For instructions on how to disable your ad blocker, click here.
If this is your first time registering, check your inbox to learn more about the benefits of your Forbes account and what you can do next.
Democrats are calling for additional facts about explosive allegations Russia has awarded bonds to militants in Afghanistan to kill U.S. infantrymen and call on Trump’s top leadership officials to testify, while the White House and President Trump continue to provide conflicting versions of the facts.
On Friday, the New York Times reported that Russia last year presented bonds to Taliban militants to kill U.S. coalition forces in Afghanistan; Trump, according to the Times and other media outlets, reported on the stage in March 2020, and the White House stubbornly a reaction with the president, but no action was taken.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are pushing for instant answers in the report, and Democrats have harshly criticized the president for his accusations that he sat down with that data and did not respond.
The House’s Democratic leaders were briefed through the White House Tuesday about the allegations, but lawmakers insisted that they had not obtained “any circular information.”
“The right of other Americans to give the information was not in the room,” said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D.Calif., To reporters Tuesday: According to Politico, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe and National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien were present , among others.
Senate Democrats called Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mike Hide with testifying this week for the reports, adding exactly when they read the information: “The president would not have taken any control stations to confront the Kremlin,” democrats wrote in the letter.
Trump insisted that he had never been affected by the news of Russia’s bonds and called reports that they otherwise suggested a “deception,” while the White House seems to claim that the president was never “affected” because the facts were not revealed to him and instead gave the lok in a written report.
“What we prefer is a briefing of the intelligence networks to give us their assessment of the credibility of this data,” the House majority leader Stebig apple Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday. “We haven’t gained a lot of new backgcircular data in the data.”
A small Organization of Senate Republicans can be informed through the White House on Tuesday.
After the Times published its report Friday, additional facts were reported on the allegations. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that senior White House officials were briefed on data on Russia’s premiums in early 2019, “a year beyond what was previously reported.” Intelligence has also been indexed at no less than a daily intelligence briefing for Trump. The New York Times reported Tuesday that U.S. intelligence officials They had intercepted knowledge of wire transfers between Russia and the Taliban.
The White House said Trump had not been formed and was therefore not very familiar with intelligence reports because of the uncertainty surrounding the information. On Saturday, the White House issued a delicate draft denying that Trump felt affected by the matter, adding that he “did not talk about the merits of the alleged information.” Several officials told the New York Times that Trump won a written briefing at the intelligence service in February. Both Russia and the Taliban have denied the reports. The Russian embassy said Saturday that the Times story was complete with “anonymous and unfounded accusations” in a message on Twitter.
Democrats leave after White House briefing on Russian bonds (Politico)
Republican White House Bureaucracy of Russian Bonuses (Politico)
Trump denies Russia paid Taliban for U.S. troop station (Forbes)
Russia secretly presented bonds to Afghan militants to kill US troops, intelligence (New York Times)
Knowledge of the financial movement reinforced suspicions that Russia provides bonuses (New York Times)
I cover national politics for Forbes. Previously, I wrote for TIME, Newsweek, New York Daily News, and VICE News. I also have my own startup, Newsreel, a
I cover national politics for Forbes. Previously, I wrote for TIME, Newsweek, New York Daily News, and VICE News. I also announced the beginning, Newsreel, a political form of political news for a tender audience.