Subject: FW: Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for Friday, February 8, 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: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 09:18:36 -0500

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing

*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <[email-masked]>
*Sent:* Friday, February 8, 2019 7:57 AM
*To:* [email-masked]
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for Friday,
February 8, 2019

*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=000-aac&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=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=001-cf1&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

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

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

• Vanity Fair: Biden Would Start Democratic Race With “Immediate
Advantage,” But Also “Baggage.” <#S1>

• Washington Examiner Commentary Page Writers Largely See Biden As Trump’s
Biggest Threat. <#S2>

• Conservative Highlights Iowa Poll Showing Trump Leading All Democrats But
Biden. <#S3>

• The Hollywood Reporter: Biden Would Draw “Significant Hollywood Support”
In 2020 Run. <#S4>

• Meghan McCain Lauds Biden During Interview With Colbert. <#S5>

• Fellow Penn Professors Express Doubts About A 2020 Biden Candidacy. <#S6>

• Eyeing 2020 Bids, Centrist Democrats Under Attack By Liberal Activists.
<#S7>

• NYTimes’ Bouie Criticizes Biden For Practicing Politics Of
“Accommodation.” <#S8>

• In 1975, Biden Said, “The Democratic Party Could Stand A Liberal George
Wallace.” <#S9>

• Columnist: Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders “Too Old To Be President.” <#S10>

• Biden, Harris Bump Into Each Other On Amtrak Train. <#S11>

• Biden Pays Tribute To The Late John Dingell. <#S12>

• Ahead Of Campaign Launch, Warren Buffeted By Native American Heritage
Controversy. <#S13>

• Harris Secures Endorsements From 20 California State Senators. <#S14>

• Sanders Would Face Fierce Competition For Liberals’ Support In Crowded
2020 Race. <#S15>

• In Speech, Schultz Rips Trump. <#S16>

• Democratic Rep. Kennedy Says He Won’t Enter 2020 Presidential Race. <#S17>

• USA Today: Trump Plans To Use “Socialism” As A Cudgel To Hammer Democrats
In 2020. <#S18>

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

• Negotiators Express Optimism About Border Security Compromise; Trump Says
“We’ll See What Happens.” <#S19>

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

• Trump Says He Will Not Meet With Xi Before March 1 Trade Deadline. <#S20>

• Biegun In North Korea To Lay Groundwork For Second Trump-Kim Summit.
<#S21>

• Kushner To Visit Mideast For Talks On Peace Plan. <#S22>

• Venezuelan Military Blocks US Aid At Border With Colombia. <#S23>

• Satellite Images Indicate Iran Attempted Second Satellite Launch. <#S24>

• Russian Deputy FM: US Refusing To Negotiate Extension Of New Start Treaty.
<#S25>

• Bipartisan Group Of Senators Introduces Bill To Penalize Saudi Arabia For
Murder Of Khashoggi. <#S26>

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

• Trump Accuses Schiff Of “Presidential Harassment” Despite “Zero Russian
Collusion.” <#S27>

• Trump’s Pledge To Oppose Abortion Wins Applause At National Prayer
Breakfast. <#S28>

• Senate Panel Approves Barr’s Nomination As Attorney General. <#S29>

• Bezos Accuses American Media Inc. Of “Extortion And Blackmail.” <#S30>

• Democrats Formally Unveil “Green New Deal” Resolution. <#S31>

• Trump Says He Is Open To Revisiting SALT Cap. <#S32>

• Democrats Seek To Limit Corporate Windfall From Trump Tax Cut. <#S33>

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

• FDA Warns Breast Implants Linked To Rare Form Of Cancer. <#S34>

• Lung-MAP Announces It Will Expand To Patients With All Non-Small-Cell
Lung Cancers. <#S35>

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S36>

• Washington Post. <#S37>
Biden in the News
Vanity Fair: Biden Would Start Democratic Race With “Immediate Advantage,”
But Also “Baggage.”

Writing for Vanity Fair
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=002-fa7&t=c>
(2/7), Eric Lutz says that if former Vice President Joe Biden launches a
2020 for the White House, he’d “have an immediate advantage, given his
stature within the party, his experience, and his popularity with voters.
But he would also come with his own baggage as an older establishment
figure in a party whose electorate appears to be jonesing for both fresh
faces and ideas.” In addition, “the 76-year-old – whose age could also be a
factor – has been in Washington long enough to accrue liabilities of his
own, including his controversial role in the Anita Hill hearing.” Lutz adds
that Biden “has reportedly told allies he believes he’s the party’s best
bet to defeat [President] Trump,” and polling “numbers back him up.”

        *The Hill: For Biden, Iraq War Could Be An Albatross In 2020. *The
Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=003-82a&t=c>
(2/8, Parnes) reports this morning that Biden’s remarks and stances “on the
Iraq War could come back to haunt him if he enters the race for the White
House.” Biden supported “the resolution giving President George W. Bush the
authority to invade Iraq, and he also praised the president in a Senate
floor speech at the time for his handling of the case for war.” The Hill
said Biden “has since said he regrets his vote, though he has put much of
the blame on Bush for his handling of the war.” However, Biden’s “defense
of the Iraq war makes for an easy attack ad for opponents to argue that
despite” his “experience, he does not always make the right calls on
policy.” Biden “is likely to be the only Democratic candidate who was part
of the Iraq debate. As a result, it’s a political problem that may be
unique to Biden in 2020.”

        *Politico: Brown Would Run “As Biden Without The Baggage.” *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=004-db7&t=c>
(2/8, Strauss, Otterbein) reports this morning that in the 2020 race for
the Democratic presidential nomination, Biden and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
“are on an early collision course,” pursuing “the same potential
supporters, touting the same themes and even using some of the same
language to go after President Donald Trump. And Brown, kicking off a
pre-campaign tour of key presidential voting states last week, made
clear...he” would “run, essentially, as Biden without the baggage. Chris
Schwartz, a Black Hawk county supervisor who hosted an event for Brown in
Iowa, introduced him by ticking off a list of votes – including opposing
NAFTA, opposing the Defense of Marriage Act and voting against
authorization of the war in Iraq – that had featured Biden on the other
side. ‘All those things that I said that Sherrod Brown got right, Joe Biden
got every single one of those things wrong,’ Schwartz said.”

        *Brown Touts Bill Aimed At Lowering Drug Costs. *In an online
report, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=005-01e&t=c>
(2/7, Luhby) reported that Brown “isn’t getting on board with Democratic
‘Medicare-for-all’ proposals, but he wants to make it clear that he’s a
leader in the fight to lower drug prices.” Brown “joined House counterparts
Thursday to roll out legislation to reduce drug prices in Medicare.” The
legislation “embraces a long-standing Democratic position – allowing
Medicare to negotiate with drug makers. But it goes further by authorizing
the federal government to license competitors to make generic versions if
it can’t secure a reasonable price for a given medication. ‘Either the drug
companies play ball and negotiate or we have an alternative, it’s a free
market alternative,’ Brown said, slamming the Trump White House as a
retreat for pharmaceutical executives.”

        *Vanity Fair: Biden, Bloomberg Eyeing Each Other Ahead Of 2020
Decisions. *Meanwhile, under the heading “Indecision 2020: Mike Bloomberg’s
Presidential Dream Springs Eternal. But in This Last-Chance Year, Is Biden
in His Old-White-Guy Lane?”, Chris Smith writes in a piece for Vanity Fair
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=006-5d4&t=c>
(2/7) that as ex-New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (D) mulls a 2020
presidential bid, a “significant factor is Joe Biden. ... Having two older,
white, male, moderate-ish contenders in the field would likely hurt them
both.” Consequently, the pair “have been doing a peculiar dance, keeping a
close eye on one another while acting as if they don’t care what the other
decides.” Smith adds “Bloomberg’s associates say they don’t have any inside
knowledge of what Biden will do. And they don’t believe the former mayor is
deferring to the former vice president, either intentionally or
subconsciously, even though Biden’s decision would provide another highly
valuable data point.”
Washington Examiner Commentary Page Writers Largely See Biden As Trump’s
Biggest Threat.

In his Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=007-2c0&t=c>
(2/7) column, Timothy Carney says he asked his “colleagues at the
Washington Examiner’s commentary page, ‘If you were Donald Trump, which
candidate would you most like to face? Which would you least like to
face?’” Of the 12 who answered the questions, five chose former Vice
President Joe Biden as the candidate they’d most fear, two chose Sen. Amy
Klobuchar (D-MN), one chose Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), one chose Sen.
Kamala Harris (D-CA), one chose ex-New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu (D-LA),
one chose ex-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), and one chose Sen. Bernie Sanders
(I-VT). None of the respondents chose Biden as the candidate they’d most
like to face.
Conservative Highlights Iowa Poll Showing Trump Leading All Democrats But
Biden.

In a Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=008-d5e&t=c>
(2/7), conservative radio host and TV commentator Tim Constantine discusses
whether President Trump can win reelection in 2020, saying that despite a
raft of negative coverage about the President, a recent Emerson College
poll of Iowa voters showed Trump leading all contenders other than ex-Vice
President Joe Biden in a hypothetical field of 2020 Democratic White House
hopefuls. Constantine describes Biden as a “gaffe machine,” and says
“Trump’s ability to spew out quotable quotes and Mr. Biden’s reputation for
the verbal stumble, this the media’s dream match-up.”
The Hollywood Reporter: Biden Would Draw “Significant Hollywood Support” In
2020 Run.

The Hollywood Reporter
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=009-ef5&t=c>
(2/7, Kiefer) says that “Hollywood’s political class is actively vetting
2020 presidential hopefuls with an eye to toppling Donald Trump.” At the
moment, “there is no hotter candidate for Hollywood than California Sen.
Kamala Harris, who’s had top industry donors since her Senate campaign.”
The article, which says that Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren
(D-MA) also draw support from Hollywood heavyweights, adds that if former
Vice President Joe Biden runs, he’d “also pull significant Hollywood
support – in October, [Jeffrey] Katzenberg hosted a $5,000-a-plate
fundraiser for Biden at his WndrCo offices in Beverly Hills, at which
[Paramount’s Jim] Gianopulos was present along with Sony Pictures’ Tom
Rothman, producer Byron Allen, [ICM Partners’ Chris] Silbermann, venture
capitalist Chris Sacca, entrepreneur Jon Vein (Goldsmith-Vein’s husband)
and Meg Whitman.”
Meghan McCain Lauds Biden During Interview With Colbert.

In an online article, CBS News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00a-60c&t=c>
(2/8) reports that during a Thursday appearance on “The Late Show with
Stephen Colbert,” Meghan McCain – daughter of the late Sen. John McCain
(R-AZ) – “said she is ‘very curious’ to see if former Vice President Joe
Biden, a close friend of her father’s, decides to run for president. ‘I
love him on a personal level,’ she said. ‘On a personal level, the
juxtaposition between my experience with cancer with the Trumps and my
experience with the Bidens has been the yin to the yang,’ she said. Biden
‘was incredibly there for me and my family, his son Beau died of the same
cancer that my father had, glioblastoma, so we have this really strange and
intense bond. And I love him dearly. If he becomes the nominee, I am going
to have to quit television because I can’t say anything bad about him.’”
Fellow Penn Professors Express Doubts About A 2020 Biden Candidacy.

The University of Pennsylvania’s Daily Pennsylvanian
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00b-36a&t=c>
(2/8, Doo) reports that “Penn Presidential Professor of Practice” Joe
Biden’s colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania are expressing doubts
that he will run for president and skepticism about his chances of winning
the Democratic nomination. For example, “Penn writer-in-residence Dick
Polman said he would not be surprised if” Biden doesn’t enter the race,
“given his advanced age of almost 80 years old. ‘[Biden] knows what it
takes to run nonstop and how physically punishing it is,’ Polman said. ‘He
keeps second-guessing [his run]. The fact that he keeps talking about it,
ruminating about it openly, makes me think that he’s not 100 percent in the
game.’” Political scientist Marc Meredith “remains uncertain about Biden’s
potential candidacy due to his baggage,” citing “how Biden handled the 1991
Anita Hill hearing.” Polman referenced Biden’s “unsuccessful bids for
presidency in the past, and the 1987 accusations of speech plagiarism
against him.”
Eyeing 2020 Bids, Centrist Democrats Under Attack By Liberal Activists.

Writing for U.S. News & World Report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00c-a59&t=c>
(2/8), David Catanese says, “As the 2020 presidential campaign intensifies
with fresh Democratic candidacies almost every week, the prevailing
question bubbling inside the party is no longer if one can viably run as a
liberal,” but whether “there’s still room for a centrist to thrive. The
first four major Democratic presidential candidates to” launch 2020 bids
“have each embraced a slate of unabashedly liberal policies – from
‘Medicare-for-all’ to a so-called vague ‘Green New Deal.’” Meanwhile,
potential more-moderate candidates “have been besieged by the most vocal
progressive activists,” with former Vice President Joe Biden, for instance,
having “been forced to defend his friendship with Republicans, after a
report revealed he praised GOP Rep. Fred Upton.”

        *Cook Political Report’s Walter: Democrats May Not Choose A
Far-Left Nominee. *However, writing for the Cook Political Report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00d-b49&t=c>
(2/7), Amy Walter said that many in the Democratic Party and GOP “are
coming to the conclusion that Democrats are going to nominate the most
left-leaning, liberal candidate for president,” providing President Trump
“his best (maybe only) opportunity to win in 2020.” However, citing polling
that indicates a wide swath of Democratic voters aren’t as far left as the
party’s activist base, and asserting that electability (the ability to
defeat Trump) is the most important consideration for many Democratic
voters, Walter said that for now, “the evidence and data suggest that the
most ideologically left candidate may not be the most likely nominee.”
NYTimes’ Bouie Criticizes Biden For Practicing Politics Of “Accommodation.”

Jamelle Bouie writes in his New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00e-362&t=c>
(2/7) column that in a speech last year, former Vice President Joe Biden
“rejected the confrontational language of some other Democrats. ‘I love
Bernie, but I’m not Bernie Sanders,’ he said. ‘I don’t think 500
billionaires are the reason we’re in trouble. I get into a lot of trouble
with my party when I say that wealthy Americans are just as patriotic as
poor folks.’” Bouie takes issue with Biden’s approach, saying, “Struggle
against the powerful, not accommodation of their interests, is how
Americans produced the conditions for its greatest social accomplishments
like the creation of the welfare state and the toppling of Jim Crow. ... If
one of the central problems of the present is an elite economic class that
hoards resources and opportunity at the expense of the public as a whole,
then it’s naïve and ahistoric to believe the beneficiaries of that
arrangement will willingly relinquish their power and privilege.”
In 1975, Biden Said, “The Democratic Party Could Stand A Liberal George
Wallace.”

The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=00f-94a&t=c>
(2/7, Goodman) reported that former Vice President Joe Biden, “who has been
emphasizing his civil rights record as he considers a 2020 White House bid,
once praised notorious segregationist George Wallace and later claimed to
have received an award from him. ‘I think the Democratic Party could stand
a liberal George Wallace – someone who’s not afraid to stand up and offend
people, someone who wouldn’t pander but would say what the American people
know in their gut is right,’ Biden told the Philadelphia Enquirer on Oct.
12, 1975, referring to the racist then-Alabama governor.” The Examiner
added, “During 1987 fundraising trips across the South for his unsuccessful
1988 presidential bid,” Biden “ought to appeal to white voters, telling
audiences that he had received an award from Wallace in 1973 and that the
segregationist had lauded him as ‘one of the outstanding young politicians
of America.’” The Blaze
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=010-489&t=c>
(2/7, Cohen) highlighted the Examiner article.
Columnist: Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders “Too Old To Be President.”

In his syndicated column, which appears in the Chicago Sun-Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=011-8e3&t=c>
(2/7), Gene Lyons writes that “I’m too old to be president. ... [T]hat’s my
answer to a question recently posed by the Boston Globe’s Robert Weisman:
‘Question for Democrats: Are some candidates too old?’ Illustrated by
photos of Sen. Bernie Sanders (77), former New York City Mayor Michael
Bloomberg (76) and former Vice President Joe Biden (76), the article asks
if it’s ‘ageist’ to think the presidential train has left the station
without them.” Lyons adds, “Anybody in their mid-70s who tries to tell you
they don’t feel the transmission slipping as time’s winged chariot draws
nearer is definitely bluffing. Maybe your judgment’s sounder, but your
memory’s not what it was, solving complex problems is more difficult, and
new ideas are harder to absorb.”
Biden, Harris Bump Into Each Other On Amtrak Train.

In an online article, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=012-3e0&t=c>
(2/7, Dezenski) reported, “Longtime noted Amtrak traveler Joe Biden ran
into a familiar 2020 contender on the train today: Sen. Kamala Harris of
California.” Their “chance encounter was captured – and promptly tweeted –
by members of Harris’ team. This isn’t the first time Biden and Harris have
had a chance encounter (which was also then captured for Twitter). The two
crossed paths – literally – in Washington, DC, in December.”
Biden Pays Tribute To The Late John Dingell.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=013-27c&t=c>
(2/7, Folley) reported that former Vice President Joe Biden “paid tribute
to former Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), who died Thursday. Biden said
Dingell ‘led with great moral courage and vision’ during his time in
Congress, shortly after Dingell’s death was confirmed. ‘John Dingell was
the Dean of the House. He earned that title – not just because he was there
the longest – but because he led with great moral courage and vision,’
Biden tweeted late Thursday. ‘He was a friend and I will miss him terribly.
Debbie is in my prayers,’ Biden said, referring to the late congressman’s
wife and successor, Rep. Deborah Dingell (D-Mich.).” In a piece
highlighting a number of politicians’ tributes to the late
congressman, the Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=014-9af&t=c>
(2/7, Brice-Saddler) reports that “Biden appreciated Dingell’s ‘great moral
courage and vision,’ and said he would ‘miss him terribly.’”
Ahead Of Campaign Launch, Warren Buffeted By Native American Heritage
Controversy.

The Concord (NH) Monitor
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=015-5e4&t=c>
(2/7, Andrews) reports that Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Saturday will visit
New Hampshire “hours after she’s expected to officially launch her campaign
for the White House.” However, “Warren’s much-anticipated announcement is
being upstaged a bit by the latest developments in the controversy over her
longstanding claims of Native American heritage. A Washington Post story on
Tuesday evening – that included the publication of a 1986 Texas bar
registration card showing her in her own handwriting identifying as
‘American Indian’ – gave new life to a story that Republicans and
especially President Donald Trump have long used to criticize her.” Leading
New Hampshire “Democrats worry the story could continue to upstage Warren
in the coming weeks.”

        The Boston Herald
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=016-06f&t=c>
(2/7, Dwinell) reports that Warren “has signaled she still intends to jump
into the 2020 presidential race despite the furor over her Native American
heritage claims – releasing plans to tour seven states starting with New
Hampshire and Iowa after her big announcement Saturday in Lawrence.” The Los
Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=017-d7b&t=c>
(2/7, Bierman) reports that with Warren “again confronting controversy over
her tenuous claims to Native American heritage, activists in early-voting
states and national allies are nervously eyeing whether she can succeed in
getting past an issue that has shadowed her campaign. ... ‘She needs to get
everything out and hope that’s the end of it,’ said Judy Reardon, a New
Hampshire environmental activist, who is a former Democratic state
legislator and top staffer to Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and is generally
complimentary of Warren.”

        Writing for Vanity Fair
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=018-655&t=c>
(2/7), Tina Nguyen says, “Perhaps Warren simply internalized some family
lore at an early age without ever questioning it. Still, that doesn’t
explain why Warren made her minuscule Native heritage such an outsize part
of her identity – or why she consistently described herself as such on
official forms. The possible existence of more documentary evidence
suggests a troubling pattern, and one that becomes increasingly difficult
to explain. More important, it promises to become a stubborn obstacle for
Warren as she embarks on her 2020 presidential campaign.”
Harris Secures Endorsements From 20 California State Senators.

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=019-669&t=c>
(2/7, Marinucci) reported that Sen. Kamala Harris’ (D-CA) “presidential
campaign has scored endorsements from a major roster of legislators in
California in a bid to cement an early advantage in her delegate-rich home
state.” Harris was endorsed by “20 state Senate Democrats, including Senate
President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins.” The new support “follow[s] endorsements
of Harris from three California members of Congress: Reps. Ted Lieu,
Nanette Barragan and Katie Hill. Harris now has the support of 21 of the
state Senate’s 28 Democrats, 75 percent of the caucus.” Politico added,
“The new endorsements, two weeks after an estimated 22,000 people attended
Harris’ Oakland campaign launch, underscore the senator’s campaign strategy
of amassing widespread support in her home state in advance of next year’s
March 3 primary.”
Sanders Would Face Fierce Competition For Liberals’ Support In Crowded 2020
Race.

Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01a-bfa&t=c>
(2/8, John) reports that Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “army of fervent
progressives will be up for grabs in 2020 even if” he mounts “another bid
for the Democratic presidential nomination,” as the Vermont lawmaker “may
find himself a victim of his own success in driving the party to the left
with his 2016 run. The field of Democratic presidential hopefuls includes
at least a half-dozen candidates who’ve adopted in whole or in part the
platform that helped Sanders build a loyal following of young voters and
liberals: Medicare for all, a $15 an hour minimum wage and debt-free
college education.” Sanders also “would be competing with a younger and
diverse field of candidates at a time when the votes of women, minorities
and young people are driving Democratic politics.”
In Speech, Schultz Rips Trump.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01b-c77&t=c>
(2/7) reports that ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, mulling a 2020
independent bid for the White House, on Thursday blasted President Trump,
saying in a speech at Purdue University “that Trump ‘must not serve a
second term.’ Schultz said Trump’s presidency is ‘one of the most
significant security threats America faces in the post-World War II era,’”
blaming the President “for walking away from strategic alliances, starting
a trade war that has raised prices for US consumers and cut market access
for US farmers, and turning a blind eye to Russian interference in US
democracy. ‘He has unilaterally abdicated our historical role as a global
leader,’ Schultz said. ‘He has poisoned our culture and our values, giving
hate and hate speech and racism and bigotry license.’”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01c-1c5&t=c>
(2/7, Scherer) reports, “Vowing to fight against” the President’s bid for a
second term “despite concerns that he would aid” Trump, Schultz unveiled
“the agenda for his potential independent presidential” run, “offering a
broad condemnation of the two-party political system but few new policy
specifics.” Schultz “made clear that his exploration of a campaign was
predicated on his fear that a ‘far-left’ Democratic 2020 nominee would
deliver reelection to Trump by pushing away many” moderate Americans. But
Schultz also vowed “to avoid forcing the same result by splitting the
anti-Trump vote, a concern of many Democratic political strategists.” Said
Schultz, “As I explore whether to run for office, I will do so with the
conviction that my final decision must not make his reelection a
possibility. I can assure you no one wants Donald Trump fired more than I.”

        *Schultz Advocates Raising Taxes On The Wealthy. *Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01d-734&t=c>
(2/7, Kapur) reports that in his speech, Schultz “said wealthy Americans
like him should pay higher taxes.” Said Schultz, “I myself should be paying
higher taxes – and all wealthy Americans should have to pay their fair
share. I think we can all agree on that.” In addition, Schultz “called for
an overhaul of the tax code that includes rate cuts for middle-income
people and small businesses, though he didn’t unveil any specifics.”
Bloomberg add that Schultz’s comments “are similar to what...Trump said as
a 2016 presidential candidate. In an August 2015 interview with Bloomberg,
Trump said he’d favor raising taxes on rich people like himself. In May
2016, he told ABC News, ‘I am willing to pay more, and you know what, the
wealthy are willing to pay more.’”
Democratic Rep. Kennedy Says He Won’t Enter 2020 Presidential Race.

In an online article, ABC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01e-700&t=c>
(2/7, Spitalniak) reported that Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA) “has ruled out
a 2020 presidential run, despite being the subject of speculation. ‘I’ve
got enough on my plate,’” Kennedy “said on ABC News’ ‘Powerhouse Politics’
podcast.”
USA Today: Trump Plans To Use “Socialism” As A Cudgel To Hammer Democrats
In 2020.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=01f-0cd&t=c>
(2/7, Groppe) reports that with his State of the Union address this week,
President Trump signaled “that he plans to run for re-election by attacking
socialism – including going after figures popular with the fired-up
Democratic base like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
After Trump warned about ‘new calls to adopt socialism in our country,’
Republicans circulated photos of Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders and other
stone-faced lawmakers who ‘refused to stand’ during parts of the speech.”
And during a Wednesday appearance on Fox News Radio, Trump adviser
Kellyanne Conway said that socialism is “creeping throughout the entire
[Democratic] party. It will be a theme in 2020.” USA Today says it’s
unclear in polling whether that line of attack will resonate.
Leading the News
Negotiators Express Optimism About Border Security Compromise; Trump Says
“We’ll See What Happens.”

Coverage of ongoing efforts by congressional negotiators to work out a
compromise on border security funding indicates some optimism among
legislators that an agreement will be reached, and that President Trump
will sign it, thereby avoiding another partial government shutdown in one
week. The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=020-1f0&t=c>
(2/7, Fram, Taylor) reports Trump “appears to be taking a more positive
view of Capitol Hill talks on border security, according to negotiators who
struck a distinctly optimistic tone after a White House meeting.” Senate
Appropriations Chairman Richard Shelby “said Thursday’s session in the Oval
Office was ‘the most positive meeting I’ve had in a long time’ and that the
president was ‘very reasonable.’” Trump “had previously called the talks a
‘waste of time.’ ... But Shelby said Trump during their meeting ‘urged me
to get to yes’ on an agreement.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=021-82b&t=c>
(2/7, Andrews) reports Shelby said the President does not want to have to
declare a national emergency in order to fund a US-Mexico border wall.

        Nancy Cordes said in a brief report on the CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=022-2d1&t=c>
(2/7, story 5, 0:30, Glor), “They actually tell us that they are on a good
trajectory tonight, and that they have reached agreement on parts of this
border security package. And crucially, a key Democratic negotiator said
for the first time today that her party probably is going to have to accept
some border barrier funding as part of this deal. She didn’t say a ‘wall,’
but she did say a ‘barrier.’” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=023-bf4&t=c>
(2/7, Cowan) reports, “Negotiators have discussed a mix of tools, such as
more law enforcement agents, procuring more high-tech devices to repel
illegal drugs and undocumented immigrants” from entering the US. But Trump
“has continued to insist on a wall, although it was unclear what his
definition of that was.” The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=024-0bb&t=c>
(2/8, Ferrechio) reports any agreement will likely include “some kind of
fencing in certain areas along the southern border. There’s no mention of a
wall in the deal, per orders of Democratic leaders who vehemently oppose
it.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=025-75a&t=c>
(2/7, Werner, Paletta) reports, “Lawmakers of both parties voiced cautious
optimism,” as did the President. Trump told reporters, “We’ll see what
happens, but I certainly hear they’re working on something, and both sides
are moving along. We’ll see what happens. We need border security. We have
to have it. It’s not an option. Let’s see what happens.”

        Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=026-202&t=c>
(2/7, Johnson, Everett, Orr) reports, “Inside the White House, the Trump
team is increasingly aware that the president is trapped. Facing a
Republican Party unwilling to back another government shutdown or a
national emergency declaration to build his border wall,” the President “is
in an unfamiliar position, according to multiple White House officials and
lawmakers: prepared, potentially, to accept a compromise foisted on him by
Congress. ... He seemed warm to the idea of a bipartisan deal” after
meeting with Shelby.

        Colby Itkowitz of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=027-187&t=c>
(2/7) writes, “Trump has never really believed Congress would give him the
money,” and he “also knows, despite threats to the contrary, that there’s
no upside to another shutdown. Which is why Trump is going to sign whatever
lands on his desk. Going it alone on the wall was probably the end game all
along.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=028-2ae&t=c>
(2/7) editorializes, “Despite President Trump’s contempt for the niceties
of legislating...there are hopeful signs emerging from Capitol Hill.”
Senate Majority Leader McConnell and House Speaker Pelosi have both
suggested “that any agreement struck by negotiators would be brought up for
a floor vote.” The Post says “Americans, fed up with Washington
dysfunction, want no more shutdowns. The only way to resolve any facet of
the immigration debate is for both parties and other stakeholders to accept
part of a loaf.”

        *WPost Analysis: Trump’s Claims About El Paso Crime “Simply False.”
*The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=029-314&t=c>
(2/7, Moore, Rucker, Johnson) reports Trump will visit the “bustling border
city” of El Paso, Texas on Monday “for his first campaign rally of the
year. ... Trump hopes spotlighting the story of El Paso – touting its
border fencing and relatively low rate of violent crime – will provide
evidence supporting his push for funding for part of a US-Mexico border
wall to avoid another shutdown, aides said.” But “the trouble for Trump is
that his claim about El Paso is simply false. His portrayal of this border
city as having been violent and lawless before the installation of fencing
has long been an irritant to local civic and business leaders.” The El Paso
(TX) Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02a-a7a&t=c>
(2/7) reports, “City leaders have denounced Trump’s comments on El Paso,”
and “a number of protests are anticipated for Monday in response” to his
rally.

        Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02b-70c&t=c>,
“El Paso has great grassroots leadership that stands up for our community
and defends the vulnerable. Can’t wait to hear about what they’ve got
planned in the face of outright lies about us and cheap attempts to use our
community as a political prop.”

        *Arizona City Threatens Legal Action Over Razor Wire On Border
Fence. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02c-123&t=c>
(2/7, Rosenberg) reports Nogales, Arizona officials passed a resolution
this week condemning the installation of “lethal” razor wire on a border
fence in the city. Mayor Arturo Garino “said one of his constituents told
him about the razor wire on Saturday night,” and said that what he “saw
when he arrived at the fence surprised him: Row after row of razor wire had
been strung on the fence so that it covered nearly the entire surface in
parts.” Garino has threatened to sue the federal government over the razor
wire.

        *AP Analysis: Border Barriers Require “Delicate Dance” For
Officials. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02d-7af&t=c>
(2/7, Spagat) examines the “delicate dance” for the federal government “as
it charts a course to extend or replace barriers that blanket nearly
one-third of the border. The path of the San Diego replacement cuts through
a gated Tijuana subdivision of luxury homes,” while farther to the east, a
“treaty limits construction on the Rio Grande flood plain.”

        *HHS Official Says He Warned About Trauma Of Family Separation. *The
AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02e-c30&t=c>
(2/7, Long) reports US Public Health Service Commander Jonathan White, the
HHS official “responsible for helping to reunite families separated by the
Trump administration,” told a House subcommittee Thursday that he “had
warned colleagues that separating children from their parents would cause
lasting, serious psychological trauma.” White said, “Separating children
poses significant risk of traumatic psychological injury to the child.”
White went on to day that “neither he nor anyone he worked with ‘would ever
have supported such a policy.’”

        Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=02f-841&t=c>
(2/7, Diamond) reports Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), chair of the House Energy
and Commerce Oversight Subcommittee, said, “There is no evidence that HHS
leaders ever tried to stop this abhorrent policy.” Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=030-01a&t=c>
(2/7, John, Epstein) also reports on White’s remarks.
Foreign Policy
Trump Says He Will Not Meet With Xi Before March 1 Trade Deadline.

Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=031-939&t=c>
(2/7, Sink, Jacobs, Leonard) reports President Trump said Thursday that “he
won’t meet Chinese President Xi Jinping before a March 1 deadline to avert
higher US tariffs on Chinese goods, intensifying fears the two won’t strike
a deal before the end of a 90-day truce.” When asked by reporters if he
would meet with Xi this month, Trump responded “No” and shook his head. He
added, “Unlikely.” A “senior administration official said the decision not
to go ahead with a meeting between Xi and Trump before March 1 should not
be read as a sign the talks were breaking down.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=032-67f&t=c>
(2/7, Mason, Holland) reports that when asked if there would be a meeting
“in the next month or so,” Trump said: “Not yet. Maybe.” Reuters says his
remarks “confirmed comments from administration officials who said the two
men were unlikely to meet before the deadline, dampening hopes of a quick
trade pact and sparking a drop in US stock markets.” The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=033-122&t=c>
(2/7, Rappeport) likewise says Trump’s comments are “raising new concerns
that the United States will not be able to complete a trade deal with China
before American tariffs increase on March 2.” The Times also says the
“decision not to meet ahead of the deadline was a reversal for Mr. Trump,
who said last week that he planned to meet with Mr. Xi to resolve any
‘final issues’ before a trade deal.”

        Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=034-9f8&t=c>
(2/7, Palmer) notes Trump tweeted last week that “no final deal will be
made until my friend President Xi, and I, meet in the near future to
discuss and agree on some of the long standing and more difficult points.”
The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=035-8aa&t=c>
(2/7) reports that while Trump does not plan to meet with Xi, Treasury
Secretary Mnuchin and USTR Lighthizer “are leading a team to Beijing next
week to continue talks.”

        *Kudlow: Negotiators Have “Pretty Sizable Distance To Go.” *NEC
Director Kudlow said on Fox Business’ Varney & Co.[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=036-8e3&t=c>
(2/7), “The President has indicated that he’s optimistic with respect to a
potential China trade deal. But...we’ve got a pretty sizable distance to go
here. ... Mr. Mnuchin and Mr. Lighthizer are going to China next week to
continue the discussions that we had last week, and those discussions, as
I’ve said, had a good vibe to them and we covered a tremendous amount of
ground and all the major issues, the technology issues, the ownership
issues, especially...the evaluation issues. How do you confirm – how do we
judge whether the Chinese are playing by the rules? So all of those things
were on the table and discussed in some detail. I think those conversations
are going to continue.”

        *Media Analyses: Administration Under Pressure To Reach Deal. *
Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=037-4c7&t=c>
(2/7, Niquette, Mayeda) reports that the Administration’s “duties on $250
billion of Chinese goods – with an increase in tariffs to come unless a
trade deal with Beijing is reached by March 1 – have affected US companies
big and small.” Bloomberg News says that “for companies caught in the trade
war, the options for mitigating exposure to tariffs range from a simple
change in paperwork to creative ‘tariff engineering’ and the overhaul of
supply chains often developed over decades.”

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=038-c82&t=c>
(2/7, Davis) reports that among those pressuring the Administration to
reach a deal is Blackstone Group Chief Executive Stephen Schwarzman, who
has warned that failure to strike a deal will undermine the US economy and
stock markets.

        *Trump Expected To Sign Executive Order Banning Chinese Telecom
Equipment Next Week. *Citing three unnamed sources, Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=039-22b&t=c>
(2/7, Geller) reports President Trump is “expected to sign an executive
order banning Chinese telecom equipment from U.S. wireless networks before
a major industry conference at the end of February.” The Administration
“plans to release the directive, part of its broader effort to protect the
US from cyber threats, before MWC Barcelona, formerly known as Mobile World
Congress, which takes place Feb. 25-28.” An unnamed “industry source” said,
“There’s a big push to get it out before MWC.” Politico says that by
“preempting MWC...the White House hopes to send a signal that future
contracts for cutting-edge technology must prioritize cybersecurity.”
Biegun In North Korea To Lay Groundwork For Second Trump-Kim Summit.

CNN’s Situation Room
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03a-1d5&t=c>
(2/7, 6:58 p.m. EST) reported that “a US envoy is in North Korea laying
groundwork for the second summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-un.”
US special envoy Steve Biegun traveled to Pyongyang on Wednesday “to hammer
out what he calls a set of concrete deliverables for the second summit in
Vietnam.” However, according to “a source familiar with the talks...even
the most basic details require extensive negotiations.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03b-74e&t=c>
(2/7, Brunnstrom, Alexander), meanwhile, reports State Department spokesman
Robert Palladino said Thursday that the choice of Vietnam as the venue for
the summit “shows the possibility of moving beyond conflict and division
toward a thriving partnership.”
Kushner To Visit Mideast For Talks On Peace Plan.

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03c-423&t=c>
(2/7, Johnson) reports White House senior adviser Jared Kushner will
“crisscross the Middle East later this month seeking buy-in for his peace
plan from leaders throughout the region.” During the trip, Kushner will
“for the first time share significant details of the economic portion of
the Trump administration’s Middle East peace plan.” A “senior
Administration official” said Tuesday, “Jared is going to present the
economic plan to the region. The economic plan only works if the region
supports it. We understand that if the political aspect of it is not solid,
the economic aspect is meaningless. But at the same time the political
aspect will not succeed without a proper economic plan.” According to the Wall
Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03d-95b&t=c>
(2/7, Salama), Kushner will be joined by special envoy Jason Greenblatt on
his trip to Oman, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and
Qatar.
Venezuelan Military Blocks US Aid At Border With Colombia.

The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03e-0fb&t=c>
(2/7, story 6, 2:15, Glor) reported on what it called “a showdown” at the
border of Colombia and Venezuela, where the Venezuelan military is blocking
US aid from entering the country. Gabe Gutierrez reported for NBC Nightly
News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=03f-629&t=c>
(2/7, story 9, 1:20, Holt) that the US aid will be stored in a warehouse at
the border, but it remains unclear “when or if it will be allowed into that
country.”

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=040-7f5&t=c>
(2/8, Haberkorn, Armario) reports that “opposition leaders vowed to bring
[the US aid] into their troubled nation despite objections from embattled
President Nicolas Maduro.” While Maduro “denies a humanitarian crisis
exists,” interim President Juan Guaido, “who requested the international
assistance, said it is necessary in a country racked by shortages of food
and medicines.”

        To the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=041-53f&t=c>
(2/7, A1, Faiola, Krygier), the “international effort to rush food and
medicine into this collapsing socialist state was rapidly transforming
Thursday into a high-stakes standoff between...Maduro and the US-backed
opposition, essentially holding hostage lifesaving shipments of
humanitarian aid at the border.” US special envoy Elliott Abrams “said at a
Thursday news conference that, while determined to deliver the aid to the
Venezuelan people, the United States and other opposition supporters would
not do so by ‘force.’” Said Abrams, “We will be moving aid to the border of
Venezuela in the hope that — and there is some aid there now — in the hope
that we will be able to get it in. I don’t think that we or the Colombians
or the Brazilians or anyone else is planning to try to force it in.”

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=042-17a&t=c>
(2/7, Baddour) reports that seven cargo trucks that reached the Tienditas
bridge connecting Colombia to Ureña in Venezuela, but the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=043-22e&t=c>
(2/7, Pérez-Peña) reports the Venezuelan military has “blockaded a major
highway link with Colombia to prevent opponents of the government from
bringing food and medicine into Venezuela.” According to the Times, “Troops
positioned truck trailers and shipping containers to block the lanes of the
Tienditas Bridge,” but “it was not clear what effect the blockade, a show
of defiance by...Maduro, would have.”

        *US Envoy Urges Maduro To Step Down. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=044-877&t=c>
(2/7) reports that US special envoy Elliot Abrams told reporters Thursday
that the US “wants to see Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro leave the
country as he cedes power to a transitional government.” Abrams said the US
“does not favor a specific country for Maduro to go to,” but noted that he
has “friends” in Cuba and Russia. The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=045-76c&t=c>
(2/7, Kasperowicz) quotes Abrams as saying, “I think it is better for the
transition to democracy in Venezuela that he be outside the country. And
there are a number of countries that I think would be willing to accept
him. He’s got friends in places like Cuba and Russia. And there are some
other countries, actually, that have come to us privately and said they’d
be willing to take members of the current illegitimate regime if it would
help the transition.”

        *White House Video In Spanish Compares Maduro To Stalin, Mussolini.
*Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=046-88e&t=c>
(2/7, Martel) reports that the White House shared “a Spanish-language video
message
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=047-d2d&t=c>
to the Venezuelan people on Thursday comparing socialist dictator Nicolás
Maduro to Josef Stalin, Muammar Qaddafi, Benito Mussolini, and other
tyrants who usurped power in their home countries, expressing solidarity
with the opposition.” The video, posted on Twitter, explains, “through a
timeline of actions by the Maduro regime, how the dictator systematically
made it impossible for opposition parties to compete politically, noting,
in particular, the use of violence to silence protesters.” It then “shows
images of, among others, Josef Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein,
and Muammar Qaddafi,” when the text declares, “We have seen this before.”

        *WSJournal A1 Analysis: Small Group Plotted To Seize Control Of
Venezuela From Maduro. *In a front-page story, the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=048-6e0&t=c>
(2/7, A1, Luhnow, Forero, de Córdoba) examines how a small group of people
from Venezuela’s opposition worked to oust President Nicolás Maduro.
According to sources, some members of the opposition were unaware that Juan
Guaidó was preparing to declare himself interim president on Jan. 23,
including some that were standing alongside him on stage when he made the
announcement. The Journal reports that the plan was devised in only the
last few weeks by a group of just four opposition leaders.

        *Zakaria: Left “Needs To Find Its Voice On Venezuela.” *Fareed
Zakaria writes in his Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=049-259&t=c>
(2/7) column that Venezuela “poses a challenge for the Democratic Party,”
questioning whether it can “find its voice on Venezuela, and foreign policy
more generally.” Zakaria says “there are worrying signs that the new
Democratic foreign policy could turn out to be a reflexive isolationism
that is not so different from President Trump’s own ‘America First’
instincts.”
Satellite Images Indicate Iran Attempted Second Satellite Launch.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04a-fcd&t=c>
(2/7, Gambrell) reports according to satellite images “released by the
Colorado-based company DigitalGlobe,” it appears that Iran has “attempted a
second satellite launch despite US criticism that its space program helps
it develop ballistic missiles.” The images “show a rocket at the Imam
Khomeini Space Center” on Tuesday, while on Wednesday, “the rocket was gone
with what appears to be burn marks on its launch pad.”

        Asked by reporters to comment, Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04b-69b&t=c>
(2/7, Alexander) reports State Department spokesman Robert Palladino said,
“I’ve seen the reports, and it failed, correct?” Palladino added, “We
continue to call upon the Iranian regime to cease immediately all
activities that are inconsistent with the United Nations Security Council
Resolution 2231, including space vehicle launches.”
Russian Deputy FM: US Refusing To Negotiate Extension Of New Start Treaty.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04c-b69&t=c>
(2/7, Isachenkov) reports according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister
Sergei Ryabkov, “the US refusal to negotiate an extension to the New Start
treaty signals Washington’s intention to let it expire in 2021.” The treaty
was signed in 2010 by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry
Medvedev. In response, Undersecretary of State Andrea Thompson said, “It is
a relatively simple treaty to extend, so we have time with that.”

        *Ignatius: Cyber Command Has Launched Effort To Deter And Disrupt
Russian Interference With US Politics. *David Ignatius writes in his column
in the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04d-961&t=c>
(2/7), that the US Cyber Command “has launched operations to deter and
disrupt Russians who have been interfering with the U.S. political system.”
Ignatius adds that “before the midterm elections, Cyber Command began
directly contacting Russians who were linked to operations,” in order to
“put people on notice that their covers had been blown.” Ignatius says that
the effort “was outlined by Gen. Paul Nakasone, the unit’s commander, in
the current issue of Joint Force Quarterly,” and his “new doctrine moves
the United States closer to Russia’s approach of treating cyberspace as
part of a continuum of warfare.”
Bipartisan Group Of Senators Introduces Bill To Penalize Saudi Arabia For
Murder Of Khashoggi.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04e-c57&t=c>
(2/7, Zengerle) reports senators from both parties on Thursday “renewed
their push...to penalize Saudi Arabia for the murder of Saudi journalist
Jamal Khashoggi and address the humanitarian crisis in Yemen,” by
prohibiting “some arms sales” and imposing “sanctions on those responsible
for his death.” Democratic Sens. Bob Menendez, Jack Reed, Jeanne Shaheen
and Chris Murphy and Republican Sens. Todd Young, Lindsey Graham, and Susan
Collins introduced the “Saudi Arabia Accountability and Yemen Act of 2019.”
Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=04f-ea5&t=c>
(2/7, Flatley) reports the bill “faces an uncertain fate” in the Senate.

        *NYTimes A1: US Intelligence Intercepted Crown Prince Threatening
“A Bullet” For Khashoggi. *In a front-page story, the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=050-a38&t=c>
(2/7, Mazzetti) cites “current and former American and foreign officials
with direct knowledge of intelligence reports” in reporting that “Crown
Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia told a top aide in a
conversation in 2017 that he would use ‘a bullet’ on Jamal Khashoggi...if
Mr. Khashoggi did not return to the kingdom and end his criticism of the
Saudi government.” The Times adds that US intelligence had intercepted the
conversation. The author of the New York Times report, Mark Mazzetti,
told CNN’s
Situation Room
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=051-3b8&t=c>
(2/7, 6:28 p.m. EST), “What this shows is that the Crown Prince made it
known he had every intent of killing Jamal Khashoggi if he did not come
back.”

        *UN Inquiry Concludes Saudis “Planned And Perpetrated” Khashoggi’s
Murder. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=052-c5d&t=c>
(2/7, Nebehay) reports that “a United Nations-led inquiry into the murder
of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi said on Thursday that evidence pointed
to a brutal crime ‘planned and perpetrated’ by Saudi officials. ...
‘Evidence collected during my mission to Turkey shows prime facie case that
Mr. Khashoggi was the victim of a brutal and premeditated killing, planned
and perpetrated by officials of the State of Saudi Arabia,’ Agnes
Callamard, UN special rapporteur for extrajudicial summary or arbitrary
executions, said in statement issued in Geneva.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=053-88a&t=c>
(2/7) reports that “during its Jan. 28-Feb. 3 trip to Turkey, Callamard’s
four-member team met with the foreign and justice ministers, the country’s
intelligence chief and the prosecutor leading the case.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=054-0b5&t=c>
(2/7, Fahim) reports Callamard said “that Saudi Arabia had ‘seriously
curtailed and undermined’ Turkey’s attempts to investigate Khashoggi’s
killing.” Callamard added, “Woefully inadequate time and access was granted
to Turkish investigators to conduct a professional and effective
crime-scene examination and search required by international standards for
investigation.”
Domestic Policy
Trump Accuses Schiff Of “Presidential Harassment” Despite “Zero Russian
Collusion.”

In a set of Thursday morning tweets, President Trump criticized House
Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff over planned investigations and for
hiring former Trump Administration officials to assist in them. Trump
tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=055-5dd&t=c>
at 6:13 a.m., “So now Congressman Adam Schiff announces, after having found
zero Russian Collusion, that he is going to be looking at every aspect of
my life, both financial and personal, even though there is no reason to be
doing so. Never happened before! Unlimited Presidential Harassment....” He
tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=056-6d3&t=c>
13 minutes later, “....The Dems and their committees are going ‘nuts.’ The
Republicans never did this to President Obama, there would be no time left
to run government. I hear other committee heads will do the same thing.
Even stealing people who work at White House! A continuation of Witch
Hunt!” About one hour later, Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=057-944&t=c>,
“PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT! It should never be allowed to happen again!”

        ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=058-f46&t=c>
(2/7, story 7, 1:20, Muir) reported, “President Trump tonight is lashing
out, as Democrats who now control the House have stepped up their
oversight.” ABC’s Mary Bruce: “Democrats in Congress are kicking their
investigations of the Trump presidency into high gear.” Bruce asked House
Speaker Pelosi, “Is there any concern that you’re in danger of appearing
like you’re overreaching?” Pelosi: “Whatever the President says about us,
he’s projecting his own unruliness. He’s a projector, and that’s what it’s
about.” Bruce: “The House Intelligence Committee is launching a sweeping
investigation into the President, his family, his finances and possible
Russia ties.”

        The CBS Evening News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=059-e08&t=c>
(2/7, story 3, 2:00, Glor) reported, “When Democrats took back the House in
the midterm elections, they made it clear they intended to ramp up
investigations of President Trump and his Administration. Today, they
kicked it into a higher gear, and the President fired back.” CBS’ Nancy
Cordes: “Just one month into their new majority, House Democrats are
demanding sensitive documents that could shed light on how security
clearances were granted at the White House, how companies got contracts to
clean up after Hurricane Maria, and whether the President’s decisions have
been influenced by his foreign financial interests.” Schiff: “We’re going
to do our proper oversight.”

        On NBC Nightly News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05a-f71&t=c>
(2/7, story 3, 0:50, Holt), Kristen Welker called Schiff’s moves “the
latest battle line as Democrats escalate their oversight of the President
and his Administration. ... Schiff has hired a former national security
council official. The President lashed out, accusing Democrats of stealing
people who work at the White House and of ‘presidential harassment.’”
Schiff: “What he calls ‘harassment’ is simply Congress doing its job. I can
understand why the idea of oversight terrifies him. So many of his close
associates and appointees have ended up in jail.” Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05b-e8f&t=c>
(2/7, House, Talev, Jacobs) reports Schiff “has hired one former career
official at the National Security Council, Abigail Grace, who left the
White House last year. ... A second career employee detailed to the Trump
White House is also considering joining Schiff’s staff, according to people
familiar with the matter.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05c-585&t=c>
(2/7, Wagner) says Trump “took fresh aim” at House Democrats, “claiming
they are going ‘nuts’ with unprecedented investigations into his
administration and businesses.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05d-ab3&t=c>
(2/7, Oprysko) reports, “The investigation by Schiff’s committee is one of
a slew that the president will face in a newly divided government that is
now getting up to full steam after a monthlong government shutdown.” The New
York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05e-d62&t=c>
(2/7, Haberman) says Thursday “offered an unusually stark comparison
between Mr. Trump’s unvarnished thoughts and his formal schedule,” as his
tweets were followed shortly by his comments before the National Prayer
Breakfast, where he said, “When we open our hearts to faith, we fill our
hearts with love.” The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=05f-951&t=c>
(2/7) headlines its story “Trump Reams Schiff For ‘Presidential
Harrassment,’ Endless Investigations.” The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=060-218&t=c>
(2/7, Kasperowicz) also covers the President’s tweets.

        Schiff tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=061-450&t=c>,
“The idea of congressional oversight is alien to the president, and who can
blame him? For two years, the GOP did nothing but shield him from
accountability. Those days are over. We will not choose between our
legislative and oversight responsibilities. Congress must do both.”

        Philip Bump writes in the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=062-f15&t=c>
(2/7) under the headline “Trump’s Claim That Republicans Never Investigated
Obama Is Ludicrous” that while Republicans did not launch “a bunch of
random personal investigations of things such as Obama’s birthplace or his
college records...because they were not worth congressional inquiries,”
what the GOP-led Congress “did investigate during Obama’s administration
was nearly everything else,” including “a failed ATF sting program,” how
the IRS “purportedly focused on conservative groups to reject their
applications for nonprofit status,” the Benghazi attacks, and other
matters.

        *Democrats Begin Effort To Obtain Trump’s Tax Returns. *The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=063-be2&t=c>
(2/7, Stein) reports, “House Democrats began hearings on Thursday about a
plan that would force President Trump to release his tax returns.” A House
Ways and Means Committee subcommittee “brought in several experts in tax
law to discuss the impact of a provision in Democrats’ anti-corruption bill
that would compel presidential candidates to release 10 years of tax
returns within 30 days of receiving their party’s nomination.” Republicans
“are expected to have the votes to block [the measure] in the Senate.”

        ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=064-634&t=c>
(2/7, story 7, 1:20, Muir) showed Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), chairman of the
subcommittee, saying, “We will ask the question, does the public have a
need to know that a person seeking to hold the highest office in our
country obeys the tax laws?” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=065-a01&t=c>
(2/7, Gordon) reports Republicans “are invoking privacy in defending
Trump’s flank,” arguing that Democrats are “using powers in the tax law to
mount a political witch hunt for Trump’s tax returns.”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=066-fc8&t=c>
(2/7, Ferrechio) reports Pelosi said Democrats “are pushing to expose
President Trump’s tax returns in part because of high public demand.”
Pelosi said, “I think overwhelmingly the public wants to see the
President’s tax returns. So, they want to know the truth. They want to know
the facts.” The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=067-8ac&t=c>
(2/7, Howell) reports Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) also said Congress has the
right to demand the tax returns. The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=068-0aa&t=c>
(2/7, Rubin) quotes Pascrell saying, “The law is on our side. If a
President is cheating the system or evading taxes or otherwise violating
the tax laws of our country, why should any citizen feel compelled to
comply?”

        Pascrell tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=069-950&t=c>,
“It’s been a long road, but we’re finally moving to expose Trump to true
transparency. Americans deserve to know if their leader is a crook.” Rep.
Brendan Boyle (D-PA) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06a-a41&t=c>,
“Today @WaysMeansCmte began seeking a copy of President Trump’s tax
returns. The only president in modern history not to disclose, yet he has
the most complicated web of financial interests. Given the
#CultureofCorruption he’s built, we must do our duty and demand
transparency.” Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA) tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06b-79f&t=c>,
“Trump has used every excuse under the sun for why America shouldn’t see
his #TaxReturns. Soon he’ll tell us his dog ate it.”

        *Whitaker Will Appear Before House Judiciary Committee After
Subpoena Threat Dropped. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06c-8dc&t=c>
(2/7, Jalonick, Tucker) reports the Justice Department said late Thursday
that Acting Attorney General Whitaker “will testify before the House
Judiciary Committee on Friday as scheduled, ending a day’s worth of
uncertainty over whether he would appear.” His “appearance became
questionable” after Chairman Jerrold Nadler “approved a tentative subpoena
to ensure that Whitaker would appear and answer questions. Whitaker
responded by saying he wouldn’t appear unless the committee dropped its
subpoena threat, which he derided as an act of ‘political theater.’”
The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06d-248&t=c>
(2/7, Barrett) reports, “The two sides continued discussions throughout the
evening and eventually, according to Justice Department officials, Nadler
agreed that no subpoena would be issued Thursday or Friday.” The New York
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06e-95d&t=c>
(2/7, Benner, Savage) says the agreement came “after a heated
back-and-forth.”

        ABC World News Tonight
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=06f-320&t=c>
(2/7, story 8, 0:40, Muir) and NBC Nightly News[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=070-5d2&t=c>
(2/7, story 2, 1:15, Holt), both reporting before the agreement was
reached, said the White House charged the committee with playing “pointless
political games.” The CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=071-32f&t=c>
(2/7, story 4, 0:20, Glor) had a brief report. Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=072-d15&t=c>
(2/7, Lynch), the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=073-06b&t=c>
(2/7, Gurman), and The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=074-cfd&t=c>
(2/7, Chalfant) are among the outlets also covering the earlier impasse. CQ
Roll Call
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=075-86f&t=c>
(2/7) headlined its online report, published before the issue was resolved,
“Through Whitaker, Trump Officially Declares War On House Oversight.”

        CNN’s Manu Raju tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=076-574&t=c>,
“Dems had expressed confidence all day that Whitaker would ultimately
appear. The question is how much will he say about his conversations with
Trump over the Mueller probe, Cohen plea and his decision not to recuse.
Probably not much.”

        *Trump Thanks Burr For Saying Senate Intelligence Committee Has
Found No Evidence Of Collusion. *Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=077-217&t=c>,
“Highly respected Senator Richard Burr, Chairman of Senate Intelligence,
said today that, after an almost two year investigation, he saw no evidence
of Russia collusion. ‘We don’t have anything that would suggest there was
collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia.’ Thank you!” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=078-e6b&t=c>
(2/7, Choi) reports that Burr told CBS that the committee “has yet to find
evidence of collusion,” though he “said some questions raised over the
investigation could occupy the committee ‘for the next decade,’ and that
portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never
revealed to the public.”

        CBS News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=079-835&t=c>
(2/7, Gazis) reports on its website, “For more than an hour, Burr detailed
the committee’s work and findings to date, explained why its investigation
will stretch beyond its second year, and addressed the potential of a
partisan breakdown at its conclusion.” Burr “made clear that the
investigation is not compiling the story of one pivotal election, but of
something larger, more complicated and, from a counterintelligence
perspective, more nefarious. The final report may be so highly classified,
he said, that a meaningful portion may not be made public at all.” He said,
“Many of the connections that we’ve made are the direct result of
intelligence products. I think it’s safe to say we’ve interviewed people
that I don’t even know if the special counsel knows about them – but you’ve
got to remember that we’re on a totally separate path than what they are.”

        *Mueller Team Says Manafort Tried To Downplay Russian Associate’s
Conduct. *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07a-2e7&t=c>
(2/7, Gerstein) reports Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team has accused
former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort “of continuing to try to
minimize the conduct” of Konstantin Kilimnik, an “associate with alleged
ties to Russian intelligence, even after Manafort agreed last year to plead
guilty and cooperate with prosecutors, according to a newly released court
transcript.” A “partially redacted transcript...shows that Mueller’s team
contended that when Manafort was debriefed by prosecutors and FBI agents,
he seemed to be trying to avoid providing information that could be
damaging” to Kilimnik, “a Russian-Ukrainian national who was deeply
involved in Manafort’s political consulting work in Ukraine.”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07b-a6d&t=c>
(2/7, Chaitin) reports that Andrew Weissmann, a “top prosecutor” for
Mueller, told US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson that a meeting between
Manafort and Kilimnik “is at ‘the heart of what the Special Counsel’s
Office is investigating.’” He added, “This goes to the larger view of what
we think is going on, and what we think the motive here is.”

        Kenneth Vogel of the New York Times tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07c-7fa&t=c>,
“KEY CONTEXT FROM MUELLER: MANAFORT had motive to hide & lie about the
$125k paid to him through the pro-Trump @RebuildingAmNow super PAC because:
1) he was trying to hide his financial problems. 2) he had billed himself
to TRUMP (& the world) as working for the campaign for free.” Vogel posted
a series of tweets
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07d-9fe&t=c>
on the Thursday disclosure.

        *CNN Poll Finds Overwhelming Support For Public Report From
Mueller. *CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07e-7a8&t=c>
(2/7, Agiesta) reports on its website, “Nearly nine in 10 Americans say
Robert Mueller’s investigators should produce a full, public report on
their findings, a sentiment that crosses party lines, according to a new
CNN poll.” The survey found that 87 percent “say investigators should
release a public report,” while just nine percent say “they should not.
Support for a public release stands at 80% among Republicans and those who
approve of the way the President is handling his job, and at 92% among
Democrats and those who disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job.
Among independents, 88% say a report should be released.”

        *Judge Agrees To Release Some Cohen Documents, Confirms
Investigation Is Ongoing. *The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=07f-c2b&t=c>
(2/7, Neumeister) reports US District Judge William H. Pauley III
“confirmed in a court filing Thursday that federal prosecutors in New York
are still investigating campaign finance crimes committed” when President
Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen “paid two women to stay silent about
alleged affairs with Trump.” Pauley “made the disclosure as he agreed to
release in several weeks some court documents related to the search warrant
that authorized last April’s FBI raids on Cohen’s home and office. Media
organizations had requested access to the records.” The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=080-4f5&t=c>
(2/7) reports Pauley “said while some of the information can be released in
full, documents related to campaign finance crimes have to be redacted
because they deal with ongoing investigations.”
Trump’s Pledge To Oppose Abortion Wins Applause At National Prayer
Breakfast.

Coverage of President Trump’s appearance at the National Prayer Breakfast
Thursday focuses on his comments on abortion. Trump tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=081-67b&t=c>
a video of his remarks to the breakfast Thursday morning. The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=082-482&t=c>
(2/7, Gearan) reports the President “drew a standing ovation from religious
leaders...for strong antiabortion comments amid a renewed national debate
over the procedure as performed late in pregnancy.” Under the headline,
“National Prayer Breakfast Cheers Donald Trump’s Pro-Life Message,”
Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=083-718&t=c>
(2/7, Spiering) says the President “championed the pro-life message” and
“vow[ed] to defend life.” Trump “received a standing ovation,” when he
said, “We must build a culture that cherishes the dignity and sanctity of
innocent human life. All children, born and unborn, are made in the holy
image of God. ... Every life is sacred, and every soul is a precious gift
from Heaven.”

        The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=084-a4a&t=c>
(2/7, Athey) says Trump “used the breakfast as an opportunity to reaffirm
the lives of unborn children,” while the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=085-075&t=c>
(2/7, Colvin, Miller) says the President “used [his] appearance at [the]
high-profile religious gathering...to stress anti-abortion policies and
appeal to conservative, Christian voters.” The AP adds that in his State of
the Union address Tuesday, Trump “denounced late-term abortion,” and called
on Congress to prohibit “the late-term abortion of children who can feel
pain in the mother’s womb.’”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=086-870&t=c>
(2/7, Gearan) says Trump’s “characterizations of the procedure and recent
state legislative efforts to loosen restrictions on it” in his SOTU address
“were misleading, but they highlighted discomfort around the topic,
including among some of the president’s Democratic political adversaries.”
The Post notes that the President “did not refer directly to that debate in
his remarks Thursday, which were among his strongest on the subject of
abortion generally.” CBS News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=087-036&t=c>
(2/7, Watson) reports that the President “also brought up religious
persecution abroad, human trafficking and other issues he says his
administration is committed to addressing.”

        *Trump’s “Abolition Of Civil Rights” Gaffe Draws Social Media
Criticism. *USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=088-3ee&t=c>
(2/7, Cummings, Fritze) reports the President listed “his administration’s
accomplishments and goals. But those words were quickly overshadowed on
social media when, in the midst of praising religion’s role in US history,
Trump made an apparent gaffe and celebrated the ‘abolition of civil
rights.’” Trump said, “Since the founding of our nation, many of our
greatest strides – from gaining our independence to abolition of civil
rights to extending the vote for women – have been led by people of faith.”

        *SCOTUS Votes 5-4 To Block Louisiana Abortion Law. *The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=089-3b1&t=c>
(2/7, A1, Barnes) reports that in a 5-4 decision Thursday, the Supreme
Court said “that Louisiana may not enforce a law that opponents say would
close most of the state’s abortion clinics and leave it with only one
doctor eligible to perform the procedure.” The Court could still consider
whether the law places an undue burden on “a woman’s access to abortion.”
The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08a-7df&t=c>
(2/7, A1, Liptak) reports the law “requires doctors performing abortions to
have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08b-763&t=c>
(2/7, Sherman) reports Chief Justice John Roberts “joined the court’s four
liberals in putting a hold on the law, pending a full review of the case.”

        *GOP State Legislators Pushing Ahead With Late-Term Abortion Bans. *The
AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08c-b9b&t=c>
(2/7, Crary) reports that while the President’s “call for a ban on
late-term abortions is unlikely to prevail in Congress,” Republican
lawmakers in several states “are pushing ahead with their own tough
anti-abortion bills that they hope can pass muster with the Supreme Court.”
Senate Panel Approves Barr’s Nomination As Attorney General.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08d-f32&t=c>
(2/7, Jalonick, Tucker) reports the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday
approved William Barr’s nomination for attorney general “along party
lines,” with Republicans “praising his credentials and Democrats
questioning how transparent he’ll be once special counsel Robert Mueller’s
Russia investigation concludes.” His nomination now heads to the full
Senate, “where Barr is expected to be confirmed in a vote as soon as next
week.”

        The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08e-067&t=c>
(2/6, Zapotosky) reports that “because Republicans control the Senate, Barr
is likely to be confirmed easily — though potentially without any
Democratic support.” Democrats “said they were particularly concerned that
Barr would not specifically commit to letting the public see whatever
report results from the special-counsel investigation into President
Trump’s campaign.” To the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=08f-cfd&t=c>
(2/7, Fandos), the committee’s “debate and subsequent 12-10 party-line
vote...revealed how fraught the politics around the Justice Department have
become after two years of unrelenting attacks by [President] Trump.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=090-4ab&t=c>
(2/7, Sullivan) likewise says Barr is “expected to win confirmation...as
soon as next week,” but his “independence could be put to the test when
Mueller wraps up his investigation.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=091-c50&t=c>
(2/7, Levine) reports Senate Democrats “have voiced concern about how Barr
would oversee...Mueller’s investigation...in light of a memo he wrote last
year criticizing the investigation as ‘fatally misconceived.’” Barr,
however, sought to assure lawmakers during his confirmation hearings “that
he would allow Mueller to finish his investigation, but Senate Democrats
said he did not do enough to convince them that he would make Mueller’s
final report public.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=092-8bc&t=c>
(2/7, Gurman, Jamerson) and Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=093-255&t=c>
(2/7, Mordock), among other outlets, report similarly on yesterday’s vote.
Bezos Accuses American Media Inc. Of “Extortion And Blackmail.”

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=094-d9d&t=c>
(2/7, Weise) reports Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos on Thursday accused American
Media Inc. Chairman David Pecker in an online Medium
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=095-cf7&t=c>
post of “trying ‘extortion and blackmail’ to stop his investigation into
how his private text messages and photos with his mistress were leaked” to
the National Enquirer. Bezos said “he had been told that if he refused, the
publisher would make risqué and intimate photos of him and his mistress,
Lauren Sanchez, public.” He released several email exchanges as evidence of
the alleged blackmail alongside the written post. ABC World News Tonight[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=096-c53&t=c>
(2/7, lead story, 1:00, Muir) reported that Bezos’ defended his decision to
publicize the personal investigation into AMI in a statement saying, “I
don’t want those photos published, but I don’t want to participate in their
well-known practice of blackmail.”

        In its lead story, NBC Nightly News[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=097-9a7&t=c>
(2/7, lead story, 1:15, Holt) reported Bezos alleged the blackmail campaign
originated because of The Washington Post’s ongoing investigations into the
National Enquirer and the murder of Jamal Khasoggi.

        The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=098-edb&t=c>
(2/7, A1, Alpert) reports on its front page that AMI’s Chief Content
Officer Dylan Howard issued the initial emails to Bezos. The Journal
highlights Pecker’s previous acknowledged efforts to defend President Trump
and Bezos’ role as a consistent critic of the President’s actions.

        According to the CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=099-cfe&t=c>
(2/7, story 10, 1:30, Glor), Bezos hired security expert Gavin De Becker to
lead the investigation into the National Enquirer after the tabloid
published its story on Bezos’ leaked data and his personal life.
Democrats Formally Unveil “Green New Deal” Resolution.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09a-d76&t=c>
(2/7, Friedman, Thrush) reports Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and
Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) on Thursday put forth a “a sweeping resolution
intended to redefine the national debate on climate change by calling for
the United States to eliminate additional emissions of carbon by 2030” as
part of a “grand strategy that combats climate change, creates jobs and
offers an affirmative response to the challenge to core party values posed
by President Trump.” Republicans criticized the resolution because of its
call to “convert ‘100 percent of the power demand in the United States’ to
‘clean, renewable and zero-emission energy sources.” The resolution is
nonbinding, so any affirmative vote would not lead to new regulations or
limitations on the US energy industry.

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09b-dfd&t=c>
(2/7, Daly) reports Markey defended the resolution in a statement, saying,
“Our energy future will not be found in the dark of a mine but in the light
of the sun.” However, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY) dismissed the resolution as a “socialist
manifesto that lays out a laundry list of government giveaways, including
guaranteed food, housing, college and economic security even for those who
refuse to work.”

        Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09c-719&t=c>
(2/7, Volcovici) reports the House legislation gained 64 House co-sponsors,
while the Senate resolution has nine Senate sponsors. Ocasio-Cortez used
the reveal to promise that she would “immediately begin to work on
legislation that would ‘fully flesh out the projects involved in the Green
New Deal.’” However, USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09d-55a&t=c>
(2/7, King) reports that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s commitment to the
Green New Deal may be less firm than initially assumed after she declined
to comment on the resolution. But Ocasio-Cortez rejected the rumors in her
statement, saying, “Nancy Pelosi is a leader on climate, has always been a
leader on climate. And I will not allow this caucus to be divided up by
silly notions for whatever narrative.”

        Bloomberg News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09e-0b1&t=c>
(2/7, Edgerton, Natter) reports Pelosi only offered a “tepid response”
during her press conference, where she said, “Quite frankly I haven’t seen
it, but I do know it’s enthusiastic, and we welcome all the enthusiasms
that are out there.” Pelosi used the press conference to highlight that the
Democratic majority is studying the issue of climate change from a variety
of perspectives and highlight that the Green New Deal is one of many
forthcoming proposals. Under the headline “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Green
New Deal Draws Laughs, Divides Democrats,” the Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=09f-6aa&t=c>
(2/7, Richardson) reports, “The wildly ambitious progressive grab-bag drew
support from 2020 Democratic presidential contenders, a lukewarm response
from...Pelosi, and guffaws on the right over some of the demands, starting
with economic security for those ‘unwilling to work.’”

        In an editorial, the Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a0-1a8&t=c>
(2/7) lauds West Virginia’s new economic data about the state’s budgeting,
which saw an estimated $180 million surplus during the first half of 2018.
The Journal warns that the proposed Green New Deal will undo all of the
progress and economic growth in energy-producing states.

        Sean Hannity said on Fox News’ Hannity[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a1-e14&t=c>
(2/7), “Today, Ocasio-Cortez rolled out what is a horrific, frightening,
frankly, piece of legislation. She’s calling it the Green New Deal.
Everything we have been saying about the new radical extreme Democratic
party, what they were hiding in 2018, now it’s all in writing, and it might
be even worse than we thought because just hours ago Ocasio-Cortez and
others put forth one of the most dangerous, impractical, misguided,
economically guaranteed to be devastating plans ever championed by any
American politician.”

        In his Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a2-2a9&t=c>
(2/7) column, Eugene Robinson advocates on behalf of the resolution,
because “climate change is the biggest, most important story of our time,”
and the US’ choice will lead “our grandchildren and great-grandchildren to
judge us by how well we meet the challenge.” Robinson reiterates the recent
warning that “last year was officially proclaimed the fourth-warmest on
record” and he cited new predictions “that melting ice in Antarctica and
Greenland could not only raise sea levels but also further destabilize
weather patterns.” He calls on US citizens to look past the “pie in the
sky” goals and focus on the dangers that could result if we do not act.

        Byron York of the Washington Examiner said on Fox News’ Special
Report
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a3-261&t=c>
(2/7), “AOC has been a member of Congress for 35 days now and on her 35th
day she promises to remake American society and the American way of life
and the American economy. I mean, the Green New Deal if it were actually to
become a reality, which it won’t but if it were it is that big. ... If you
listen to her, she wants to spend 40 to 50 percent of GDP on this. Federal
outlays right now are about 20 percent. They have never really been above
that very much except for 1943, 43, 44 and 45 when we did spend 40 plus
percent of GDP to win World War II. The idea that most Americans would
think that climate change is a World War II-like crisis is really
unlikely.”

        Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist said on Fox News’ Special
Report[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a4-dc5&t=c>
(2/7), “It is a very radical proposal. It does propose getting rid of air
travel and cars and boats and gutting every building in America. It is also
agreed to by Al Gore and Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and Elizabeth
Warren. I am not sure how well this will go over with the average American
voter particularly given that there is not really a constituency. There is
not really a case being made for why you would need to upend your lives,
destroy life as you know it, destroy wealth and job opportunities, get rid
of massive industries that employ thousands and millions of people and for
what?”

        *New House Climate Committee Forms Without Ocasio-Cortez. *The
Washington
Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a5-244&t=c>
(2/7, Ferrechio) reports that Pelosi on Thursday announced the formation of
a new select House committee on climate change, but Ocasio-Cortez did not
earn a seat on the panel for unclear reasons. Pelosi said during the press
conference that “Ocasio-Cortez declined a spot on the panel,” while
Ocasio-Cortez indicated that her current congressional responsibilities did
not provide her with enough time to join. The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a6-8d4&t=c>
(2/7, Pearce) reports that Ocasio-Cortez rejected rumors about her
nonappointment to the new House climate committee. She told the press that
House Pelosi “did, in fact, invite me to be on this committee, so I don’t
think that this is a snub.”

        *WPost’s Weigel: 2020 Democrats “Embracing The Litmus Test” Of The
New Green Deal. *Writing Thursday on the website of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a7-55d&t=c>
(2/7), reporter Dave Weigel said, “As of this morning, the Green New Deal
has the backing of three Democrats running for president — Sens. Elizabeth
Warren (Mass.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) and Kamala D. Harris (Calif.) –
as well as of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).” Weigel asked, “Why would
Democrats who want to be president sign on to legislation that could easily
be described as a plan to make most cars obsolete and to update every
building in the country to meet new climate standards? ... The actual text
of the deal is so aspirational, and unspecific, that no 2020 Democrat has
backed away from it. For the umpteenth time in this primary, they are
embracing the litmus test.”
Trump Says He Is Open To Revisiting SALT Cap.

Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a8-abd&t=c>
(2/7, Browning) reports President Trump “said he’d consider changes to a
cap on the federal deduction for state and local taxes, one of the most
divisive provisions of the 2017 Republican tax overhaul.” According to
Bloomberg News, “Trump told regional newspaper reporters in response to a
question Wednesday that he’s ‘open to talking about’ revisions to the
so-called SALT cap, which limits to $10,000 the amount of state and local
levies, including property taxes, that taxpayers can deduct each year on
their federal returns.” Said Trump, “There are some people from New York
who have been speaking to me about doing something about that, about
changing things. It’s been severe on them.”

        The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0a9-cde&t=c>
(2/7, Wilhelm) reports that “almost as quickly as President Trump mused
about lifting the cap on state and local tax deductions,” Sen. Chuck
Grassley “said it won’t happen.” Said a Grassley spokesman, “The Senate
Finance Committee won’t be revisiting the SALT deduction reforms made in
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act under Chairman Grassley’s leadership. The SALT
deduction is a federal subsidy for states to raise taxes on their residents
without political consequence. The answer to the problem is for states to
lower their taxes instead of insisting that taxpayers from lower-tax states
subsidize their profligate spending.”
Democrats Seek To Limit Corporate Windfall From Trump Tax Cut.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0aa-c7b&t=c>
(2/7, Tankersley) reports that “top Democrats, eager to reverse a corporate
windfall created by President Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax cut, are
galvanizing around economic policies aimed at limiting the ability of
companies to enrich shareholders.” The efforts, says the Times, are “part
of a growing push to stoke Main Street anger toward Wall Street ahead of
the 2020 presidential election.” Democrats are “looking for ways to prod
businesses to share more of the winnings” from the Trump tax cuts with
their workers. This week, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who “has long allied
with the financial firms that drive much of Manhattan’s economy, proposed
limiting the ability of corporations to buy back shares of their stock and
suggested possible changes in the tax treatment of investments.” In an
interview, Schumer said, “It’s a signal to corporate America that we have
to go back to the old ways.”
Cancer Research
FDA Warns Breast Implants Linked To Rare Form Of Cancer.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0ab-94b&t=c>
(2/7, Miller) reports, “A rare cancer linked to breast implants has killed
at least nine patients since 2010, federal health officials warned” on Feb.
6.

        The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0ac-08f&t=c>
(2/7, Perrone) reports the Food and Drug Administration issued a letter
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0ad-e0f&t=c>
warning healthcare professionals “to be on the lookout for a rare cancer
linked to breast implants after receiving more reports of the disease.” The
AP adds that breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma
(BIA-ALCL) “usually forms in the scar tissue that forms around implants.”
FDA spokeswoman Stephanie Caccomo said, “Having everyone informed about
this is in the best interest of the patient.”

        CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0ae-67a&t=c>
(2/7, Karimi) reports on its website that the FDA said “at least 457 women
in the United States have so far been diagnosed with anaplastic large cell
lymphoma,” and nine women have died from the rare cancer. CNN adds that
“the rare cancer...affects cells in the immune system and can be found
around the breast implant.”

        The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0af-f37&t=c>
(2/7, Gstalter) reports the FDA said in its letter, “We want all healthcare
providers to be aware of BIA-ALCL, particularly in patients with new
swelling, lumps, or pain around breast implants, to expedite diagnosis of
this malignancy.” Dr. Binita Ashar of the FDA’s Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, said in a statement, “We want to provide patients with
the most up-to-date information about the variety of breast implants
available so that patients and providers can have thorough and thoughtful
discussions weighing the benefits and risks of different products.”

        The Radiology Business Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b0-7cd&t=c>
(2/7, Walter) reports the letter was “signed by William Maisel, MD, MPH,
CMO of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health.”

        Fortune
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b1-5e8&t=c>
(2/7, Shoot) also covers the story.
Lung-MAP Announces It Will Expand To Patients With All Non-Small-Cell Lung
Cancers.

Cancer Network
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b2-5c2&t=c>
(2/7, Levitan) reports that “the large precision medicine trial known as
Lung-MAP (Lung Cancer Master Protocol) has announced it will expand to
patients with all non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC), accounting for as
many as 85% of all lung cancer diagnoses in the” US. According to the
Cancer Network, “The trial is a public-private partnership, cosponsored by
the National Cancer Institute along with various other foundations and
groups, as well as pharmaceutical companies.” In a press release, Meg
Mooney, MD, MBA, of the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Therapy
Evaluation Program, said, “The Lung-MAP trial has already proven its value
by successfully completing trials with new targeted agents in selected,
molecularly defined subsets of squamous cell lung cancer. This amendment to
the trial will allow patients with all types of non–small-cell lung cancer
to potentially benefit.”
Editorials/Op-Eds
New York Times.

*“Which Way To The North Pole?”* The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b3-ba9&t=c>
(2/7) editorializes on the reported movement of magnetic north towards
Russia, saying, “The stories under the headlines proved less alarming,” as
they indicated it is “a phenomenon for which humans bore no responsibility
and for which responsible institutions and monitors (well, when the United
States government was not shut down) had effective solutions.” The Times
sees no reason for concern in this, but adds that the geographic North Pole
“is also shifting east,” and says scientists think it may be that “the
redistribution of mass on Earth as glaciers and ice sheets melt is one of
the major reasons.” The Times says that “should be causing real concern.”

        *“Public Records Belong To The Public.” *In an editorial, the New
York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b4-142&t=c>
(2/7) condemns Thursday the lack of public access to the Public Access to
Court Electronic Records system, which “was designed, at least in
principle, to provide online access to the more than one billion court
documents that have been docketed in federal courts across the country
since the advent of electronic case filing.” Despite the transparent nature
of the system’s name, the DOJ “charges 10 cents per page to view electronic
court documents – or up to $3 for documents exceeding 30 pages” and the
pricing structure is at the center of a new lawsuit that cites the
E-Government Act of 2002’s requirement for the court’s to “impose fees
‘only to the extent necessary’ to make public records available.” The Times
lauds the plaintiffs in the lawsuit and calls for a more transparent
judicial system for all Americans.
Washington Post.

*“The World Needs Rational American Leadership On Climate Change.”*
The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b5-552&t=c>
(2/7) editorializes against President Trump’s tweet from last week in which
he wrote, “WHAT THE hell is going on with Global Waming?” The Post says
that “The warming of the Earth is unmistakable,” and according to NASA and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration “2018 was the
fourth-warmest year on record.” The Post also criticizes the Democrats’
“Green New Deal” saying that while it is “not nearly as harmful as Mr.
Trump’s rank denialism, engaging in this sort of fantasy also hurts the
cause of practically addressing the issue.” The Post concludes, “The world
needs rational US leadership. Unfortunately, global warming will not stop
in the meantime.”

        *“Congress, It’s Time To Find A Middle Ground On Border Security.” *The
Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b6-e8c&t=c>
(2/7) editorializes, “Despite President Trump’s contempt for the niceties
of legislating...there are hopeful signs emerging from Capitol Hill.”
Senate Majority Leader McConnell and House Speaker Pelosi have both
suggested “that any agreement struck by negotiators would be brought up for
a floor vote.” The Post says “Americans, fed up with Washington
dysfunction, want no more shutdowns. The only way to resolve any facet of
the immigration debate is for both parties and other stakeholders to accept
part of a loaf.”

        *“It’s Time For China To Grow Up And Leave The World Bank Nest.” *The
Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b7-7fd&t=c>
(2/7) editorializes against the World Bank continuing to lend “to China at
below-market interest rates,” saying that these loans are “ultimately
underwritten, in part, by the United States,” adding, “this is not a
healthy, sustainable or even logical situation.” The Post adds that
President Trump’s choice for World Bank president, David Malpass, “is among
those questioning China’s continued access to subsidized multilateral
funding.” The Post adds that “there are legitimate reasons for concern over
Mr. Malpass’s nomination,” but concludes, “To the extent he promotes a
realistic, mature relationship between the institution and China, however,
Mr. Malpass’s tenure wouldn’t necessarily be the end of the world, much
less the World Bank.”

*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=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b8-a27&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=2019020801biden&r=email-04b3&l=0b9-ad9&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