Subject: FW: Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for Wednesday, February 6, 2019
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, 06 Feb 2019 09:43:52 -0500

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing

*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <[email-masked]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 6, 2019 7:58 AM
*To:* [email-masked]
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Wednesday, February 6, 2019

*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=000-603&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=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=001-761&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

*Wednesday, February 6, 2019 8:00 AM EST*
Today's Table of Contents

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

• In Tweet, Biden Lauds Abrams’ Response To SOTU And Jabs Trump. <#S1>

• The Independent Highlights Article On Biden’s 2020 Preparations. <#S2>

• 2020 Democratic Field Not As Large As Anticipated. <#S3>

• Biden Foundation Collaborating With LGBTQ Groups On Family Acceptance
Campaign. <#S4>

• Warren Wrote She Was “American Indian” On 1986 State Bar Of Texas
Registration Card. <#S5>

• Klobuchar To Announce Decision On 2020 Race On Sunday. <#S6>

• In Interview With Oprah, O’Rourke Says He’ll Decide On 2020 Bid End Of
Month. <#S7>

• Brown Says He’ll Likely Make Decision On 2020 Bid In March. <#S8>

• Democratic Group Pitching Opposition Research On Schultz To Publications.
<#S9>

• In Senate, 2020 Democrats Agree With Trump On Pulling US Troops From
Afghanistan, Syria. <#S10>

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

• Media Analyses: Trump Outlines Bipartisan Themes While Maintaining Border
Security Stance. <#S11>

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

• Trump Announces Second Summit With Kim To Take Place In Vietnam Later
This Month. <#S12>

• Pompeo, Afghanistan’s Ghani Discuss Taliban Peace Talks. <#S13>

• Votel Supports Trump’s Decision To Withdraw Troops From Syria. <#S14>

• Bloomberg News Analysis: Senate Undermines Trump’s Position On Syria With
77-23 Vote. <#S15>

• Russia Says It Will Deploy New Mid-Range Missiles If US Does The Same.
<#S16>

• Report: Mnuchin, Lighthizer To Travel To China For Trade Talks. <#S17>

• Venezuelan Opposition Seeks To Deliver Humanitarian Aid Rejected By
Maduro. <#S18>

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

• Conferees “Still Far Apart” On Border Security Compromise. <#S19>

• Trump Seeks To Eliminate AIDS In The US Within A Decade. <#S20>

• Trump Calls On Congress To Ban Late-Term Abortions. <#S21>

• Grassley Anticipates Mueller Report “Within A Month.” <#S22>

• GAO: Trump’s 2017 Trips To Mar-A-Lago Cost Taxpayers “Nearly $1 Million A
Day.” <#S23>

• Nadler Says He Is Prepared To Subpoena Whitaker. <#S24>

• WPost Analysis: Leaked Calendars Show How Much Trump’s Approach Differs
From Predecessors. <#S25>

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

• Trump To Ask Congress For $500 Million More For Childhood Cancer Research.
<#S26>

• Sedentary Behavior May Increase Risk of Early Onset Colorectal Cancer,
Study Finds. <#S27>

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S28>

• Washington Post. <#S29>
Biden in the News
In Tweet, Biden Lauds Abrams’ Response To SOTU And Jabs Trump.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=002-59d&t=c>
(2/5, Anapol) reported that former Vice President Joe Biden lauded former
gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (D-GA) “after she delivered the
Democratic response to President Trump’s State of the Union.” The Hill
quoted Biden as saying in a tweet
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=003-778&t=c>,
“Stacey Abrams achieved in a matter of minutes something Donald Trump
failed to do in over an hour – to embrace and give voice to the spirit and
core values that make America great.” Under the headline “State Of The
Union: Democrats Running For President In 2020 Respond To Trump With
Sarcasm, Outrage,” USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=004-818&t=c>
(2/6, Groppe) reports on the reaction to Trump’s SOTU address from the
field of announced and potential 2020 Democratic presidential contenders.
The first reaction mentioned by USA Today – appearing in the third
paragraph – is Biden’s tweet praising Abrams and jabbing Trump.

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=005-10a&t=c>
(2/5, Barrow) largely focuses on the content of Abrams’ speech, but also
says that several “potential 2020 Democratic presidential contenders were
quick to praise her performance.” Biden’s tweet is the first reaction from
a possible Democratic contender mentioned in the AP dispatch, though it
comes further down in the piece than in the aforementioned USA Today story.
The Huffington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=006-2ec&t=c>
(2/6, Russo) says Biden posted “his scathing one-sentence response on
Twitter late Tuesday after both speeches had concluded, chalking Trump’s
remarks up as a failure.”

        *Hours Before Call For Unity In SOTU, Trump Blasted Biden, Other
Top Democrats. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=007-06b&t=c>
(2/5, Baker, Grynbaum) reports, “For public consumption...Trump planned to
use his State of the Union address on Tuesday night to appeal for
bipartisan unity. But at a private lunch for television anchors earlier in
the day, he offered searing assessments of a host of Democrats,” including
Biden. The Times says that “according to multiple people in the room,”
Trump said of his yet-to-be determined 2020 Democratic presidential
opponent, “I hope it’s Biden. Biden was never very smart. He was a terrible
student. His gaffes are unbelievable. When I say something that you might
think is a gaffe, it’s on purpose; it’s not a gaffe. When Biden says
something dumb, it’s because he’s dumb.” The Times says Trump also took
shots at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
and Gov. Ralph Northam (D-VA).

        Drawing from the Times’ story, Business Insider
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=008-496&t=c>
(2/5, Choi) also reported on the comments sources said Trump made about
Biden. Business Insider added that Trump’s “pointed remarks at Biden stood
in contrast to his previous assessment of the former vice president,
according
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=009-d01&t=c>
(7/25, Allen) to Axios,” which reported this past summer that the President
“viewed Biden as a threat to his incumbency in 2020, particularly due to
his appeal to Trump’s own base of working-class white voters.” The Daily
Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00a-f44&t=c>
(2/5) highlighted the Times’ quote of Trump attacking Biden, and said that
the President called Schumer “a ‘nasty [expletive].’” And referring to
Northam, “Trump said, ‘Did you see that news conference? Could you believe
it? He choked like a dog.’”

        In its report on the Times’ story, the Daily Beast
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00b-8e5&t=c>
(2/5) briefly mentioned Trump’s remarks on Biden, but largely focused on a
jab the President was said to have made about the late Sen. John McCain
(R-AZ). According to the Times, Trump “once again lamented McCain’s
decision to vote against a GOP measure to repeal Obamacare in 2017, despite
the fact that the Arizona Republican passed away last August. ‘By the way,’
he was quoted as saying of McCain’s book, ‘he wrote a book and the book
bombed.’” Among the other media outlets highlighting the Times’ story and
Trump’s reported shots at Biden are the Huffington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00c-112&t=c>
(2/5, O'Connor), Newsweek
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00d-a81&t=c>
(2/5, Miere), Axios
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00e-879&t=c>
(2/5, Axios), and Salon
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=00f-a4f&t=c>
(2/5, Al-Sibai).
The Independent Highlights Article On Biden’s 2020 Preparations.

Under the headline “Joe Biden Aides told To Prepare For 2020 Presidential
Run Against Trump ‘At Moment’s Notice,’” the Independent (UK)
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=010-b0a&t=c>
(2/5, Riotta) highlighted an article
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=011-520&t=c>
by The Atlantic’s Edward-Issac Dovere (covered in Monday’s briefing) that
indicated former Vice President Joe Biden appears to be growing close to
announcing a decision on the 2020 race for president. The Independent
reported Dovere wrote that Biden is “keeping tabs of potential talents to
recruit for his team and ‘day-one endorsers’ to help launch his candidacy
if he officially decides to run.”
2020 Democratic Field Not As Large As Anticipated.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=012-8bc&t=c>
(2/5, Parnes) reported, “While more than half a dozen Democrats have
declared they are running for president or launched exploratory committees,
it’s a significantly smaller crowd than the estimated two or three dozen
that were once mentioned as would-be contenders.” The Hill reported that
“Democrats now say they expect their primary season to include a dozen or
so candidates.” The Hill added, “Several politicians seen as contenders for
the centrist lane, including former Vice President Joe Biden and former New
York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have yet to announce their intentions
about 2020. ... Some of the centrist candidates may be waiting to see what
Biden, 76, decides to do.” A “major Democratic donor said that Biden would
clear the centrist lane should he decide to run.”
Biden Foundation Collaborating With LGBTQ Groups On Family Acceptance
Campaign.

In an online article, NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=013-333&t=c>
(2/5, Moreau) reported on “the newly announced Advancing Acceptance
campaign, a collaboration of the Biden Foundation, the Movement Advancement
Project and Gender Spectrum. The campaign seeks to raise awareness about
the importance of family acceptance for transgender and
gender-nonconforming youth through video testimonials and a collection of
resources for youth, their families and policymakers.” Emily Hecht-McGowan,
“director of LGBTQ equality for the nonprofit Biden Foundation, where
former Vice President Joe Biden is an honorary co-chair, said the Advancing
Acceptance initiative seeks to educate the public about the importance of
family acceptance through personal stories.” Said Hecht-McGowan, “We want
to educate people about how important it is and what good it does for LGBTQ
young people when they are accepted.”
Warren Wrote She Was “American Indian” On 1986 State Bar Of Texas
Registration Card.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=014-8c6&t=c>
(2/5, Linskey, Gardner) reports that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) on
Tuesday apologized for having “identified herself as a Native American for
almost two decades.” Her remarks “more fully explain the regret she
expressed last week to the chief of the Cherokee Nation, the first time
she’s” apologized “for claiming American Indian heritage. The private
apology was earlier reported as focusing more narrowly on a DNA test she
took to demonstrate her purported heritage.” The Post adds that it
“obtained Warren’s registration card for the State Bar of Texas,” which
provided “a previously undisclosed example of Warren identifying as an
‘American Indian.’ ... Dated April 1986, it is the first document to
surface showing Warren making the claim in her own handwriting.”

        Drawing from the Post report, the Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=015-179&t=c>
(2/5, Morton) says that the registration card, “written in ink and signed
personally by Ms. Warren, identifies her as an ‘American Indian.’” The
Times adds that Warren “has downplayed similar claims in other venues such
as the Harvard Law School diversity reports, in part by saying the claim
was made by others on her behalf. According to the Post, Ms. Warren’s
office didn’t dispute the card as an authentic document.” The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=016-c40&t=c>
(2/5) asserted that the Post “buried the lede of the story, which is
headlined ‘Elizabeth Warren apologizes for calling herself Native
American.’”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=017-0cb&t=c>
(2/5, Caralle) reported that Warren, “who is in the running for the
Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has faced criticism, especially
from President Trump, for her claims to Native American heritage decades
ago when applying for law school professorships. Trump has called Warren
‘Pocahontas’ and said that he would donate $1 million to a charity of her
choosing if she took a DNA test and proved that she is Native American.”

        *Warren, Proponent Of “Wealth Tax,” Worth Between $4.6M And $10.6M.
*The New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=018-ef6&t=c>
(2/5, Fredericks) reports that Warren – “who has proposed a ‘wealth tax’ on
the super-rich – and her husband have a net worth of between $4.6 million
and $10.6 million, according to financial disclosure forms filed with the
Senate. Warren’s minimum net worth was estimated to be at least $4.6
million in 2017, but since senators are required to report their assets in
ranges, she could have as much as $10.6 million, the Center for Public
Integrity reported. She and her husband, Bruce Mann, reported an income of
$913,000.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=019-0fe&t=c>
(2/5, Herndon) reports that although Warren “has shaped her political brand
around fighting unrestrained capitalism and reining in wealth inequality,
she remains fairly wealthy herself: Her combined assets with her husband,
reported through a variety of ordinary investment accounts, range between
about $4 million and $11 million. Ms. Warren has between $500,000 and $1
million in an annuity.” The Times says Warren’s “personal wealth places her
well behind several other senators in terms of personal wealth, though Roll
Call ranked her as the 69th wealthiest member of Congress a year ago.” In
an online article headlined “Elizabeth Warren Is Still Worth Millions,
Presidential Financial Disclosure Shows,” CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01a-d88&t=c>
(2/5, Schouten) also reported on the story.
Klobuchar To Announce Decision On 2020 Race On Sunday.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01b-a63&t=c>
(2/5, Schor) reports that Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) “signaled on Tuesday
she could become the next Democrat to enter the presidential contest,
teasing a major announcement on Sunday in Minneapolis. ‘Come to Boom Island
in Minnesota...and you’ll find out,’ she told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow.
‘Then you’ll find out my decision.’” The Minneapolis Star Tribune
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01c-8ee&t=c>
(2/5, Condon) reports, “A spokeswoman said Tuesday that Klobuchar would not
say until the event itself whether she will seek the Democratic
presidential nomination in 2020. A news release says only that Klobuchar
will make a ‘major announcement’ to a crowd of Minnesotans and supporters.”
Klobuchar has repeatedly said “that she is considering a presidential bid.
She went so far as to say that her family was on board with a national
campaign.”

        The St. Paul (MN) Pioneer Press
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01d-4fe&t=c>
(2/5, Orrick) reports that “the Minnesota political rumor mill officially
went into bonkers mode Tuesday when the news broke that a weekend
announcement could be coming.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01e-21a&t=c>
(2/5, Schneider) reported that Klobuchar “is taking other steps that look
like setup for a presidential campaign: She is scheduled to travel to Iowa
later this month, where she will headline the Ankeny Area Democrats Winter
Banquet, and her team is exploring events elsewhere in the first caucus
state that are likely to be added to that itinerary.”
In Interview With Oprah, O’Rourke Says He’ll Decide On 2020 Bid End Of
Month.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=01f-9a1&t=c>
(2/5, Peoples, Weissert) reports that during a Tuesday interview with Oprah
Winfrey, ex-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX) said “that he would announce his
decision about a 2020 presidential run ‘before the end of the month’ and
suggested he’s leaning toward it.” O’Rourke’s remarks came “during a taping
of [Winfrey’s] program ‘Oprah’s SuperSoul Conversations from Times
Square.’” Winfrey “appeared to encourage O’Rourke to run during the
wide-ranging interview that spanned nearly an hour. ‘What’s it going to
take for you to say, ‘Yes, I’m doing it?’ she asked. The decision, O’Rourke
said, would really be up to his family.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=020-013&t=c>
(2/5, Ax) reports that O’Rourke “appeared to be leaning toward a 2020” bid,
“but said he would make his decision after consulting his wife and three
children. ‘I have been thinking about running for president,’ he said,
prompting wild applause. ‘I’m so excited at the prospect of being able to
play that role.’” Reuters adds, “The interview will air on Winfrey’s cable
television channel OWN on Feb. 16.” The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=021-435&t=c>
(2/5, Halper) reports, “After weeks in which O’Rourke has hidden from the
swarm of reporters and fans stalking his every move,” he “emerged from his
conversation with Winfrey having restored some of the mojo that defined his
emotional, overflowing town-hall events during” his unsuccessful 2018 bid
to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). O’Rourke “once again boosted excitement
about his White House potential, promising that” he’d make an announcement
“within weeks.”

        The Dallas Morning News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=022-b5e&t=c>
(2/5, Jeffers) reports, “Throughout the interview O’Rourke sounded like he
had already made up his mind. ‘I’m increasingly excited about doing
something,’ O’Rourke said.” However, the Houston Chronicle
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=023-851&t=c>
(2/5, Diaz) reports that although “his most ardent supporters were looking
for a clear sign that he’s in, they didn’t get it.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=024-f89&t=c>
(2/5, Viser) reports, “The interview with Winfrey at times had the feel of
O’Rourke openly wondering whether he was the one for the moment – as the
crowd egged him on, hoping he would just go ahead and announce.” The New
York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=025-32d&t=c>
(2/5, Flegenheimer) reports, “Much of the conversation with Ms. Winfrey
centered on his deliberations since the midterms, which have included a
meeting with former President Barack Obama, who famously benefited from the
Oprah imprimatur during his own White House run.”
Brown Says He’ll Likely Make Decision On 2020 Bid In March.

CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=026-e1f&t=c>
(2/5, Bernard) reported that Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) “will likely decide
in March whether to seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.”
Speaking on Tuesday with CNN, Brown said of his wife, “Probably March,
Connie and I will decide.” Brown added, “We’re doing a dignity of work
listening tour. I don’t go to these early states looking for big crowds.
I’m going listening to workers and listening to farmers and listening to
people talking about their lives.” His “listening tour [includes] stops in
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.”
Democratic Group Pitching Opposition Research On Schultz To Publications.

The Washington Free Beacon
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=027-df0&t=c>
(2/5, Schoffstall) reported that American Bridge 21st Century, an
organization “led by liberal operative and Hillary Clinton loyalist David
Brock,” is putting together “and pushing opposition research hits on”
ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who Democrats are concerned “could ensure
Donald Trump’s re-election if he enters the 2020 presidential race.” The
group “began digging into Schultz as soon as he floated a potential”
independent White House run “and started pitching the research to
publications. The Daily Beast reported
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=028-1c9&t=c>
last week that Bridge sent the publication a file hitting” Schultz “on his
family foundation, mainly focused on $400,000 the foundation had spent on
furniture and a $21,000-per-month salary its executive director collected
during the 2016 tax year, an annual salary of $252,000.”

        *Mulling Independent Bid, Schultz To Deliver Policy Speech At
Purdue University On Thursday. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=029-ddb&t=c>
(2/5, Scherer) reports, “Undaunted by Democratic attacks,” Schultz is
slated “to deliver a major policy address at Purdue University on Thursday
to further explain his vision for an independent presidential campaign that
would take aim at the country’s two-party political system. The speech
comes after a week-long media blitz that prompted sharp verbal sparring
between Schultz and Democratic leaders, who worry that a self-funded bid by
a billionaire fiscal moderate and social liberal will ultimately
help...Trump win reelection. ‘Howard burst onto the scene in a way that no
one anticipated, and now that a majority of Americans know who is he is, he
is laying out some of his ideas and prescriptions for the greatest problems
facing our country,’ said Bill Burton, a spokesman for the Schultz effort.”

        The Lafayette (IN) Journal and Courier
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02a-1bc&t=c>
(2/5, Bangert) reports that Purdue President Mitch Daniels on Tuesday
“confirmed that Schultz would be on campus Thursday. Daniels told the J&C
that Schultz reached out to Purdue about the event.” The article adds, “The
format for the event – lecture, Q&A with Daniels or straight-up rally –
wasn’t immediately specified by Purdue or Schultz’s team.” The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02b-b14&t=c>
(2/5, Frazin) quoted Schultz spokesperson Erin McPike as saying of
Schultz’s speech, “He will lay out his theory of the case [for an
independent] and talk about some policy themes.”
In Senate, 2020 Democrats Agree With Trump On Pulling US Troops From
Afghanistan, Syria.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02c-692&t=c>
(2/5, Astor) reports, “You don’t often see this in Washington: some of the
most liberal candidates in the 2020 presidential field lining up with
President Trump on foreign policy. Every declared presidential candidate in
the Senate, and three other senators who are considering running, voted on
Tuesday against a bill that, among other things, condemns Mr. Trump’s
decision to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan and Syria.” The bill
“passed the Senate, 77 to 23, and now goes to the House.” The Times adds
“that this is a rare issue on which, ideologically, Mr. Trump is more
aligned with Democrats than Republicans – which creates an awkward
political situation for the Democrats, who would not normally decline an
opportunity to rebuke Mr. Trump.”
Leading the News
Media Analyses: Trump Outlines Bipartisan Themes While Maintaining Border
Security Stance.

Coverage of President Trump’s 82-minute State of the Union address
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02d-98a&t=c>
says the President attempted to offer a bipartisan message while still
maintaining his stance on border security. Some analyses say Trump
effectively presented some proposals that could win bipartisan support, but
others say the tone of the speech shifted markedly between conciliation and
an uncompromising stance, and that the President did not suggest a way
forward on the ongoing impasse.

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02e-ba7&t=c>
(2/6, Pace, Lucey) reports Trump, “face to face with emboldened
Democrats...called on Washington to cast aside ‘revenge, resistance and
retribution’ and end ‘ridiculous partisan investigations’ in a State of the
Union address delivered at a vulnerable moment for his presidency.” The
President “appealed for bipartisanship but refused to yield on the
hard-line immigration policies that have infuriated Democrats and forced
the recent government shutdown.” He “renewed his call for a border wall”
and “accepted no blame for his role in cultivating the rancorous atmosphere
in the nation’s capital.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=02f-488&t=c>
(2/5, Holland, Mason) reports the President vowed “to build a border wall,
which is a source of a deep partisan divide,” and “called illegal
immigration ‘an urgent national crisis,’ but stopped short of declaring a
border emergency that would allow him to bypass Congress for wall funding.”

        USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=030-0f8&t=c>
(2/5, Fritze, Collins) reports, “Just days after the end of the longest
government shutdown in history, Trump managed to draw bipartisan applause
during a handful of moments in his roughly 80-minute speech by mentioning
the record number of women in Congress and paying tribute to an 81-year-old
Holocaust survivor. But much of the speech was devoted to the very issues
that led to the shutdown: Trump’s demand for billions of dollars for a
border wall.” USA Today says Trump was “politically wounded by the 35-day
government shutdown.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=031-59a&t=c>
(2/5, A1, Baker) reports that though Trump “delivered a message of
bipartisan unity,” he “signaled that he will continue to wage war for the
hard-line immigration policies that have polarized the capital and the
nation.” The Times says the speech “toggled between conciliation and
confrontation,” and “any hopes for a newfound spirit of
cooperation...seemed elusive as the president and Democrats spent the hours
before, during and after the address exchanging partisan political fire.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=032-253&t=c>
(2/5, Wagner) writes that Trump “called for more bipartisan cooperation in
his State of the Union address Tuesday night as he stood before a Congress
bitterly divided over his demand for border-wall funding.” The Wall Street
Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=033-5fe&t=c>
(2/6, Ballhaus, Nicholas) says the President did not adopt the rancorous
tone of his political rallies except when describing illegal immigration,
which he faulted for “savage” gangs entering the US. McClatchy
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=034-050&t=c>
(2/5, Ordoñez) reports that even with the change in tone, Trump “delivered
the same message on immigration and security that he promised on the
presidential campaign trail in 2016.”

        The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=035-204&t=c>
(2/5, Hook) writes, “It was an awkward match of man and mission.” Trump
“aspired to be a unifying political leader...but he was also a candidate
for reelection in 2020 whose campaign almost surely will set records for
division. ... Even as he exhorted members of Congress to come together on
an agenda of shared legislative interests, he provoked Democrats on
immigration, abortion and investigations of his administration.” Anita
Kumar of Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=036-9e5&t=c>
(2/5) writes, “No longer just a disrupter out to shatter the establishment,
Trump is now a president midway through his first term – and feeling the
need to show results as he readies for a bitter 2020 re-election fight.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=037-489&t=c>
(2/5, Fabian) says Trump “peppered his speech with appeals for bipartisan
unity. ... But his message, which also included numerous barbs at
Democrats, reflected the deep partisan divisions in Washington he has
helped fuel during his two years in the Oval Office.” CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=038-b1f&t=c>
(2/5, Liptak, Diamond) writes on its website, “The President’s address was
a tale of two speeches, with appeals to bipartisanship giving way to
divisive policy pitches and stern warnings aimed at discouraging Democratic
investigations into his administration.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=039-4d1&t=c>
(2/5, Restuccia, Caygle) says Trump “called for bipartisan cooperation – on
his terms.”

        Margaret Brennan said on CBS
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03a-880&t=c>
(2/5, 10:31 p.m. ET), “There were a few things in here that Democrats will
like that the President put in there. He has mentioned lowering the cost of
prescription drugs, extending protections to patients with pre-existing
conditions. You saw Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stand up and clap
when he said that. There are a few items of outreach there, including this
moonshot to try to come up with an AIDS vaccine. But a number of the other
things – and most centrally the wall – continue to be really divisive
issues, and don’t suggest that he’s going to be able to get legislative
accomplishments through any time soon.”

        Mary Bruce said on ABC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03b-719&t=c>
(2/5, 10:33 p.m. ET), “Really remarkable to watch [Pelosi’s] reaction
throughout that entire speech. At moments she seemed to be keeping track of
the President’s remarks there, looking over the papers in front of her. And
she made very clear where she disagreed with the President, when he issued
was a stark warning to Democrats that they should not be investigating him
if they want to maintain hope for compromise, Pelosi shook her head, you
heard groans from the Democrats there. That is something that Nancy Pelosi
is not going to rein in.”

        Chris Christie said on ABC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03c-380&t=c>
(2/5, 10:31 p.m. ET), “I think he gave Democrats there tonight a lot of
opportunity, if they wanted to – and they didn’t take much of it – to
applaud. Whether it was lower prescription drug prices, whether it was
coming together on issues like infrastructure. And he wanted to draw a
line, too, that he was going to make sure they understood that if
investigations got out of hand by the Congress, that it was going to slow
their ability to do the kind of bipartisan things he was recommending.”

        John Dickerson said on CBS’ Late Show[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03d-887&t=c>
(2/6, Colbert), “It won’t move the needle, but it solidifies his support.
And where was that weakening? We saw from the polls he was losing support
during the shutdown. … It shores up his troops and that’s good for one
speech for one night.”

        Major Garrett said on CBS
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03e-77b&t=c>
(2/5, 10:33 p.m. ET), “There is a deep personalization President Trump
brings to this office. So much of it is about him – his particular mood at
any given hour, his whims, his unpredictable way of dealing with the
presidency. Tonight he gave a speech about something much larger than him,
much larger than the office of the presidency himself. … And the speech
began with an enormous outreach to Democrats about common ground and common
purpose. The one truth, though, behind all of that: This speech has an
expiration date. If there is not a resolution of the issue that the
President put at the center of this speech – border security as he defines
it – and there’s another partial government shutdown on February 15, all of
that soaring rhetoric will be for naught.”

        Savannah Guthrie said on NBC’s Tonight Show[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=03f-f97&t=c>
(2/6, Fallon), “This is the first time the President has addressed Congress
and have it be a divided Congress. Everything was written all over the
room. You had Nancy Pelosi literally hovering over the President. Which is
basically what’s going to happen with the next couple years with the
Democrats hovering over this Administration.”

        Brit Hume said on Fox News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=040-ae7&t=c>
(2/5, 10:34 p.m. ET), “The President did a good job of laying out his
accomplishments. When you hear them lined up, as he did, and recited that
way, they are rather impressive, I think. The speech looked to me as if it
were designed to make it as difficult as possible, even for his opponents
not to applaud him. In some instances, they did.”

        Jonathan Karl said on ABC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=041-5a3&t=c>
(2/5, 10:56 p.m. ET), “It was notable, he talked about the need to have the
wall on the southern border, but he did not repeat his threat to shut down
the government to get that wall. He used the word ‘compromise’ when talking
about it. And he did not say anything about declaring a national emergency.
So, I thought that what was actually most remarkable about this speech is
the President coming into a chamber where he has been relentlessly
attacking Democrats, they have been relentlessly attacking him, he found a
way to get applause from both sides of the chamber.”

        Gayle King said on CBS’ Late Show[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=042-8d2&t=c>
(2/6, Colbert), “We kept hearing it’s going to be unity, unity, unity. Then
an hour before I heard it’s going to be very aggressive, very caustic, and
very acrimonious. I actually thought it was pretty tame. There were a
couple of moments where you went ‘huh,’ you cocked your head. I thought he
tried to extend the olive branch.”

        Chris Matthews said on MSNBC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=043-cdc&t=c>
(2/5, 10:37 p.m. ET), “It was so Trump. … All presidents that have been in
trouble – 38 percent – have to make a change. They all did. Certainly Bill
Clinton did, certainly Nixon did. They changed to get reelected. They saw
the problem in the midterm and fixed it. He didn’t change anything.”

        Andrea Mitchell said on NBC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=044-f22&t=c>
(2/5, 10:31 p.m. ET), “He says he wants to compromise. There are only 10
days left, but he was standing by the wall. He didn’t revert to what he
said earlier in a tweet today which is that people can be walls, so he
wasn’t offering any semantic cover story there.”

        Terry Moran said on ABC
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=045-028&t=c>
(2/5, 10:55 p.m. ET), “There were moments where you could almost see the
possibilities of deals. One, on infrastructure, and on trade. Perhaps the
biggest thing the President has done is change the consensus around
globalization. Democrats like that, too. And they might have a deal, except
they’re at loggerheads on everything else.”

        Norah O’Donnell said on CBS’ Late Show[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=046-ac5&t=c>
(2/6, Colbert), “He threatened Congress as well. He said if there is going
to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. That
was a threat. He called them ‘these ridiculous investigations.’”

        Rick Santorum said on CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=047-7dc&t=c>
(2/5, 10:54 p.m. ET), “This was probably the worst delivered speech I’ve
heard Donald Trump give. He ran over his lines. He didn’t deliver his punch
lines. He would deliver a line and go to the next issue, and I don’t think
he even realized he was moving on to the next issue. There wasn’t a
paragraph. Someone didn’t do a good job of breaking his speech so he knew
what to do.”

        Jake Tapper said on CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=048-6ff&t=c>
(2/5, 10:30 p.m. ET), “We heard different reports about what kind of speech
the President wanted to give tonight. We heard that he was going to give
one that was unifying, and also heard that he was going to give one that
was more combative. And I think ultimately, what they did was try to
deliver both. We had a speech that was for the most part unifying, for the
most part, a lot of the items that President Trump talked about were items
that you could have heard a Democratic president talk about in a speech
when it comes to infrastructure, when it comes to reducing drug prices,
criminal justice reform. But then there were moments of whiplash, where he
would talk about things that he knew would sit poorly with Democrats,
obviously, talking about an onslaught of undocumented immigrants coming in
caravans, was going to be something that people were very unhappy with.”

        Chris Wallace said on Fox News[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=049-aca&t=c>
(2/5, 10:38 p.m. ET), “I thought it was a very well-written speech. … I
think it was quite effective as an opening speech for the 2020 campaign. …
I don’t believe it’s an especially effective speech in terms of trying to
make legislative progress in 2019.”

        Juan Williams said on Fox News[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04a-16a&t=c>
(2/5, 10:39 p.m. ET), “I thought it was a humdrum speech. The big drama
was, I didn’t see any Democrats walking out or being rude to the President.
Lots of Republicans thought it was going to be a contrast between a
President who is preaching unity and Democrats who are acting up.”

        Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said on CBS[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04b-ae9&t=c>
(2/5, 10:51 p.m. ET), “The State of the Union address was disappointing on
many fronts. He spoke a lot of words of bipartisanship, but this is a guy
whose teleprompter is very different than his tweets, than his constant
rhetoric and his demeaning and degrading. … It’s a disappointing speech.
There wasn’t really a sincere offer to find ways to work together and we’ll
see if things changed.”

        Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said on NBC[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04c-fbc&t=c>
(2/5, 10:53 p.m. ET), “I don’t think that investigations into federal
misconduct have anything to do with our economy. The fact of the matter is,
3,000 Americans died in a dysfunctional and irresponsible response to
Hurricane Maria. We have had children die in DHS custody. We have had the
mass violation of human rights in separating children from their parents.
And I think that the desire to not investigate that is a partisan request.”

        Julián Castro said on ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04d-12c&t=c>
(2/6, Kimmel), “Speeches for Trump are all the same. He says pretty words
tonight, and tomorrow morning at 5 a.m. he’s going to tweet out a storm
about somebody being an idiot. … The problem with this President is that we
can’t trust his words anymore because his actions just don’t match those.
So he said a lot of stuff today. We’ll see how it goes.”

        Ann Coulter tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04e-a38&t=c>,
“This was the lamest, sappiest, most intentionally tear-jerking SOTU ever.
Please fire your speechwriter, @realDonaldTrump.” Peggy Noonan tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=04f-56b&t=c>,
“This has been a deeply adept speech in terms of policy. He cut to the
muscle on legal and illegal immigration, on abortion and infanticide, on
foreign wars. His vow on socialism will be remembered.” Frank Rich tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=050-555&t=c>,
“Who will be the first on camera to declare this doggerel ‘surprisingly
presidential’?”

        Susan Page of USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=051-900&t=c>
(2/5) writes, “You might say that Donald Trump’s presidency seems to be
heading toward a wall.” Though Trump “strode down the center aisle of the
House of Representatives chamber Tuesday night just as he did at last
year’s State of the Union...the political landscape arrayed before him was
considerably less friendly, and his future more in peril.” The President
“was loath to acknowledge the changes or adjust his approach to accommodate
them. But the empowered Democratic opposition that spent much of the
evening making a point of not clapping will complicate his ability to build
a barrier along the Mexico border or deliver on any other proposal he
proudly detailed.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=052-96b&t=c>
(2/5) says in an editorial, “For all of President Trump’s political
eccentricity, the man delivers a fairly conventional State of the Union
address.” His “soothing message...was wholly at odds with the acrid reality
of how he has governed. In that way, the entire spectacle – reflected in
the vibrating hostility between the two sides trapped together in the House
chamber – evinced the true state of the union: fractured, fractious,
painfully dysfunctional.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=053-353&t=c>
(2/5) editorializes, “Trump seemed as though he might never yield the
podium once he got his chance Tuesday night. In a speech that reflected
endurance if not eloquence, Mr. Trump offered a thin sheen of ‘unity’ over
large helpings of the same old polarizing demagoguery.” The President
“fairly saluted the one substantial bipartisan accomplishment of his
presidency, passage of criminal-justice reform. He also mentioned areas of
possible future bipartisan agreement. ... Yet even in these areas there
will be no progress without serious, nitty-gritty legislating and
compromise.”

        Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=054-2aa&t=c>
(2/5, Kuo, Sink) and the Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=055-c1a&t=c>
(2/5, Boyer, Howell) are among the other outlets covering the State of the
Union.

        *CBS Poll: 76% Of Those Who Watched Speech Approved Of It. *CBS News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=056-951&t=c>
(2/6, Salvanto) reports on its website that a poll by the network found
that 76 percent of those who watched the speech approved of it, while 24
percent disapproved. CBS writes, “As is often the case in State of the
Union addresses, the people who watched tonight’s speech leaned more
towards the president’s own party, at least compared to Americans overall.
In the latest CBS national poll released last month, 25 percent of
Americans identified themselves as Republicans. Among those who watched
Tuesday night’s address, that figure was 43 percent, and Republicans helped
bolster the overall approval of the address.”

        *CNN Poll: 59% Of Viewers Had “Very Positive” Reaction To Trump
Address. *Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=057-e0e&t=c>
(2/5, Caplan) reports, “A snap CNN poll shows 76% of speech viewers feel
positive about...Trump’s State of the Union address.” Breitbart quoted
CNN’s David Chalian as saying, “I just want to stress here for a State of
the Union address, the president’s partisans, his supporters tend to turn
out to watch the speech. This is true of a president of either party.
Tonight, we saw a heavily Republican-skewed audience turn out to watch the
president’s speech. But, look at this. A very positive reaction from those
who watched the speech tonight. 59 percent very positive, 17 percent
somewhat positive, 23 percent negative.”

        *Abrams: “Shutdown Was A Stunt” Engineered By Trump. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=058-a4e&t=c>
(2/6, Barrow) reports Stacey Abrams, delivering the Democratic response
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=059-6d4&t=c>,
“harnessed the frustration of Democrats...with a sharp rebuke” of Trump
“for abandoning working Americans and fomenting partisan and cultural
discord.” Abrams “used the high-wattage event to blister Trump on
everything from education and school safety to being out of touch with the
middle class. But she was especially stinging when it came to Trump’s role
in the 35-day partial government shutdown.” She said, “The shutdown was a
stunt engineered by the President of the United States, one that defied
every tenet of fairness and abandoned not just our people, but our values.”

        USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05a-d31&t=c>
(2/5, King) reports, “Abrams spoke for nearly 11 minutes from Atlanta in
front of a well-choreographed assembly of supporters who nodded their
approval at the mention of key issues. ... She ticked through a litany of
Democrats’ differences with the president, including gun control, the
Republican tax cuts, immigration, climate change and the border wall.”
The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05b-ab8&t=c>
(2/5, Williams, Sullivan) says Abrams “delivered a sharp rebuke of
President Trump” in a speech in which she “sought to sharpen the contrast
Democrats are seeking with Trump and the GOP ahead of the next election, as
well as introduce herself to a broad audience ahead of a possible Senate
run” in Georgia in 2020. The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05c-aab&t=c>
(2/5, Stolberg) reports, “Democrats hope an Abrams candidacy can mobilize
minority voters and possibly put Georgia into play in the presidential
contest.”

        CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05d-705&t=c>
(2/5, Foran) reports on its website, “Abrams, who has made voting rights a
signature issue, warned during her speech that voter suppression is ‘real’
and described protecting the right to vote as ‘the next battle for our
democracy.’ After outlining a host of Democratic priorities, she said,
‘None of these ambitions are possible without the bedrock guarantee of our
right to vote,’ adding, ‘Let’s be clear: voter suppression is real.’”

        In an “analysis,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05e-a6f&t=c>
(2/6, Bluestein, Hallerman) reports that Abrams “steered clear of the
gaffes or awkwardness that tripped up so many of her predecessors – like
Marco Rubio’s gulping of water, or Joe Kennedy’s too-glistening lips – and
kept the focus instead on her competing political vision. ... Democrats
were overjoyed.”

        The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=05f-940&t=c>
(2/5) reports Abrams is “the first black woman and the first Georgian to
give the response to the State of the Union speech.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=060-65f&t=c>
(2/5, Strauss) and The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=061-224&t=c>
(2/5, Wilson) are among the other outlets covering Abrams’ speech.

        *WPost Analysis: “The GOP Is Still Very Much The Party Of Trump.” *The
Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=062-02d&t=c>
(2/5, Costa) reports that despite “the Senate’s rebuke” of his “plan to
pull U.S. troops out of Syria and Afghanistan,” and “warnings from top GOP
senators that they might vote to block the president from using an
emergency order to divert federal funds to a border wall,” the State of the
Union, “with thunderous applause and gushing accolades from Republicans,
offered a reminder that, for all their policy differences and frustrations,
the GOP is still very much the party of Trump. Republicans erupted in
chants of ‘USA! USA!’ There were hearty ovations as Trump boasted of
repealing much of [the Affordable Care Act] and spoke darkly of ‘mass
illegal immigration’ and ‘our very dangerous southern border.’ ... It was
typical of how Republicans have responded to Trump throughout his
presidency: with reverence and roars despite the surplus of controversies,
scandals and fury.”

        *Many Female Representatives Wore White. *The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=063-0ef&t=c>
(2/5, Emmrich) reports, “Throughout the chamber of the House of
Representatives, there were pops of white, those bursts of color
contrasting sharply with the sea of dark suits that surrounded them. There
are now 102 women serving in the House of Representatives, a record number,
and it seemed that all were wearing white.” The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=064-0b8&t=c>
(2/5, Stolberg) reports many of them “dressed in the color in a nod to the
American suffragist movement – sitting together in the packed chamber, in a
celebration of their historic numbers in Congress and also as a protest to
Mr. Trump’s policies.” Midway through the speech, “they did something
completely unexpected: They stood up and cheered for something Mr. Trump
had said.” The President said, “No one has benefited more from our thriving
economy than women, who have filled 58 percent of the newly created jobs
last year.” The Times says the President followed by pointing out the
record number of women serving in the House, “a striking moment for a
president who has been routinely accused of misogyny, who is implicated in
a scheme to pay hush money to a pornographic film actress and a Playboy
model and who was caught on tape boasting about grabbing women’s genitals.”

        *Perry Was “Designated Survivor.” *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=065-eca&t=c>
(2/5, Morin) reports Energy Secretary Perry “was selected as the
‘designated survivor’ for Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.” He
watched the speech from an undisclosed location in case of an attack on the
Capitol.
Foreign Policy
Trump Announces Second Summit With Kim To Take Place In Vietnam Later This
Month.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=066-564&t=c>
(2/5, Nakamura) reports that in his State of the Union address on Tuesday,
President Trump “announced a second nuclear summit with North Korean leader
Kim Jong Un in Vietnam on Feb. 27-28 as the White House seeks to jump-start
moribund negotiations.” Said Trump, “As part of a bold new diplomacy, we
continue our historic push for peace on the Korean Peninsula.” He added,
“If I had not been elected President of the United States, we would right
now, in my opinion, be in a major war with North Korea. Much work remains
to be done, but my relationship with Kim Jong-un is a good one.” According
to analysts, “the choice of Vietnam, with its business-oriented,
authoritarian government and successful mix of trade and tourism, could
highlight a path forward for North Korea and encourage Kim to choose a
bright economic future over nuclear weapons.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=067-0d0&t=c>
(2/6, Zengerle) says that “Trump did not say which Vietnamese city would
host the two leaders, but both the capital, Hanoi, and Da Nang have been
considered possibilities.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=068-ad4&t=c>
(2/5, Riechmann) says Vietnam is “keen to project itself on the world
stage.”

        While USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=069-a75&t=c>
(2/5, Fritze, Shesgreen) says Trump’s announcement is “the latest sign of
thawing tensions between two leaders who had once publicly traded insults
and threats of military confrontation,” some analysts “have questioned the
decision to hold a second summit, arguing Trump should demand concrete
steps toward denuclearization from North Korea – the original US goal –
before agreeing to another meeting.” Since Trump’s first “historic meeting
in Singapore” almost a year ago, the President “has claimed the country is
no longer a nuclear threat, but independent analysts have sharply
questioned that assessment.” Some members of the Administration also
“acknowledge North Korea is still developing a nuclear weapons program and
US sanctions on the country remain in place.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06a-efd&t=c>
(2/5, Baker) says that while “Trump hopes the meeting will jump-start a
diplomatic effort that has stalled since their first encounter,” the
upcoming summit “is fraught for Mr. Trump, who has made a possible
agreement with North Korea one of the signature goals of his foreign
policy.” While “North Korea since then has refrained from overtly
provocative actions like testing nuclear warheads or ballistic missiles, it
has yet to agree to actually give up any piece of its atomic arsenal.” Many
experts also suspect that “North Korea is simply stringing Mr. Trump along,
taking advantage of his inexperience and his desire for a breakthrough.”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06b-584&t=c>
(2/5, Wolfgang) reports that Trump’s “announcement of a second summit comes
as top US and North Korean officials negotiate behind the scenes toward a
deal.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06c-09a&t=c>
(2/5, Denyer) reports US special envoy Stephen Biegun will arrive in
Pyongyang on Wednesday for talks with his North Korean counterpart, Kim
Hyok Chol, “where he will try to advance a plan to reinvigorate
denuclearization talks” ahead of Trump’s summit. Biegun “was initially
expected to meet Kim Hyok Chol in the Korean border village of Panmunjom
for a second time on Tuesday,” but according to experts, “the fact that he
has been invited to Pyongyang suggests the North Koreans are taking him
more seriously.”

        The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06d-efa&t=c>
(2/5, Wilkinson) says talks between the US and North Korea “over the last
eight months made little apparent headway beyond setting up a second
summit.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06e-4cc&t=c>
(2/5, Bender) reports Biegun last week suggested that the US is no longer
insisting that North Korea submit a detailed accounting of its missile and
nuclear programs at the onset of the denuclearization process, but may do
so later in the negotiations.

        Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=06f-9f3&t=c>,
“Chairman Kim Jong-Un and Trump will continue their love affair that grew
through letters and now will have its second act. #LoveAffair”

        Max Boot of the Washington Post tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=070-a97&t=c>,
“The odds of war with North Korea went up because of Trump’s bellicose
rhetoric in 2017. He’s taking credit for flipping from threatening ‘rocket
man’ to flattering him.” NBC’s Richard Engel tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=071-314&t=c>,
“This may be most bizarre claim of SOTU so far: Trump says there would be
war with North Korea if he were not president. It was his game of chicken
with ‘little rocket man’ that nearly started a war and had people in Seoul
dusting out their bomb shelters.” Chris Brennan of the Philadelphia
Inquirer tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=072-1c4&t=c>,
“Even the Republicans are all ‘Say what now?’ when Trump claims in the
#SOTU that the U.S. would be in a major war with North Korea right now if
not for his election.”

        *UN Experts: North Korea Defying Sanctions, Keeping Nuclear
Programs Intact. *In a report to the UN Security Council obtained Tuesday
by the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=073-a7f&t=c>
(2/5, Lederer), UN experts said North Korean “nuclear and missile programs
‘remain intact’ and its leaders are dispersing missile assembly and testing
facilities to prevent ‘decapitation’ strikes.” The report also “says the
country continues to defy UN sanctions, including through ‘a massive
increase in illegal ship-to-ship transfers of petroleum products and
coal,’” and “continues to violate an arms embargo, a ban on luxury goods
and financial sanctions.” The experts added that they are “continuing to
investigate companies, entities and individuals in Asia who are on the UN
sanctions blacklist and ‘clandestinely procured centrifuges for the DPRK’s
nuclear program’ – and who attempted to sell ‘a wide range of military
equipment to armed groups and governments in the Middle East and Africa.’”
Pompeo, Afghanistan’s Ghani Discuss Taliban Peace Talks.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=074-f1a&t=c>
(2/6, Faiez) reports Secretary Pompeo spoke with Afghan President Ashraf
Ghani “late Tuesday in an apparent bid to reassert his authority as
Washington accelerates its negotiations with the Taliban and as separate
talks unfold in Moscow without the government’s involvement.” State
Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Palladino “said Pompeo reaffirmed the
U.S. commitment to achieving a lasting peace.” Pompeo also “emphasized the
importance of an intra-Afghan dialogue and the role of a cease-fire in
ending the violence and making it possible for the Afghan government, other
Afghan leaders and the Taliban to negotiate a political settlement,
Palladino said.” On Twitter
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=075-428&t=c>,
Ghani said that Pompeo “stressed that our military partnership is
unwavering and will remain until a lasting and inclusive peace is
achieved.” To the AP, “Ghani’s call to Pompeo seemed an attempt to
re-assert his government’s role in negotiations he has sharply criticized
at times as one-sided.”

        *Taliban, Afghan Officials Convene In Moscow For Peace Talks.
*The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=076-cec&t=c>
(2/5, Ferris-Rotman) reports that Taliban representatives and “key Afghan
power brokers,” including former President Hamid Karzai, “discussed their
vision for the future of Afghanistan on Tuesday, meeting in Moscow for
talks aimed at ending the war.” The Post says the gathering “marked another
triumph” for Moscow, which “seeks to reassert its influence in the region
and probably would want a role in shaping any possible peace plan.”
According to the Post, the talks also “shifted the fragile peace process
from the United States, whose special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad declared a
potential breakthrough with the Taliban just days ago.” The talks “included
no representatives of President Ashraf Ghani’s government, inviting fierce
criticism from the US-backed Afghan leader.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=077-ecb&t=c>
(2/5, Shalizi) reports Ghani on Tuesday said that “no peace deal between
the Taliban and the United States could be finalised without involving his
government as ‘the decision-maker.’” Reuters says the Afghan government
“has so far been shut out of the evolving peace talks between Taliban
negotiators and US envoys.” Reuters adds, “With both sides hailing progress
in talks in Qatar last month...Khalilzad is due to meet Taliban
representatives there again on Feb. 25.”

        *US General Says Any Resolution To Afghan Conflict “Will Be
Political.” *In continuing coverage of its interview with Gen. Scott
Miller, the head of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, ABC World News
Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=078-c50&t=c>
(2/5, story 6, 0:50, Muir) reported Miller said “any end-game” in
Afghanistan “will be political.” Miller also said “they will keep up the
pressure on the Taliban to keep the Taliban at the table.”
Votel Supports Trump’s Decision To Withdraw Troops From Syria.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=079-ac3&t=c>
(2/5) reports CENTCOM Commander Gen. Joseph Votel “told a Senate hearing on
Tuesday that he was not consulted ahead of President Donald Trump’s
surprise decision in December to pull US troops out of Syria.” But Bloomberg
News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07a-28e&t=c>
(2/5, Carey, Capaccio) reports Votel said he backs the President’s
decision. Votel did, however, warn that ISIS “may try to reassert influence
after losing its hold on territory in the war-ravaged country.” Bloomberg
News says that while Votel “effectively endorsed Trump’s decision, he
emphasized a methodical approach that the president has increasingly
embraced.” Said Votel, “We are adjusting our military posture in Syria,
planning and executing a deliberate, safe, and professional withdrawal of
personnel and equipment while preserving sufficient power in the region to
ensure that we can continue to destroy remnants of ISIS fighters and ensure
it does not return.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07b-84e&t=c>
(2/5, Lee) reports Votel cautioned that “it is important to understand that
even though this territory has been reclaimed, the fight against ISIS and
violent extremists is not over and our mission has not changed.” He
continued, “The coalition’s hard-won battlefield gains can only be secured
by maintaining a vigilant offensive against the now largely dispersed and
disaggregated ISIS that retains leaders, fighters, facilitators, resources
and the profane ideology that fuels their efforts.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07c-2f6&t=c>
(2/5, Cooper) reports Votel’s comments came “during a testy hearing in
which a succession of senators from both parties questioned Mr. Trump’s
decision to withdraw troops from Syria.” To the Times, “it was yet another
instance of top national security leaders diverging from the president on
the withdrawal.”

        Charlie D’Agata reported from Syria for the CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07d-00d&t=c>
(2/5, story 4, 1:25, Glor) that “nobody here is declaring victory just yet,
but US forces and their allies have now cornered ISIS into an area of just
a few square miles.” However, “There is still thought to be about 2,000
ISIS fighters remaining here in eastern Syria,” and a new Department of
Defense report warns “that the terror group is likely to resurge here
within 6-12 months without sustained pressure.”

        *Administration To Host Talks With Anti-ISIS Coalition. *The Washington
Free Beacon
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07e-d2f&t=c>
(2/5, Kredo) reports that “an international who’s who of global leaders is
scheduled to meet in Washington, DC, on Wednesday to discuss with the Trump
administration next steps to deal a death blow” to ISIS and “thwart the
Iranian regime’s military intervention across the Middle East, according to
senior State Department officials.” Leaders from “75 nations and four
international organizations” will gather at the State Department for
meetings with Secretary of State Pompeo and “other high-level Trump
administration officials as the global coalition plans its next moves in
the ongoing fight against ISIS.”
Bloomberg News Analysis: Senate Undermines Trump’s Position On Syria With
77-23 Vote.

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=07f-ff9&t=c>
(2/5, Flatley) reports that in a 77-23
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=080-05a&t=c>
vote Tuesday, the Senate backed legislation that would “require” President
Trump “to impose new sanctions on Syria.” Bloomberg News says it was “a
rebuke delivered just hours before the president is expected to defend his
policies during his State of the Union address” that was “prompted by
Senate Republicans’ strong disapproval of Trump’s announcement in December
that he was declaring victory against Islamic State in Syria and
withdrawing US forces from the country.” According to Bloomberg News, the
legislation “directs the administration to impose sanctions on entities
doing business with the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,”
and also includes an amendment sponsored by Senate Majority Leader
McConnell “that urges Trump not to exit military conflicts in Syria and
Afghanistan.”

        Under the headline “Concerns Pile Up In Senate Over Trump’s Troop
Withdrawal,” CQ Roll Call
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=081-828&t=c>
(2/5, Donnelly) reports that senators from both parties “worried aloud at a
hearing Tuesday that looming US troop withdrawals from Syria and
Afghanistan could risk squandering years of costly effort.” The senators’
“expressions of concern,” CQ notes, “came a day after the Senate voted
70-26 to approve a resolution that would oppose a ‘precipitous’ withdrawal
from Syria or Afghanistan.”
Russia Says It Will Deploy New Mid-Range Missiles If US Does The Same.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=082-489&t=c>
(2/5, Osborn) reports Russia announced Tuesday that it will “race to
develop two new land-based missile launch systems before 2021 to respond to
Washington’s planned exit from a landmark nuclear arms control pact.”
Reuters notes that over the weekend, President Vladimir Putin said Russia
“had suspended the Cold War-era Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty
(INF), which bans both nations from stationing short- and
intermediate-range land-based missiles in Europe.” Putin said the
Administration “made clear it planned to start research, development and
design work on new missile systems and Moscow would do the same,” according
to Reuters. Putin added that Russia’s military would “start work on
creating land-based launch systems for an existing ship-launched cruise
missile, the Kalibr, and for longer-range hypersonic missiles which travel
at least five times the speed of sound.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=083-d97&t=c>
(2/5, Isachenkov) reports Putin has “emphasized that such new weapons won’t
be deployed unless the US does so.” Said Putin, “Russia will not station
intermediate-range weapons in Europe or other regions until similar US
weapons appear in those regions.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=084-0fe&t=c>
(2/5, Simmons) reports analysts believe Russia’s plan likely will advance
the stockpiling of weapons. Meanwhile, in an email to the Journal, Defense
Department spokesman Johnny Michael defended the US withdrawal, saying that
Russia’s violations of the treaty “have consequences.”

        *State Department Says Embassy Officials Visited American Detained
In Russia. *A State Department spokesperson told the Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=085-949&t=c>
(2/5, Blake) that US Embassy representatives on Tuesday visited Paul
Whelan, a former US Marine imprisoned at the Lefortovo Detention Facility
in Moscow on espionage charges. The spokesperson reiterated, “We are
strongly concerned about the delay in consular access both to Mr. Whelan
and, more broadly, to US citizens in Russia and about Russia’s lack of
adherence to the Bilateral Consular Agreement between our two countries,”
which “includes allowing Mr. Whelan to provide a Privacy Act Waiver” that
allows information to be released. The spokesperson continued, “We continue
to urge Russia to follow international law and provide for swift, fair, and
transparent judicial processes for all detained US citizens in Russia.” US
Embassy officials were slated to visit Whelan “on Jan. 17, but that meeting
was abruptly canceled by Russian officials hours before it was scheduled to
occur, the State Department spokesperson told The Washington Times on
Tuesday.”
Report: Mnuchin, Lighthizer To Travel To China For Trade Talks.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=086-4b3&t=c>
(2/5, Prentice, Hirtzer, Chiacu, Lawder) reports two people familiar with
the plans said that senior US and Chinese officials will meet for “another
round of trade talks in Beijing next week to push for a deal to protect
American intellectual property and avert a March 2 increase in U.S. tariffs
on Chinese goods.” Dow Jones, citing an unidentified senior Administration
official, said that USTR Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin will
lead the talks.

        *China Disputes USTR Report On WTO Compliance. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=087-68a&t=c>
(2/6, Hua) reports China’s commerce ministry said that a US Trade
Representative’s office report on China’s World Trade Organization (WTO)
compliance is, in Reuters’ words, “based on U.S. domestic law rather than
WTO agreements and multilateral rules” and that many of the accusations in
the report “exceeded its commitments to the WTO, lacking legal and factual
basis.” The US Trade Representative’s office “used its annual report to
Congress on China’s WTO compliance in part to justify its actions in a
six-month trade war with Beijing aimed at forcing changes in China’s
economic model.”

        *AP Analysis: Soybeans Upstaging More Important Issues In Trade
Talks. *In an analysis, the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=088-39b&t=c>
(2/5, Wiseman) reports that “somehow” soybeans “are upstaging weightier,
thornier issues as the Trump administration tackles trade disputes,”
despite them making up “less than 1 percent of all the goods and services
the United States sells the rest of the world.” Soybeans’ “outsize
importance...was apparent” in recent US-China trade talks when, “to the
president’s delight,” China agreed, “in an unexpected deal that even
surprised the top U.S. trade negotiator,” to buy five million metric tons
of American soybeans over an unspecified period. However, “critics worry
that focusing on getting foreigners to buy soybeans and other U.S. goods is
a distraction from pushing them to make deeper economic reforms that would
offer longer-lasting benefits to the United States” and determine “whether
Beijing or Washington presides over the economy of the future.”
Additionally, it implies that China “might be able to avoid substantive
concessions” by agreeing to purchase more American goods.
Venezuelan Opposition Seeks To Deliver Humanitarian Aid Rejected By Maduro.

NBC Nightly News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=089-89b&t=c>
(2/5, story 10, 1:30, Holt) said that in Venezuela, “the chaos consuming
the government has only worsened what was already a health care system in
tatters, threatening young lives at children’s hospitals.” NBC’s Kerry
Sanders reported, “Many critics here blame these conditions on the
government of President Nicolas Maduro,” who on Tuesday evening said that
“he will refuse any aid shipments from President Trump, which are now
scheduled to arrive as early as tomorrow.”

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08a-87e&t=c>
(2/5, Kurmanaev, Herrero, Londoño) reports that the opposition, meanwhile,
said “it is preparing to deliver tens of millions of dollars in food and
medicine” donated by the US, Colombia, and Venezuelans abroad “to ease
devastating shortages and undermine the authoritarian rule of Nicolás
Maduro.” While the humanitarian aid “could provide the opposition with a
tangible way of weakening Mr. Maduro, who has long relied on food handouts
to keep his political base loyal during the country’s long economic
collapse,” some “major relief organizations are reluctant to cooperate,
fearing the plan could turn humanitarian aid into a political weapon.” To
the Times, bringing the aid “into Venezuela, past Mr. Maduro’s security
forces and into the right hands will be a critical test of the opposition’s
ability to rally the nation and establish an interim government.”

        *Pope Francis Says He Is Willing To Mediate Talks Between Maduro
And Opposition. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08b-834&t=c>
(2/5, Horowitz) reports that Pope Francis has “expressed a potential
willingness...to mediate a peaceful resolution to the tense political
conflict in Venezuela if asked by both President Nicolás Maduro and the
opposition leader who is increasingly recognized as the country’s
legitimate leader.” According to the Times, Francis “acknowledged that Mr.
Maduro, whose government the United States and many other European
countries no longer recognize, had sent him a letter, which he said he has
yet to read, asking for a new dialogue.”

        *Opposition Lawmaker Says Fund Transfer Blocked. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08c-d1b&t=c>
(2/5, Sequera, Berwick) reports that “Portugal-based Novo Banco halted the
$1.2 billion transfer of Venezuelan government financial assets to
Uruguayan banks, [Venezuelan opposition] legislator Carlos Paparoni said
during a congressional session.” The move came a day after opposition
leader Juan Guaidó said Venezuelan authorities were attempting to drain
state coffers and move funds ahead of a possible change of government.

        *NYTimes: Venezuela Crisis Has Transformed Into Global Power
Struggle. *A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08d-3cc&t=c>
(2/5) editorial says that the “tense standoff in Venezuela between Nicolás
Maduro and Juan Guaidó has morphed into” a “dangerous global power
struggle,” in part because of the Administration’s “all-in support for
regime change.” That, the Times says, is “the last thing Venezuelans need.”
The Times says while there is “no question that President Maduro must go,
the sooner the better,” the democratic governments that have resoundingly
expressed support for Guaidó “are not entirely alliances of the
like-minded,” and “disparate interests are at play.” There also is “a
suspicion or fear of President Trump’s motives and potential means.” The
prospect that this “proxy war that could spill over Venezuela’s borders
horrifies most Latin American leaders, as well as Canada and the
Europeans.” The Times urges democratic governments to instead grant “the
long-suffering Venezuelans a chance to freely choose their government and
start the arduous task of rebuilding their economy, not to score a victory
in an ideological struggle.”
Domestic Policy
Conferees “Still Far Apart” On Border Security Compromise.

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08e-d73&t=c>
(2/5, Caygle, Everett) reported before the President’s State of the Union
speech that “bipartisan talks to avert another government shutdown are
going great, except on the one thing that matters: the border wall. With an
unofficial deadline to reach a border security compromise by week’s end,
lawmakers on the conference committee say they’re still far apart on any
agreement” that could satisfy both President Trump and congressional
Democrats. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) said, “We’re back and forth.
Nobody’s shut down their negotiating.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=08f-b52&t=c>
(2/5, Costa) reports GOP members of the conference committee “indicated
Tuesday they were prepared to agree to less money for the wall than Trump
wants,” but said they “still do not know what the president will be able to
support in the end.” Senate Majority Leader McConnell said, “Obviously,
it’d be great if the President decided to sign the bill. I think we don’t
yet know what his view is on this, but I think the conferees ought to reach
an agreement and then we’ll hope that the President finds it worth
signing.”

        *McConnell Says Trump Could “Prevail” In Congressional Fight Over
Emergency Declaration. *The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=090-207&t=c>
(2/5, Carney) reports McConnell told Fox News that Trump “could ‘prevail’
in the fight with Congress over an emergency declaration to build the
U.S.-Mexico border wall by vetoing a potential resolution.” McConnell
“declined to say how he would vote on a potential resolution of
disapproval, but predicted that it ‘wouldn’t be without controversy’ if the
president declares a national emergency.”

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=091-33d&t=c>
(2/5, Peterson, Andrews) reports many Republicans are concerned about the
precedent of an emergency declaration, expressing fears that future
Democratic presidents could use the tactic to circumvent Congress. Senate
Majority Whip Thune said senators are concerned about “the precedent it
creates for a future Democrat president to find lots of reasons to declare
an emergency, the questions about separation of power and checks and
balances and everything else.”

        *GOP Urges Lawmakers To Play Up Crimes Committed By Immigrants. *The
Intercept
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=092-020&t=c>
(2/5, Fang) reports that House Republican lawmakers are “being encouraged
by their party’s leadership to play up gruesome murders, rapes, and other
crimes committed by undocumented immigrants in the United States.” In a
newsletter sent Friday, House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Liz Cheney
(R-WY) “provided the caucus and staff with a messaging update that compiled
immigrant crimes by date and congressional district.” The newsletter, which
was obtained by The Intercept, offered “a messaging opportunity to leverage
the government shutdown against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,” saying,
“Speaker Pelosi made one thing clear during the government shutdown: she
doesn’t care about the tragic consequences of illegal immigration on
American families.”

        *FAIR Study Finds High Rates Of Incarceration For Undocumented
Immigrants. *The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=093-797&t=c>
(2/5, Dinan) reports that “nearly 3 percent of illegal immigrants in
Arizona end up in state prison or jail during the course of a year – four
times the rate of US citizens and legal residents, according to a study
that uses federal reimbursements for prisons and jails to try to calculate
one of the most important yet elusive statistics in the immigration
debate.” The study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform “based
its calculations on federal government reimbursements to states and
localities under the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which pays
some of the costs for holding illegal immigrants in prisons and jails.”

        AP Analysis: Immigrant Crime Hotline Sparks Controversy. The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=094-541&t=c>
(2/5, Balsamo, Long) reports President Trump “picked the grandest stage to
unveil one of his first immigration initiatives: Appearing before a joint
session of Congress a month after taking office, Trump announced the
creation of a hotline to help victims of crimes committed by immigrants.”
But the AP says that “almost immediately, the Victims of Immigration Crime
Engagement hotline was immersed in controversy and confusion.” Trump’s
critics saw the hotline, known as VOICE, “as a cynical stunt that played to
his political base, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars and perpetuating
the false notion that immigrants are more likely to commit crimes than US
citizens.” Others “wrongly saw it as a hotline for reporting neighbors,
colleagues or strangers they suspect are in the United States illegally.”
The AP says that “two years later, the hotline continues on.”

        *California AG Warns Of Legal Action Over Emergency Declaration. *The
Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=095-fef&t=c>
(2/5, Ulloa) reports California Attorney General Xavier Becerra “warned in
a national televised address Tuesday that he is prepared to take President
Trump to court if he declares a national emergency” to fund a border wall.

        *DHS: Caravan Of About 2,000 Migrants Has Arrived At Border.
*The Washington
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=096-a25&t=c>
(2/5, Dinan) reports DHS said “a caravan with about 2,000 migrants has
arrived on the U.S.-Mexico border south of Texas.” DHS Secretary Nielsen
“blamed Congress for the caravan, saying lawmakers must change the
incentives that draw illegal immigrants toward the U.S. with assurances of
lenient treatment if they can get on American soil.” Nielsen said, “This
crisis won’t be solved until we have comprehensive border security. Until
then, DHS will do everything in its power – with the assistance of federal
and state partners – to hold smugglers and traffickers accountable, enforce
our laws and keep American communities safe.”

        *Trump Supporters Visit Border To Discuss Private Wall Project. *
Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=097-237&t=c>
(2/5, Schreckinger) reports that a group of some of President Trump’s “most
notorious and outspoken supporters” gathered last week in the Mexican
border town of McAllen, Texas. In what Politico says “amounted to a kind of
#MAGA field trip, former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, former Kansas
secretary of state Kris Kobach, former Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, baseball
legend Curt Schilling, and former Sheriff David Clarke convened to discuss
a new plan for building a wall along the southern US border.” Blackwater
founder Erik Prince “phoned in from South Africa.” Politico reports that
with Congress “refusing to pony up the $5.7 billion” the President has
demanded for the project, “his allies now are plotting to kick things off
with private money and private land.”

        *New Mexico Governor Withdraws Most National Guard Troops From
Border. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=098-537&t=c>
(2/5, Moore) reports Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM), who took office
last month, has ordered the New Mexico National Guard “to withdraw most of
its troops assigned to the southern border Tuesday night, rejecting the
contention that ‘an overwhelming national security crisis’ exists.” She
“made the announcement shortly before President Trump’s State of the Union
address, which was expected to focus heavily on border security.”

        Rep. Deb Haaland (D-NM) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=099-161&t=c>,
“Militarizing the border was never the answer. Thank you, @GovMLG.”
Trump Seeks To Eliminate AIDS In The US Within A Decade.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09a-49d&t=c>
(2/5, Hellmann) reports that in his State of the Union address, President
Trump pledged that his “budget will ask Democrats and Republicans to make
the needed commitment to eliminate the HIV epidemic in the United States
within 10 years,” promising, “Together, we will defeat AIDS in America.”
However, Trump’s Administration has “asked for cuts to domestic and global
HIV/AIDs programs in previous budgets.” The Administration also fired
members of the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS in late 2017, with
new co-chairs not sworn in until last month and the rest of the council
remains vacant. Additionally, Trump has not appointed a director of the
Office of National AIDS Policy.

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09b-5f4&t=c>
(2/5, Pear) reports Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr.
Robert R. Redfield said, “It’s not an attempt to go for the whole country.”
He added, “It’s an attempt to go after 48 counties out of over 3,000” in
the United States. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Director Anthony S. Fauci said the strategy will use antiretroviral drugs
to reduce the amount of HIV in those infected to reduce transmission, as
well as increase the use of medications that help prevent HIV infections.
HHS Secretary Azar said the goal is to reduce new infections by
three-quarters in five years and “end the H.I.V. epidemic in America” by
2030. He added, “We are committed to ensuring that the next generation does
not face an H.I.V. epidemic.” The Times casts the effort as being planned
“with the precision of a military campaign,” with community health workers
to increase “the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infections.”

        Rep. Anthony Brown (D-MD) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09c-c3b&t=c>,
“Yes we can end the scourge of HIV, but lets not forget that less than 1
year ago President Trump proposed slashing $100 million from programs that
work toward curing HIV/AIDS and helping those communities impacted by the
disease.” Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09d-d15&t=c>,
“Democrats and Republicans can stand together to fight HIV/AIDS, which
disproportionally affects the LGBTQ community and minority communities.
President’s promises are welcome, but his policies have not supported
them.”

        Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09e-dd9&t=c>,
“President Trump’s record on HIV has been abysmal. If he’s serious about
the epidemic, he can start rebuilding trust by making serious investments
in lifesaving HIV/AIDS programs like Ryan White and ending the attacks on
LGBTQ Americans.” Rep. Marc Pocan (D-WI) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=09f-ac7&t=c>,
“You know how you don’t solve the #HIV crisis? By stealing funds from the
Ryan White HIV/AIDS program for child prisons on the border.” Rep. Eric
Swalwell (D-CA) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a0-d44&t=c>,
“I support bringing down prescription drug prices. I support going all-in
to put an end to AIDS, cancer, and other diseases. We can work together on
this.”

        Annie Karni of the New York Times tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a1-f03&t=c>
a link to a December 2017 Times story in which, she writes, “POTUS told his
top advisers in an Oval Office meeting that all Haitians have AIDS.”
Trump Calls On Congress To Ban Late-Term Abortions.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a2-529&t=c>
(2/5, Hellmann) reports that in his State of the Union address President
Trump called for “the Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the
late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in the mother’s womb.” The
policy “won’t pass a divided Congress,” and Senate Republicans were unable
“to force a vote Monday on a bill Trump was referencing,” as Sen. Patty
Murray (D-WA) “objected, arguing that the measure was duplicative of
current law.”

        *Mississippi Bills Would Ban Abortion After Fetal Heartbeat. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a3-870&t=c>
(2/6, Pettus) reports bills passed Mississippi legislative committees that
“would ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, as early as six
weeks into a pregnancy,” which would be “one of the strictest abortion laws
in the country.” Gov. Phil Bryant (R-MS) said he would sign either bill.
“An Iowa judge struck down a similar law” last month, and “supporters and
opponents anticipate a court fight” should the bills become law.
Grassley Anticipates Mueller Report “Within A Month.”

Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a4-a71&t=c>
(2/5, Key) reports Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) said on Hugh Hewitt’s radio
show Tuesday that he believes Special Counsel Robert Mueller “will release
the report on his probe into potential collusion between the Trump campaign
and Russia during the 2016 presidential election ‘within a month.’”
Grassley also said he believes the report should be released to the public.
Grassley said, “I don’t care what the report says. We paid $25 million,
maybe $35 million to do it, and the public ought to know what their $25 or
$35 million bought.”

        CNN’s Manu Raju tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a5-734&t=c>,
“Grassley walks back his remarks that Mueller report will be out within a
month. ‘It’s just based upon all the rumors you hear, which probably isn’t
a very good basis for me saying what I said, but ... it’s been reported
every month it was going to come out, and I want it out.’”

        *BuzzFeed: Documents Contradict Trump’s Claims About Moscow Project
Talks. *Under the headline “Secret Files Show How Trump Moscow Talks
Unfolded While Trump Heaped Praise On Putin,” BuzzFeed News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a6-8f5&t=c>
(2/5) published “a cache of internal Trump Organization documents that lay
bare the secret negotiations” over a proposed Trump building project in
Moscow. According to BuzzFeed, “As a candidate, Donald Trump had a lot of
praise for Vladimir Putin – and no business, he kept insisting, in Russia,”
but “these documents tell a different story.” BuzzFeed says the “secret
negotiations...continued long after” Trump’s former attorney, Michael
Cohen, “claimed the deal had been abandoned.” The documents “reveal that –
despite Trump’s claim that the development was never more than a passing
notion – the effort to get the tower built was long-running,
detail-oriented, and directly entwined with the ups and downs of his
campaign.”

        *Sanders: Inaugural Committee Subpoena Part Of “Hysteria” Over
Trump Presidency. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a7-14e&t=c>
(2/5, Mustian, Day) reports White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said
Tuesday that the federal subpoena “seeking documents from Donald Trump’s
inaugural committee is part of ‘a hysteria’ over the fact that he’s
president.” Referring to other investigations surrounding the President,
Sanders said, “I think the common thread is a hysteria over the fact that
this President became president. The common thread is that there is so much
hatred out there that they will look for anything to try to create and tie
problems to this President.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a8-e60&t=c>
(2/5, Muñoz) reports Sanders also told CNN, “What I do know at this point
is that this has nothing to do with the White House.” The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0a9-b39&t=c>
(2/5, Fabian) briefly reports on Sanders’ comments.

        ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0aa-6e3&t=c>
(2/5, story 5, 2:20, Muir) reported that the “wide-ranging subpoena” seeks
“documents and records on how the record amount of money was raised, where
it came from, [and] how it was spent. Investigators want to know who gave
that money, and what, if anything, was expected in return.” The CBS Evening
News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0ab-67f&t=c>
(2/5, story 5, 0:25, Glor) and NBC Nightly News[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0ac-ba8&t=c>
(2/5, story 2, 0:10, Holt) had brief reports.

        The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0ad-4b8&t=c>
(2/5, Vogel, Kirkpatrick, Haberman) reports that a $900,000 donation from
Avenue Ventures, a firm led by venture capitalist Imaad Zuberi, to the
committee is among those under scrutiny. Zuberi backed both President Obama
and Hillary Clinton, but after Trump’s unexpected victory, the Times says
he told friends “he needed to act quickly to balance out his political
connections if he hoped to maintain access.”

        *Prosecutors Have Been Examining Flow Of Foreign Funds To
Manafort-Recruited Firms. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0ae-1af&t=c>
(2/5, Vogel) reports federal prosecutors have recently “been interviewing
witnesses about the flow of foreign money to three powerful law and
lobbying firms that Paul Manafort recruited seven years ago to help improve
the image” of Viktor Yanukovych, the then-president of Ukraine who was
aligned with Russia. The Times reports that the “previously unreported
interviews about the flow of the money are among the latest developments in
the investigation of key figures who worked at the three firms.”
GAO: Trump’s 2017 Trips To Mar-A-Lago Cost Taxpayers “Nearly $1 Million A
Day.”

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0af-884&t=c>
(2/5) reports that the GAO said that four of President Trump’s “trips to
his Florida home in 2017 cost taxpayers about $13.6 million, amounting to
nearly $1 million a day,” including $60,000 “paid directly to Trump’s
Mar-a-Lago club.” According to Bloomberg News, “The GAO noted in its report
that it didn’t include some expenses that are classified nor did it include
salaries or benefits, including overtime, for Secret Service and Defense
Department personnel or other government employees traveling with the
president or involved with preparations for the trips.”

        The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b0-d4e&t=c>
(2/5, Dinan) reports the GAO examined four of the President’s 19 trips to
Mar-a-Lago in his first two years in office. The Times says “the fact that
the president’s property earned money from those stays could be a problem,”
as opponents argue that federal payments to his property could violate “the
Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution, one of which prevents him from
earning income from the government beyond his salary.”
Nadler Says He Is Prepared To Subpoena Whitaker.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b1-73a&t=c>
(2/5, Lynch) reports that House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said that
he “plans to have a subpoena ready just in case” Acting Attorney General
Whitaker “tries to dodge ‘uncomfortable questions’ when he testifies before
the panel on Friday.” Reuters says Nadler warned that Whitaker “should
arrive at the hearing...prepared to answer questions about his
communications with the White House and his refusal to recuse himself from
overseeing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference
in the 2016 presidential election.”
WPost Analysis: Leaked Calendars Show How Much Trump’s Approach Differs
From Predecessors.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b2-646&t=c>
(2/5, Olorunnipa) reports that President Trump’s private schedules, made
public earlier this week, “show a commander in chief with an unprecedented
amount of free time, a sharp departure from predecessors who packed their
days with back-to-back events.” To the Post, the leaked calendars
“underscore the extent to which Trump chafes at many of the more burdensome
and formal responsibilities of his office and prefers a less-structured
presidency that allows him to follow his own whims and consume copious
amounts of cable television.”
Cancer Research
Trump To Ask Congress For $500 Million More For Childhood Cancer Research.

Yahoo! News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b3-fb7&t=c>
(2/6, Tubman) reports Trump in his State of the Union address Tuesday,
“pledged to ‘defeat AIDS in America’ and fight against childhood cancer.”
Trump said, “Many childhood cancers have not seen new therapies in
decades.” Yahoo! Adds, “The current federal budget for cancer research is
$5.74 billion for the National Cancer Institute.”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b4-feb&t=c>
(2/5, Leonard) reports Trump “called for a $500 million increase in funding
for medical research on childhood cancer over a decade.” The Examiner adds,
“the National Institutes of Health...will spend an estimated $462 million
on childhood cancer in 2019.”
Sedentary Behavior May Increase Risk of Early Onset Colorectal Cancer,
Study Finds.

NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b5-598&t=c>
(2/5, Charles) reports on a study
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b6-ab7&t=c>
published in JNCI Cancer Spectrum that has “identified sedentary behavior
as a potential risk factor to explain the sharp rise in colorectal cancer
among those under 50,” which NBC says is a “first.” The study, adds NBC,
“looked at TV viewing as well as other sedentary behavior in nearly 90,000
American women, [and] found that more than one hour of daily TV viewing was
associated with a 12 percent increase in risk of colorectal cancer,” while
“watching more than two hours per day,” was linked to “a striking 70
percent increase in risk.” The study included 89,278 nurses, age 25 to 42
at the start, and continued for 25 years. There were “118 cases of
early-onset colorectal cancer.”

        HealthDay
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b7-06a&t=c>
(2/5, Preidt) reports TV-watching “may be an altogether distinct risk
factor for young-onset colorectal cancer,” said study co-senior author Yin
Cao.
Editorials/Op-Eds
New York Times.

*“A Message Of Unity From An Agent Of Discord.”* The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b8-e02&t=c>
(2/5) says in an editorial, “For all of President Trump’s political
eccentricity, the man delivers a fairly conventional State of the Union
address.” His “soothing message...was wholly at odds with the acrid reality
of how he has governed. In that way, the entire spectacle – reflected in
the vibrating hostility between the two sides trapped together in the House
chamber – evinced the true state of the union: fractured, fractious,
painfully dysfunctional.”

        *“Venezuela’s Crisis Spreads Beyond Its Borders.” *A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0b9-252&t=c>
(2/5) editorial says that the “tense standoff in Venezuela between Nicolás
Maduro and Juan Guaidó has morphed into” a “dangerous global power
struggle,” in part because of the Administration’s “all-in support for
regime change.” That, the Times says, is “the last thing Venezuelans need.”
The Times says while there is “no question that President Maduro must go,
the sooner the better,” the democratic governments that have resoundingly
expressed support for Guaidó “are not entirely alliances of the
like-minded,” and “disparate interests are at play.” There also is “a
suspicion or fear of President Trump’s motives and potential means.” The
prospect that this “proxy war that could spill over Venezuela’s borders
horrifies most Latin American leaders, as well as Canada and the
Europeans.” The Times urges democratic governments to instead grant “the
long-suffering Venezuelans a chance to freely choose their government and
start the arduous task of rebuilding their economy, not to score a victory
in an ideological struggle.”

        *“A Bill Comes Due For Marie Colvin’s Death.” *A New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0ba-860&t=c>
(2/5) editorial welcomes a ruling last week by Judge Amy Berman Jackson of
the District Court for the District of Columbia that awarded the family of
journalist Marie Colvin, who was killed in Syria in 2012, $302.5 million,
“including $300 million in punitive damages against” Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad and “his associates.” The Times says that while “dictators
have always tried to silence a free press,” the “deliberate targeting of
reporters like Ms. Colvin reflects a new and distressing trend among
authoritarian leaders to view the independent media solely as an enemy to
be eliminated, if necessary by death.” It is “good to know,” the Times
concludes, “that an American judge is prepared to let the Assads, and
thereby all autocrats who seek to silence free speech, know that their
actions have a heavy cost, to their people and, one hopes, to themselves.”
Washington Post.

*“Trump’s State Of The Union Gave Us The Same Old Polarizing Demagoguery –
At Great Length.”* The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0bb-f9c&t=c>
(2/5) editorializes President Trump “seemed as though he might never yield
the podium once he got his chance Tuesday night. In a speech that reflected
endurance if not eloquence, Mr. Trump offered a thin sheen of ‘unity’ over
large helpings of the same old polarizing demagoguery.” The President
“fairly saluted the one substantial bipartisan accomplishment of his
presidency, passage of criminal-justice reform. He also mentioned areas of
possible future bipartisan agreement. ... Yet even in these areas there
will be no progress without serious, nitty-gritty legislating and
compromise.”

        *“El Salvador Has Put Its Hopes In A 37-Year-Old Independent
President. So Should We.” *In an editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0bc-4ac&t=c>
(2/5) reports that former San Salvador Mayor Nayib Bukele “won 54 percent
of the [presidential] vote running on a vague, populist, anti-corruption
platform.” The Post celebrates Bukele’s distinction “of being both the
youngest to be elected president in El Salvador’s modern history and the
first of Muslim origin.” The Post calls on El Salvador’s international
allies to give President Bukele the resources to establish a stable,
legitimate national political order.

        *“The Least Savory Actors In The Information Economy.” *In an
editorial, the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0bd-ebd&t=c>
(2/5) criticizes data brokers and the ongoing lack of federal attention on
the information reselling industry, which provides clients with targeted
personal information for advertising purposes. Existing federal laws do not
regulate the industry and the Post recommends to Congress to add the
information reselling industry to any future federal privacy framework. The
Post urges Congress to utilize Vermont’s state registry as a foundation for
a federal framework that the FTC could administer.

*Copyright 2019 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=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0be-a4d&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=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=0bf-685&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