run sector of the economy while allowing
private business to grow, and put China’s stamp on international affairs.”
In what the Times calls an “apparent reference to demands from Washington
and other capitals that China undo some of its protectionist economic
policies,” Xi said, “No one is in the position to dictate to the Chinese
people what should and should not be done.” Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01b-c89&t=c>
(12/18) says his remark shows that “anyone betting that” Xi “would back
down quickly in a trade war with Donald Trump better think again.” To
Bloomberg News, Xi’s speech “outlined no new economic policies that might
assuage investor concerns about market access or the slowing economy.”
Taliban: US Officials Discussing “Future Withdrawal Of Foreign Troops” From
Afghanistan.

Citing “Taliban sources,” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01c-85f&t=c>
(12/18, Ahmad, Sediqi) reports that in a meeting in Abu Dhabi, “US and
Taliban officials have discussed proposals for a six-month ceasefire in
Afghanistan and a future withdrawal of foreign troops as talks aimed at
setting up peace negotiations went into a second day.” According to
Reuters, “Taliban officials...said the US delegation was pressing for a
six-month truce as well as an agreement to name Taliban representatives to
a future caretaker government,” but “the Taliban negotiators were resisting
the ceasefire proposal as they felt it would damage their cause and help US
and Afghan forces.”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01d-a52&t=c>
(12/18, Muñoz), however, reports US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is
“demanding the Taliban agree to a six-month cease-fire as a prerequisite
for future peace talks.” The Times says it “remains unclear whether the
Taliban will accept Mr. Khalilzad’s cease-fire,” which would “be a major
victory for US diplomacy.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01e-bb3&t=c>
(12/18, Salahuddin) reports the talks unexpectedly “stretched into a second
day Tuesday as an Afghan government delegation arrived, raising the
prospect that rebel and government representatives might meet face-to-face
for the first time.”
White House: Trump Told Turkish President He Would “Look At” Possibly
Extraditing Cleric.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=01f-202&t=c>
(12/18, Mason) reports that after Turkey’s foreign minister said on Sunday
that President Trump told Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan “that Washington
was working on extraditing” Fethullah Gulen, a “cleric who Ankara suspects
of being behind a 2016 coup attempt,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders
said on Tuesday, “The only thing [Trump] said is that we would take a look
at” the possibility of extradition. She added, “Nothing further at this
point beyond that. ... Nothing committal at all in that process.”
Trump Urges Kosovo To Reach Deal With Serbia.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=020-84a&t=c>
(12/18, Bytyci) reports President Trump sent a letter to Kosovo President
Hashim Thaci’s official website, “urging him to do everything to reach a
longstanding deal with Serbia two decades after their war ended.” The text
of the letter on the website said, “Failure to capitalise on this unique
opportunity would be a tragic setback, as another chance for a
comprehensive peace is unlikely to occur again soon.”
UK Begins Preparations For No-Deal Brexit.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=021-fea&t=c>
(12/18, Maclellan, Young) reports that with just over 100 days until
Britain is scheduled to leave the EU, the British government said it is
implementing plans for a no-deal Brexit and told businesses and citizens to
prepare for such. Measures “include setting aside space on ferries to
ensure a regular flow of medical supplies and keeping 3,500 armed forces
personnel ready to support the government with its contingency plans.”
Reuters calls a no-deal Brexit a “nightmare scenario for international
businesses and the dream of hard Brexiteers who want a decisive split.”
Opposition Labour Party Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer told Parliament, “No
deal has never truly been a viable option, it is a political hoax, and deep
down I think the government and this prime minister knows it.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=022-1e6&t=c>
(12/18, Castle) reports, “Critics accuse Mrs. May of trying to run down the
clock, seeking to make it impossible for Parliament to consider
alternatives to her deal.” Meanwhile, fear of a no-deal Brexit “that could
clog ports, starve factories and disrupt supplies of food and medicines is
growing.”
Hacked European Cables Show Concerns About Trump, Russia, China.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=023-e3c&t=c>
(12/18, Sanger, Erlanger) reports, “Hackers infiltrated the European
Union’s diplomatic communications network for years,” using techniques
resembling “those long used by an elite unit of China’s People’s Liberation
Army.” The hackers also targeted more than 100 organizations and
institutions, including “the United Nations, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and
ministries of foreign affairs and finance worldwide.” While the hack is
“reminiscent of the WikiLeaks publication of 250,000 State Department
cables in 2010,” the material was not published. The stolen material
“provides insight into Europe’s struggle to understand the political
turmoil engulfing three continents,” including “concerns about an
unpredictable Trump administration and struggles to deal with Russia and
China and the risk that Iran would revive its nuclear program.” When asked
about the hack, “the National Security Agency said it was still examining
the discovery of the European trove.”
Mexico Welcomes US Commitment To Spend More Than $10 Billion In Aid To
Central America.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=024-c25&t=c>
(12/18, Esposito) reports the US and Mexico announced Tuesday that the US
is “committing $5.8 billion toward development in Central America, as part
of a plan to strengthen economic growth in the region and curb illegal
immigration.” Reuters adds that Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez
Obrador “has vowed to work with” President Trump “to reduce migration from
Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, as well as Mexico’s poorer south, by
spurring economic development.” According to Reuters, Mexican Foreign
Minister Marcelo Ebrard said the US is “also committed to increasing public
and private in investment in Mexico by $4.8 billion via the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), $2 billion of which would go to the
south.” For its part, Ebrard said the Mexican government has “pledged to
find $25 billion to develop the south of the country during the next five
years.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=025-bf8&t=c>
(12/18) reports that “the plan was announced in a joint US-Mexican
statement released by the State Department and read aloud by...Ebrard in
the Mexican capital.” Said Ebrard, “In sum I think this is good news, very
good news for Mexico. ... The commitments established here signify more
than doubling foreign investment in southern Mexico starting in 2019.”
The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=026-743&t=c>
(12/18, Sheridan) reports that “after two tumultuous years in the bilateral
relationship and several tense weeks during the arrival of several migrant
caravans, the Mexican government said it considered the US collaboration a
positive sign.” Said Ebrard, “The announcement reflects the importance that
both countries grant to our bilateral relationship.”
Domestic Policy
Media Analyses: White House Signaling Retreat On Full Border Wall Funding
To Avoid Shutdown.

Coverage of comments from the President and the White House regarding a
possible partial government shutdown portrays the Administration as
retreating from the President’s previously firm position that he would not
sign any budget that did not include $5 billion for a US-Mexico border
wall. While some reports paint this as creating an opening for compromise,
more cast it as a step back for Trump. Analyses are also skeptical of the
President’s ability – both legally and practically – to find the needed
funds in existing Cabinet agency budgets.

        Terry Moran said on ABC World News Tonight[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=027-099&t=c>
(12/18, story 5, 2:45, Muir), “It was Donald Trump’s most famous campaign
promise: the border wall, and how to pay for it.” Trump: “Who’s going to
pay for the wall?” Crowd response: “Mexico!” Moran: “That’s not happening,
so the President demanded $5 billion from Congress by Friday or he’ll
trigger a government shutdown. ... Today, the President seemed to waver.”
The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=028-2f0&t=c>
(12/18, story 4, 0:25, Glor), in a briefer report, said “there were signs
of a breakthrough to avoid a partial government shutdown. ... The White
House did signal a compromise on President Trump’s demands. ... Now,
Democrats and Republicans in Congress are trying to agree on a government
spending plan.” According to Phil Mattingly of CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=029-494&t=c>
(12/18), “the most likely scenario” would be “a short-term continuing
resolution” that would “essentially” continue funding “as it currently
stands.” But that would mean Trump would “not be able to get his wall
funding.”

        NPR’s Tamara Keith tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02a-94e&t=c>,
“Asked @realDonaldTrump about the looming shutdown. He said ‘we’ll see what
happens’ and that it was ‘too early to say.’ Then I asked: ‘Are you still
willing to shut it down for $5 billion?’ Trump said thank you (to usher the
press out), and added ‘We need border security.’ This, combined with what
@PressSec said about not wanting a shutdown and moving money from other
departments, would indicate that the hard line POTUS took on border wall
funding last week has softened.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02b-03a&t=c>
(12/18, Davis, Rogers) reports under the headline “White House Signals
Retreat On Shutdown Threat” that the White House “signaled on Tuesday that
President Trump might be ready to capitulate on his demand for $5 billion
for a wall on the southwestern border, but negotiations on a spending deal
remained stalled as lawmakers awaited a White House strategy” to avert a
shutdown. The Times says the President’s “flirtation with a retreat on his
wall only underscored the dysfunction at the tail end of the all-Republican
majority on Capitol Hill.” While the White House “blamed the
Republican-controlled Senate for failing to pass legislation to bridge the
divide,” congressional GOP leaders “said they were still unsure what the
president was willing to sign.” The New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02c-466&t=c>
(12/18, Hicks) reports, “It’s a major reversal from last week, when Trump
said he would be ‘proud’ to shut down the government in an astonishing
exchange with top congressional Democrats.”

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02d-717&t=c>
(12/18, A1, Ballhaus, Peterson) runs a similar report on its front page
under a less bold headline, “White House Signals Flexibility On Border-Wall
Funding As Shutdown Looms,” writing that the White House signaled interest
in averting a shutdown even if the President’s demands are not met, though
Trump has not indicated whether he would sign a short-term spending
measure. The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02e-78a&t=c>
(12/18, Wagner) reports Trump “abandoned months of strident demands for
Congress to give him $5 billion for his border wall, bowing to political
reality. ... But the concession” by Trump “did not break the impasse that’s
overtaken Capitol Hill in the final days of unified GOP control of
Washington.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=02f-9fd&t=c>
(12/18, Cowan) reports the White House said “it was searching for ways to
unilaterally fund” the border wall.

        The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=030-46c&t=c>
(12/18, Stokols) reports the President “appeared to back away on Tuesday
from threats to shut down parts of the federal government over his demands
for billions for his border wall, though he left Congress unclear about
what deal he would accept.” White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told Fox
News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=031-7dd&t=c>
(12/18), “We have other ways that we can get to that $5 billion.” But, the
Times writes, “she did not offer specifics,” and “Trump would be unlikely
to find several billions more than Congress provides or to proceed with
wall construction without meeting congressional resistance.” The Washington
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=032-634&t=c>
(12/18, Boyer) reports Sanders said the President “has asked all federal
agencies ‘to look and see if they have money that can be used for that
purpose.’” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=033-d55&t=c>
(12/18, Ferris, Johnson, Everett) headlines its report “GOP Talks Trump Off
The Shutdown Ledge.”

        *Democrats Reject “Slush Fund” Proposal. *On NBC Nightly News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=034-b6f&t=c>
(12/18, story 3, 1:45, Holt), Kristen Welker reported, “Republicans offered
a compromise proposal, but Democrats rejected it, saying it would amount to
a slush fund for the President’s immigration policies.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=035-0f6&t=c>
(12/18, Sherfinski, Muñoz) reports House Minority Leader Pelosi, who will
likely be speaker within three weeks, said, “We cannot accept the offer
they made of a billion-dollar slush fund for the President to implement his
very wrong immigration policies, so that won’t happen. Right now, what they
offered, we have not accepted.” Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=036-37e&t=c>
(12/18, Moran) reports Senate Minority Leader Schumer echoed Pelosi in
saying that he rejected the “spending bill offer, saying that he could not
accept a billion dollar immigration slush fund.” Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=037-c2a&t=c>
(12/18, Hanchett) reports Schumer said, “As for the idea of what [Sanders]
said, they could get wall money from NAFTA or some other part of the
government, they need congressional approval. They’re not getting it for
the wall, plain and simple.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=038-b8e&t=c>
(12/18, Fabian) reports Senate Majority Leader McConnell “predicted on
Tuesday there would not be a shutdown, saying the Trump administration is
‘extremely flexible’ in striking a spending deal.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=039-cb4&t=c>
(12/18, Mascaro, Daly, Lucey) reports McConnell “said a stopgap measure
could be approved, though he suggested [Pelosi] would not want to saddle
the new year with a budget brawl.” McConnell said, “If I were in her shoes,
I would rather not be dealing with this year’s business next year.” USA
Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03a-845&t=c>
(12/18, Fritze, Jackson, Gaudiano, Collins) reports McConnell said he
thought the White House proposal “‘was reasonable to both sides’ but that
he is talking to the White House about the next step now that Democrats
rejected the offer.”

        Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) said on Fox News’ Special Report[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03b-90b&t=c>
(12/18), “I think the President is dead right. We have to make sure that we
secure our borders.” Scott added, “I think we will get the deal done, but
the fact of the matter is: a, the President likes the $1.6 billion; b, I
think finding more money through reprogamming is a realistic expectation
and an opportunity that he will take full advantage of, which gives him
more of the resources necessary to make sure that we secure our borders.”

        Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said on CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03c-cd0&t=c>
(12/18) that the President “seems to come off the demand on the $5 billion,
but he’s replaced that with this demand for a slush fund. We really just
need to get back to the bipartisan agreements we had in the past. Let’s let
Congress act here and then the President can decide whether he wants to
sign or veto it.”

        Jennifer Haberkorn of the Los Angeles Times tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03d-844&t=c>
that Senate Appropriations Chairman Richard Shelby says the “Senate GOP is
working on a government funding bill through early February. If successful,
they’d punt on a border wall dispute and avoid a shutdown.”

        *WPost Analysis: Redirecting Allocated Funds May Be Illegal.
*The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03e-60c&t=c>
(12/18, Paletta) writes that Trump’s “new approach sets up more budget and
political battles, as it’s very difficult to legally redirect taxpayer
money without Congress’s approval.” Todd Harrison, Director of Defense
Budget Analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies,
said, “If you do this without going through the proper reprogramming
requests and getting all the proper approvals, you are breaking the law.”
Sanders said Administration attorneys were looking into this, saying,
“That’s their entire job is determining whether or not something is legal,
and we are looking to those individuals to find out those specific pots of
money that can be used for that.”

        *Trump: “Beautiful” Wall Will Be Built. *The President did not
directly comment on the budget impasse on Twitter on Tuesday, but did tweet
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=03f-d2e&t=c>
at 8:13 p.m., “The Democrats, are saying loud and clear that they do not
want to build a Concrete Wall – but we are not building a Concrete Wall, we
are building artistically designed steel slats, so that you can easily see
through it. ...
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=040-dac&t=c>
It will be beautiful and, at the same time, give our Country the security
that our citizens deserve. It will go up fast and save us BILLIONS of
dollars a month once completed!”

        *Quinnipiac Poll: Support For Wall Rises. *The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=041-78c&t=c>
(12/18, Dinan) reports that though “support for President Trump’s border
wall hit a record high in a new Quinnipiac University poll Tuesday,” a
majority still opposes the wall, “saying it’s a waste that isn’t needed to
improve border security. The poll found 43 percent do support the wall, but
54 percent oppose it and say it won’t help secure the southern boundary.”
Support for the wall “was just 33 percent in Quinnipiac’s polling in early
2017,” and “reached 40 percent in April.”

        *WSJournal: Trump Should Offer To Legalize Dreamers In Exchange For
Wall Funding. *The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=042-7dc&t=c>
(12/18) says in an editorial that Trump should offer legalization of
so-called “Dreamers” in exchange for the $5 billion. Besides being a good
deal, the Journal says it would help Trump to win back some of the moderate
suburban Republicans who abandoned the GOP in this year’s elections, and
that he will need to win a second term.

        *WPost’s Itkowitz: White House Asking Taxpayers “To Pay For The
Wall.” *Colby Itkowitz of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=043-a46&t=c>
(12/18) writes under the headline “Yes, Sarah Sanders, You Are Asking US
Taxpayers To Pay For The Wall” that when Sanders “said Tuesday that if
Congress won’t agree to an additional $5 billion toward a border wall, then
President Trump would seek other government funds to pay for it,” she was
asked by a reporter why taxpayers are “paying for the wall when President
Trump as a candidate promised that Mexico would pay for it.” Sanders said,
“We’re not asking American taxpayers for that. We are looking at existing
funding through other agencies right now that we can draw on to do that in
– immediately. The President has been clear that the USMCA deal would
provide additional revenue through the deal that would show that Mexico has
paid for the wall.” However, Itkowitz writes, “any existing funding that
other agencies have in their coffers is taxpayer money.”

        *USA Today: Shutdown “A Big Price To Pay For A Political Symbol.” *USA
Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=044-77e&t=c>
(12/18) editorializes, “A government shutdown, if it happens, would be a
big price to pay for a political symbol. ... A wall would do nothing...to
thwart the nearly half of all illegal immigrants who arrived in America
legally and then overstayed their visas. Nor would it be of much assistance
in deterring the families and unaccompanied minors from El Salvador,
Guatemala and Honduras who have been showing up at the border recently,
sometimes in caravans.”

        Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) writes in an opposing USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=045-8e9&t=c>
(12/18) op-ed, “The problem we are dealing with is not just illegal
immigration; there are illicit drugs flowing through our borders, human
trafficking, and dangerous cartels exploiting vulnerable women and
children.” Lesko writes that on a recent visit to the border, she asked CBP
agents “if they thought the wall would help. ... They told me yes, the wall
will help in their efforts to combat illegal immigration and other activity
along the border.”
Sentencing Delayed As Judge Blasts Flynn, Suggests Prison Is A Possibility.

Coverage of Tuesday’s sentencing hearing for former National Security
Adviser Michael Flynn indicates the retired general entered the courtroom
expecting to receive no prison time – given that special counsel Robert
Mueller’s prosecutors had recommended as much. However, media reports say
US District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan “excoriated” Flynn, delivering
“blistering rebuke” in which he accused Flynn of selling out his country
and calling into question whether the former lieutenant general will go to
prison for his crimes. Reports indicate that Flynn will now have to provide
additional assistance to Mueller’s investigation if he hopes to avoid a
prison sentence from Sullivan. Several accounts link Sullivan’s combative
attitude towards Flynn to moves by his defense team to draw scrutiny to the
FBI’s handling of the initial interview of Flynn that served as the basis
for the charges to which Flynn pleaded guilty.

        In the lead story for NBC Nightly News[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=046-838&t=c>
(12/18, lead story, 2:20, Holt), Lester Holt said Sullivan delivered a
“blistering rebuke” to Flynn, who Pete Williams said “arrived at the
federal courthouse in Washington with every reason to expect he would be
sentenced only to probation with no prison time.” The CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=047-223&t=c>
(12/18, story 2, 2:30, Glor) described a “bizarre day” in which Flynn
“heard a scathing lecture” from Sullivan. CBS (Reid) added that in front of
“a stunned courtroom,” Sullivan indicated “that he intended to send the
former three-star general to jail.”

        Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=048-783&t=c>
(12/18, Samuelsohn, Choi) reports the “surprise outcome came after an
unexpectedly contentious hearing,” and the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=049-24b&t=c>
(12/18, Tucker, Day) says the postponement of Flynn’s sentencing followed
“a stunning hearing in which the judge accused Flynn of selling out his
country.” The AP reports Sullivan told Flynn, “Arguably you sold your
country out” during a “tongue-lashing that raised the prospect that the
judge could send the retired Army lieutenant general to prison, even though
prosecutors have recommended against prison time, citing his cooperation in
the Russia probe.”

        The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04a-81a&t=c>
(12/18, Willman) says Sullivan “excoriated” Flynn, saying he could not hide
“my disgust, my disdain,” for his crimes, and Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04b-973&t=c>
(12/18, Wolfe, Gibson) reports Sullivan “sternly told Flynn his actions
were abhorrent, noting that Flynn had also lied to senior White House
officials, who in turn misled the public.” Sullivan at one point “asked
prosecutors if Flynn could have been charged with treason, although the
judge later said he had not been suggesting such a charge was warranted.”
Byron York of the Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04c-bc1&t=c>
(12/18) emphasizes that Sullivan “excoriated Flynn for what is called
uncharged conduct – that is, for crimes that Flynn has not been formally
accused of committing.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04d-0e7&t=c>
(12/17, Leonnig) says Sullivan said Flynn acted as “an unregistered agent
of a foreign country, while serving as the national security adviser to the
president of the United States,” but later “walked back that allegation,
because Flynn did work to benefit Turkey when he was on the Trump campaign,
rather than when he was in the Trump government.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04e-aa8&t=c>
(12/18, Tau, Viswanatha) says Sullivan could impose a harsher penalty than
the two sides agreed, while The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=04f-c02&t=c>
(12/18, Chalfant) reports Sullivan “noted that he would take Flynn’s public
service and cooperation with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation
into account.”

        The New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=050-452&t=c>
(12/18, Eustachewich) says Sullivan “warned Flynn that he couldn’t ‘promise
anything’ regarding a sentence – in a hint that jail time could be on the
table.” The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=051-ea3&t=c>
(12/18, Cohen) reports, “A status report in the case is due March 13.”

        A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=052-81c&t=c>
(12/18) editorial says Sullivan imposed “a bit of common sense and common
decency ...into the crazy world of Donald Trump,” and Dana Milbank writes
in the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=053-082&t=c>
(12/18) that Sullivan “struck a potent blow for the rule of law.” Milbank
adds that Sullivan’s “passion on the bench was a much-needed corrective
from the federal judiciary.”

        The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=054-41e&t=c>
(12/18, Ross) says Flynn’s attorney Robert Kelner, “took...Sullivan up on
an offer to delay sentencing until the retired lieutenant general finishes
his cooperation with prosecutors handling other criminal investigations.” USA
Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=055-e5d&t=c>
(12/18, Johnson, Jansen) reports Kelner said Flynn “has held nothing back”
in cooperating with prosecutors, but he “acknowledged the judge’s earlier
cautions about proceeding to sentencing while Flynn’s cooperation was
likely not yet complete.”

        Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=056-691&t=c>
(12/18, Kocieniewski, Harris, Farrell, Schoenberg)says normally, “an
admitted felon who cooperates with authorities would happily accept
prosecutors’ recommendation of a light sentence.” However, “Flynn’s legal
team pushed back, which two former U.S. prosecutors said may have hurt
their case.” His attorneys “argued that two FBI officials involved in the
case, Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe, neglected to warn him that it was a
crime to lie to federal investigators.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=057-754&t=c>
(12/18, Lafraniere, Goldman) reports that during the hearing, Sullivan
asked Flynn and his lawyer “about their earlier suggestion that F.B.I.
agents might have tricked Mr. Flynn by failing to inform him before they
interviewed him nearly two years ago that lying to them would constitute a
federal crime.” According to the Times, Flynn “told the court that he was
not challenging the circumstances of the interview,” and, “in doing
so...distanced himself from Mr. Trump’s efforts to suggest misconduct by
the F.B.I.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=058-c6c&t=c>
(12/18, Tucker, Day) says the President “signaled his intense interest in
the case” by tweeting
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=059-5bb&t=c>,
“Good luck today in court to General Michael Flynn. Will be interesting to
see what he has to say, despite tremendous pressure being put on him, about
Russian Collusion in our great and, obviously, highly successful political
campaign. There was no Collusion!” CQ Roll Call
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05a-2ae&t=c>
(12/18, Connolly) says Washington’s “rumor pool has stirred for nearly a
year with gurgles that Trump could pardon his former campaign and national
security adviser.”

        In an interview with Fox News’ America’s Newsroom[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05b-f6f&t=c>
(12/18) ahead of Flynn’s sentencing hearing, White House Press Secretary
Sarah Sanders made a similar suggestion of FBI misconduct, stating, “We
don’t have expectations but certainly we have a lot of concerns. I think
that the judge does as well, which is why he requested additional
information, particularly about the way the FBI broke every standard
protocol that they have.” Sanders added that “we’re tuned in and we’ll see
not just what he has to say but also what the judge has to say and how he
will react to what we know the FBI did in terms of the way that they
ambushed Michael Flynn in the interview process that took place here at the
White House.”

        Jake Tapper said on CNN’s The Lead[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05c-3b3&t=c>
(12/18), “Flynn asserted in court he was not going to challenge the
circumstances of that interview he had with the FBI, that he was aware
lying to the FBI was a crime when he was interviewed, directly rebutting
claims from the White House that investigators had been trying to, quote,
ambush Flynn.” Pierre Thomas said in the lead story for ABC World News
Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05d-e36&t=c>
(12/18, lead story, 2:50, Muir) that Flynn “admitted he did not lie because
of what the FBI did, but White House officials are not backing away from
their claim that he was ambushed.”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05e-3c7&t=c>
(12/18, Miller) says the White House “stood by claims that...Flynn was
essentially tricked into lying to the FBI,” and The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=05f-aab&t=c>
(12/18, Fabian) says Sanders “said she had no reason to take back her claim
he was ‘ambushed’ by the FBI.” CNN chief White House correspondent Jim
Acosta said on CNN’s Situation Room
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=060-e86&t=c>
(12/18) that this “detachment from reality on the part of the White House
was on full display” in Sanders’ press briefing, during which she “prov[ed]
that the White House briefing room is no courtroom and that when it comes
to the truth, just about anything goes.”

        Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said on CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=061-c1e&t=c>
(12/18), “The President has continued to look the other way when it comes
to lying to the FBI. In fact, he continues to indulge in these conspiracy
theories that somehow the FBI trapped Michael Flynn, and Michael Flynn in
court today confessed that he did know that lying to the FBI was a crime.”

        Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) was asked on CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=062-28d&t=c>
(12/18) about Sanders’ claim that Flynn’s crimes had nothing to do with the
President. Reed said, “he was the national security adviser when he made
those misstatements about his contacts with the former Russian ambassador.
In fact, as the President indicated previously...he, in fact, did not
candidly tell the truth to Vice President Pence. So there was an
involvement here, whether it was in any way directed, inspired or
encouraged by anyone else in the White House, that’s still probably being
determined or investigated by Mueller.”

        *Attorney Says Flynn Will Cooperate In Case Against Former Business
Associates. *The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=063-cd9&t=c>
(12/18, Mordock) reports Kelner “said Flynn will cooperate with prosecutors
in the Eastern District of Virginia in a case against two of his former
business associates.” Two of Flynn’s former business associates “were
indicted Monday by federal prosecutors in Virginia. The indictment says the
two men violated foreign lobbying rules by plotting with Turkish officials
to pressure U.S. government officials to extradite a cleric living in
Pennsylvania to Turkey.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=064-f39&t=c>
(12/18, Layne) reports Flynn’s former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian.
“entered a plea of not guilty on Tuesday.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=065-d43&t=c>
(12/18, Weiner) says he is “maintaining his innocence and headed to trial
on charges that the two ran a secret, illegal influence campaign for the
Turkish government.” According to the Post, prosecutors allege that the
Turkish government paid him “and Flynn’s Flynn Intel Group consulting firm
hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobby for the extradition of prominent
dissident Fethullah Gulen, using a Turkish businessman as a conduit.”

        *Trump Signed Letter Of Intent For Trump Tower Moscow. *Axios
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=066-27e&t=c>
(12/18, Basu) reports that on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=067-b82&t=c>
Tuesday night, Cuomo “obtained a letter of intent to move forward with a
Trump Tower in Moscow signed by now-President Trump on October 28, 2015.”
Axios says the letter, as Cuomo pointed out, “doesn’t have direct legal
implications or suggest obvious wrongdoing. But it does raise questions
about why Trump has repeatedly denied having anything to do with Russia,
especially as new details about the timeline of the Moscow project have
emerged.”

        *Company Possibly Linked To Mueller Probe Ordered To Comply With
Subpoena. *The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=068-fa3&t=c>
(12/18, Cohen) reports a federal appeals court “ruled Tuesday that a
corporation owned by a foreign country must turn over information in a
grand jury subpoena battle.” The court ruled that “the Corporation” owned
by “Country A” must comply with the grand jury subpoena. The subpoena “is
suspected to be related to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation
into Russian election interference.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=069-411&t=c>
(12/18, Barrett) says officials “have not confirmed who the prosecutors on
the case are, but on the day the court order under appeal was issued, two
lawyers were observed exiting a sealed hearing before Chief Judge Beryl A.
Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia – who oversees
grand-jury proceedings – along with five prosecutors with the special
counsel’s office, including appellate specialist Michael Dreeben.”

        *Poll: Most Americans Don’t Believe Trump’s Denials About Russia
Collusion. *USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06a-5d2&t=c>
(12/18, Page, Theobald) reports on “sobering findings” in a USA
TODAY/Suffolk University Poll which found “most Americans don’t believe
]the President’s] denials that his campaign colluded with Russians in the
2016 campaign.” According to the poll, “just over a third of those surveyed
express even ‘some’ trust in Trump’s version of events. Nearly six in 10
have little or none.” The findings set “a rocky landscape for him even
before special counsel Robert Mueller submits a report, perhaps soon, that
will examine whether Trump’s team conspired with the Russians and if the
president tried to obstruct investigations into those accusations.”
Trump Foundation Will Dissolve As Part Of A Deal With New York’s Attorney
General.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06b-924&t=c>
(12/18, Sisak) reports that the Trump Foundation “reached a deal Tuesday to
go out of business, even as Trump continues to fight allegations he misused
its assets to resolve business disputes and boost his run for the White
House.” The AP adds that “New York’s attorney general and lawyers for the
Trump Foundation agreed on a court-supervised process for shutting down the
charity and distributing about $1.7 million in remaining assets to other
nonprofit groups.” However, New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood’s
“lawsuit alleging Trump and his family illegally operated the foundation as
an extension of his businesses and his presidential campaign will
continue.” CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06c-8da&t=c>
(12/18, Orden) says the lawsuit “will continue in court because it also
seeks two other outcomes: $2.8 million in restitution, plus penalties, and
a ban on Trump and his three eldest children serving on the board of any
other New York nonprofit.”

        ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06d-a0a&t=c>
(12/18, story 6, 2:00, Phillips) reported that Underwood called the
foundation “little more than checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and
political interests,” and “says the President, his family and his campaign
basically used the foundation as a personal slush fund: Spending $30,000 in
charity money on two portraits of Donald Trump himself. $12,000 for a
signed football helmet of former quarterback Tim Tebow,” and “using
foundation money to help his own campaign.” The CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06e-069&t=c>
(12/18, story 3, 2:10, Jiang) also said Underwood painted “the Trump
Foundation as a piggy bank” for “Trump’s business and political interests.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=06f-aa7&t=c>
(12/18, Fahrenthold) reports that Underwood said that the investigation
uncovered “a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation
– including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign,
repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more.” According to the Post,
Trump “used the charity’s money to pay legal settlements for his private
business, to purchase art for one of his clubs and to make a prohibited
political donation.” The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=070-20c&t=c>
(12/18, Goldmacher) notes that Trump “had said after the 2016 election that
he would dissolve the foundation to avoid any appearance of conflict of
interest,” but “the attorney general’s office said that such a move would
require its approval, given the continuing investigation.”

        NBC Nightly News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=071-c42&t=c>
(12/18, story 2, 1:50, Jackson) reported that “the attorney for the Trump
Organization defended the foundation and the $19 million he says it’s
distributed to more than 700 charities. The statement” accuses “the New
York attorney general, a Democrat, of an attempt to politicize the
agreement and pointing out the foundation has been trying to dissolve ever
since...Trump won the 2016 election, something New York state prevented as
it pursued its investigation. So, what happens to the remaining money in
the foundation? It’ll be distributed to charities the state deems
reputable.” USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=072-4b9&t=c>
(12/18, Campbell) also reports “once signed by a judge, the Trump
Foundation and Underwood’s office would have 30 days to submit a plan to
disperse the charity’s assets to other nonprofits.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=073-e2c&t=c>
(12/18, Nahmias), Axios
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=074-027&t=c>
(12/18, Fernandez), Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=075-58a&t=c>
(12/18, Yilek), Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=076-910&t=c>
(12/18, Nasiripour, Larson) and Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=077-f4e&t=c>
(12/18, Ramey), among other news outlets, run similar stories.
House Democrats Visit Border Patrol Station Where Migrant Girl Died,
Denounce Conditions.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=078-0fb&t=c>
(12/18, Miroff) reports that a delegation of Democratic lawmakers who
visited a New Mexico Border Patrol station on Tuesday “vowing to
investigate the death of a 7-year-old migrant girl emerged from their tour
with a litany of accusations but few solutions for helping the agency
manage the surge of families that has left agents overwhelmed.” The
delegation, led by members of the House Hispanic Caucus, “described a
facility jam-packed with families, lacking sufficient medical care and
poorly equipped to care for children.” The Post says the visit, and “the
ferocious criticism of US border officials that followed, underscored the
degree to which the death of Jakelin Caal has deepened the partisan feud
over immigration as President Trump demands funding for a border wall.”

        Meanwhile, in an interview with the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=079-088&t=c>
(12/18, Malkin) from her home in Guatemala, Claudia Maquin, Jakelin’s
mother, offered “a simple explanation for why her husband joined a growing
number of villagers and made the dangerous journey north: the absolute lack
of alternatives in this lush but remote part of the country. Indigenous
communities like theirs have endured centuries of poverty, exclusion and
repression by economic and political elites.” She told the Times through an
interpreter, “I am living with a deep sadness since I learned of my
daughter’s death. But there are no jobs, and this caused the decision to
leave.”
DOJ Orders Americans To Destroy Bump Stocks Within 90 Days.

The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07a-dd9&t=c>
(12/18, story 5, 0:20, Glor) briefly reported that the Administration
yesterday “moved...to ban bump stocks,” and NBC Nightly News[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07b-1c3&t=c>
(12/18, story 4, 1:40, Holt) that the President “followed through on a vow
to ban” the devices, “used to amp up fire power in certain rifles, and were
used by the gunman in the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that left 58
people dead.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07c-63a&t=c>
(12/18, Balsamo) says acting Attorney General Whitaker signed regulations
yesterday that “reverse a 2010 ATF decision that found bump stocks did not
amount to machine guns and could not be regulated unless Congress changed
existing firearms law or passed a new one.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07d-8c7&t=c>
(12/18, Lambert) reports that “the Justice Department’s regulation follows
the lead of many states and retailers that imposed stricter limits on sales
of guns and accessories after a deadly March shooting at a Florida high
school.” However, according to Reuters, the Trump Administration is
“already bracing for a lawsuit from the National Rifle Association or other
gun ownership groups.” The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07e-e6e&t=c>
(12/18, Savage) points out that “the new regulation, which had been
expected, would ban the sale or possession of the devices under a new
interpretation of existing law,” and “Americans who own bump stocks would
have 90 days to destroy their devices or to turn them in to the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”

        The Washington Free Beacon
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=07f-94b&t=c>
(12/18, Gutowski) reports “gun-rights groups criticized the DOJ for the ban
and how it plans to institute it – some are already taking legal action.”
The NRA “pointed out the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives had previously determined bump-stocks to be legal – many gun
owners purchased them under that understanding. The gun-rights group said
the attorney general should have allowed those gun owners amnesty from the
new rule.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=080-e82&t=c>
(12/18, Gurman, Elinson), Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=081-d6e&t=c>
(12/18, Barrett), USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=082-aeb&t=c>
(12/18, Penzenstadler), Axios
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=083-fa1&t=c>
(12/18, Sykes) and New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=084-e59&t=c>
(12/18, Hicks), among other news outlets, also report the story this
morning.
Mnuchin: Democrats Share Blame For Growing Deficit.

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=085-dce&t=c>
(12/18, McGregor, Mohsin) reports Treasury Secretary Mnuchin said in a
roundtable interview Tuesday that while the budget agreement to increase
military spending is a factor in the growing deficit, Democrats share the
blame for the shortfall because of their spending requests. Mnuchin said,
“In an effort to get the military spending – which the president thought
was critical and which I fully support – given the issues we have all over
the world and the under-investment we have had in the last eight years,
this required bipartisan support and the Democrats required big increases
in non-military spending. ... So that’s a major component of deficit
today.”

        *Furman: Trump Tax Cuts Raised Deficit, Benefited Corporations. *In
an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=086-cc7&t=c>
(12/18), Jason Furman, a professor of practice at the Harvard Kennedy
School, who served as chairman of the White House Council of Economic
Advisers from 2013-17, argues that while the President’s tax cuts did
result in economic growth and increased jobs, the deficit has gone up and
most of the benefits went to corporate profits rather than employee wages.
Lawmakers Push For Language Prohibiting Corporate Israel Boycotts In
Spending Bill.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=087-70e&t=c>
(12/18, Lillis) reports on an “eleventh hour” effort by a bipartisan group
of lawmakers “to include controversial language in a year-end spending bill
prohibiting US companies from joining boycotts of Israel launched by the
United Nations or similar groups.” In “a move that could complicate efforts
to prevent a government shutdown,” the lawmakers “are pressing
congressional leaders to attach his [Sen. Ben Cardin’s (D-MD)] Israel
anti-boycott legislation to a sweeping omnibus spending package.” While
supporters “say it would simply expand an existing prohibition on companies
participating in anti-Israel boycotts led by foreign governments to those
orchestrated by international governmental organizations (IGOs),” it has
been “hammered by human rights and free speech groups, which contend the
proposal prioritizes the concerns of a foreign government over
constitutionally guaranteed First Amendment protections.”

        *NYTimes: Measure Would Likely Face Court Challenge. *A New York
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=088-c24&t=c>
(12/18) article says any such measure enacted by Congress is “likely to
face a court challenge,” and argues that a “more constructive” tactic would
be for political leaders to “focus on the injustice and finding viable
solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rather than reinforcing
divisions between the two parties and promoting legislation that raises
free speech concerns.”

        *NYTimes Under Fire Over Walker Interview Endorsing “Anti-Semitic”
Book. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=089-c98&t=c>
(12/18, Stanley-Becker) reports the New York Times is facing criticism
after it printed an interview with author Alice Walker in which she
endorsed David Icke’s book “And the Truth Shall Set You Free,” which
critics say is “anti-Semitic,” and “places Holocaust revisionism at the
center of an odious and addled worldview.” The Post says “some decried the
decision by the Times to relay her recommendation to readers without
qualification.”

        *Woman Sues After Losing Job For Refusing To Sign Pro-Israel
Pledge. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08a-0de&t=c>
(12/18, Rosenberg) reports Bahia Amawi, “who has worked as a contractor in
a Texas school district for nine years,” was “forced to stop working for
the district” after she declined to sign a contract agreement which “asked
her to affirm that she did not boycott Israel and assert that she would not
while working for the school.” Amawi, an American citizen of Palestinian
descent, “said the statements infringed on her principles: her stance on
Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and her belief in the First Amendment.”
The contract “stems from a 2017 law passed by the state’s Republican-held
legislature and governor that prohibited state agencies from contracting
with companies boycotting Israel.” It is “the subject of a lawsuit filed
this week by Amawi in federal district court in Austin. Amawi says the
state’s enforcement of the law violates her right to free speech.”
Cancer Research
Survivors Of Childhood Hodgkin Lymphoma Face Increased Long-Term Risk Of
Solid Tumors, Study Suggests.

Medscape
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08b-00d&t=c>
(12/18) reports a new study suggests that survivors of childhood Hodgkin
lymphoma have a 14-fold higher risk of developing cancer later in life
compared with the general population. Additionally, results suggest that
the cumulative incidence of any solid cancer was 26.4% at 40 years after
being diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma. The findings
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08c-88b&t=c>
were published in Cancer.

        MedPage Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08d-d6b&t=c>
(12/18) also reports.
Study Finds Women Who Receive “False Positive” From Mammogram Are Twice As
Likely To End Up With Cancer, Compared To Those With Negative Result.

The Telegraph (UK)
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08e-e78&t=c>
(12/19, Donnelly) reports a study conducted by Hospital del Mar Medical
Research Institute in Barcelona found that “women who experience a ‘false
positive’ result after a mammogram are twice as likely to end up developing
cancer as those who get a negative result.” The study examined data on 1.15
million women who had a combined 3.5 million mammograms, which resulted “in
10,600 cancers being detected.”
Editorials/Op-Eds
New York Times.

*“Good Luck In Court, Mr. Trump.”* A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=08f-261&t=c>
(12/18) editorial says that during former National Security Adviser Michael
Flynn’s sentencing hearing Tuesday, Judge Emmet Sullivan imposed “a bit of
common sense and common decency...into the crazy world of Donald Trump.”

        *“Curbing Speech In The Name Of Helping Israel.” *A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=090-552&t=c>
(12/18) editorial says any measure like a current Senate bill to punish US
companies and organizations that participate in anti-Israel boycotts is
“likely to face a court challenge,” and argues that a “more constructive”
tactic would be for political leaders to “focus on the injustice and
finding viable solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rather than
reinforcing divisions between the two parties and promoting legislation
that raises free speech concerns.”
Washington Post.

*“China Got Rid Of One Of The Most Oppressive Practices Of The Mao Era. Now
It’s Coming Back.”* A Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=091-805&t=c>
(12/18) editorial is critical of China’s use of “forced labor in
concentration camps for Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang province.” The Post
argues that the situation “has become one of the world’s most urgent human
rights crises,” and urges Congress to “pass the Uighur Human Rights Policy
Act, which has bipartisan sponsorship in both chambers.” President Trump,
it adds, “has been way too silent about the Xinjiang repression, although
other administration officials have spoken out. ... China must hear loud
and clear that the world will not stand by as Beijing attempts to destroy a
people through forced labor and brainwashing.”

        *“The Trump Administration Is Making School Lunches Less Healthy
Again.” *A Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=092-d63&t=c>
(12/18) editorial is critical of the Administration’s decision last week to
relax federal standards for school lunches. While the USDA argued that the
standards “were too demanding,” the Post argues they “were not the burden
the administration makes them out to be. If anything, they should have been
tougher.” The Post writes that the rules “are not in place for the
convenience of lunch-line workers or the food industry that benefits from
federal school lunch spending. They exist to help children grow in healthy
ways.”

        *“Lyft’s New Pilot Program Could Address A Long-Standing DC Grocery
Gap.” *In an editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=093-76f&t=c>
(12/18) welcomes Lyft’s pilot program “partnering with nonprofit Martha’s
Table” that offers “discounted trips to supermarkets in the District’s
Wards 7 and 8.” The Post says pilot program is “a promising strategy for
addressing a long-standing grocery gap that the city has so far failed to
bridge.”

*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=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=094-97d&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=2018121901biden&r=email-3d08&l=095-59a&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