EMAIL DETAILS

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing


*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com>
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 6, 2019 7:58 AM
*To:* Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Wednesday, February 6, 2019


*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=000-603&t=c>
mobile-optimized online version, including download options and an audio
reader.*


[image: Image removed by sender. Office of Vice President Biden
Intelligence Briefing]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=001-761&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

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

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

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

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

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

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

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S28>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019020601biden&r=email-dc63&l=077-ec