EMAIL DETAILS

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing


*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, January 17, 2019 7:59 AM
*To:* Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Thursday, January 17, 2019


*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=000-d61&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=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=001-fbc&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

*Thursday, January 17, 2019 8:00 AM EST*
Today's Table of Contents

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

• Poll: Trump’s Approval Rating Dips; Biden’s Favorable Rating Tops Among
2020 Democrats. <#S1>

• CNN’s Bolduan Describes Biden As “The Quintessential Centrist.” <#S2>

• National Review’s Geraghty Highlights “Twenty Things You Probably Didn’t
Know About” Biden. <#S3>

• Loudell Highlights Article On Biden’s 2020 Deliberations. <#S4>

• 2020 Democrats Face Decision On Whether To Battle Trump Or Pay Him No
Heed. <#S5>

• Some Democrats Worry Liberals Will Choose A 2020 Nominee Who Lacks Appeal
In Swing States. <#S6>

• Sanders Meets With Ex-Staff Members About Alleged Harassment On 2016
Campaign. <#S7>

• Media Analyses: Gillibrand Emphasizing Her Gender Early In 2020
Democratic Race. <#S8>

• After Visiting New Hampshire Last Weekend, Warren Returning This Friday.
<#S9>

• O’Rourke Questions Whether “230-Plus Years” Old Constitution Still
Relevant. <#S10>

• Stumping In New Hampshire, Castro Issues Call For “Tuition-Free” Public
Colleges, Apprenticeships. <#S11>

• 2020 Presidential Race Appears Likely To Shatter Record For Democrats’
Largest Field. <#S12>

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

• Republicans Weigh Alternative Venues After Pelosi Asks Trump To Skip
State Of Union Address. <#S13>

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

• Media Analyses: Syria Attack Undermines Trump’s Claim That ISIS Is
Defeated. <#S14>

• Talks Fail To Bridge US-Russia Differences Over Missile Treaty. <#S15>

• At Least 21 Dead In Al-Shabaab Attack In Kenya. <#S16>

• May Follows Confidence Vote Victory With Attempt To Find Path To Brexit.
<#S17>

• Sources: Trump Could Announce Second North Korea Summit This Week. <#S18>

• Rouhani: Iran To Attempt Another Satellite Launch In A Few Months. <#S19>

• Report: Trump Peace Plan Sees Palestinian State In Most Of West Bank,
Capital In East Jerusalem. <#S20>

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

• Pence, Kushner Tell GOP Senators Trump Won’t End Shutdown Without Wall
Funding. <#S21>

• NYTimes Analysis: White House Redefining Who Is Essential As Shutdown
Continues. <#S22>

• Giuliani: “I Never Said There Was No Collusion Between The Campaign” And
Russia. <#S23>

• GSA IG Expresses Constitutional Concerns Over Trump Hotel Lease. <#S24>

• Leaked Ohr Transcript: After Comey Firing, FBI Sought Out Steele. <#S25>

• Judge Orders Susan Rice, Other Obama Officials To Answer Questions In
Clinton Email Case. <#S26>

• Wheeler Defends His Tenure At EPA, Says Climate Change Not “Greatest
Crisis” Facing US. <#S27>

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

• Opinion: More Diversity In Clinical Trials Needed. <#S28>

• Study Suggests LGBTQ Knowledge Gap Among Oncologists. <#S29>

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S30>

• Washington Post. <#S31>
Biden in the News
Poll: Trump’s Approval Rating Dips; Biden’s Favorable Rating Tops Among
2020 Democrats.

In an online article, NPR
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=002-1f5&t=c>
(1/17, Montanaro) reports that an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll of 1,023 US
adults, taken Jan. 10-13, pegs President Trump’s approval rating at 39%,
with 53% disapproving – “a 7-point net change from December when his”
approval rating stood at 42%, with 49% disapproving. NPR says that Trump is
facing “some significant headwinds for re-election in 2020. Just 30 percent
of registered voters said they will definitely vote for Trump in 2020,
while 57 percent said they will definitely vote against him.” NPR adds, “As
for who Trump would face, former Vice President Joe Biden stands apart from
the Democratic field, in terms of how Democratic voters feel about him.” He
“is the best-known potential Democratic candidate, and is very well liked –
76 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have a
favorable impression of him. Just 12 percent have a negative view.”

*2020 Poll: Sanders, Biden Viewed Most Favorably By Millennials. *The
Lowell (MA) Sun
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=003-33f&t=c>
(1/16) reports that in a UMass Lowell/YouGov national poll of 1,000
Americans ages 18-37 (millennials), taken Nov. 30-Dec. 10, 62% “said they
disapprove of Trump’s job performance,” while 37% said they approve of his
job performance. The Sun says, “Of those polled, 54 percent identify
themselves as Democrats, 32 percent as Republicans, 12 percent as
independents and 2 percent were unsure.” Among the field of potential 2020
Democratic candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Biden “are the most
well-liked by millennials, with 54 percent who have a favorable impression
of Sanders and 51 percent who have a favorable view of Biden. Forty percent
said they have a favorable view of [Sen. Elizabeth] Warren and 36 percent
of [ex-Rep. Beto] O’Rourke.”
CNN’s Bolduan Describes Biden As “The Quintessential Centrist.”

The Washington Free Beacon
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=004-0a3&t=c>
(1/16, Rutz) reported that CNN anchor Kate Bolduan described former Vice
President Joe Biden “as the ‘quintessential centrist’ in the 2020
Democratic primary on Wednesday, should he decide to run.” Discussing Sen.
Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-NY) entry into the race, “Bolduan wondered what
‘lane’ she might occupy.” Bolduan said that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
“is to the far left. If Joe Biden gets in, he’s kind of the quintessential
centrist, if you will. Where does Kirsten Gillibrand fit into this?” The
report added, “It is unclear what positions Biden has held in his lengthy
career that would lend to him being defined as a ‘centrist,’ except perhaps
compared to the far-left tilt of the new batch of potential Democratic
Party challengers for the nomination.”
National Review’s Geraghty Highlights “Twenty Things You Probably Didn’t
Know About” Biden.

In a negative piece headed “Twenty Things You Probably Didn’t Know About
Joe Biden,” Jim Geraghty – writing for National Review
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=005-63a&t=c>
(1/17) – lists a number of items about former Vice President Joe Biden. For
instance, Geraghty writes that Biden “received five student draft
deferments during the Vietnam War – which just happens to be the same
number of deferments received by former Vice President Dick Cheney. Biden
later was disqualified from service because of the asthma that he suffered
as a teenager,” though the condition “was not severe enough to stop” him
“from playing on his high-school football team or playing halfback for the
University of Delaware Blue Hens.” Other items touched on by Geraghty – as
they relate to Biden – include: “forced busing,” “abortion,” “the 1984
Crime Control Act,” and “the Gulf War.”
Loudell Highlights Article On Biden’s 2020 Deliberations.

In his blog on the website of WDEL-AM
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=006-c1b&t=c>
Wilmington, DE (1/16), Allan Loudell highlighted an article
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=007-312&t=c>
(1/16) by David Catanese of US World & News Report – covered in yesterday’s
briefing – that focused on former Vice President Joe Biden’s deliberations
on a 2020 run for president. Loudell wrote, “The latest Joe Biden intrigue:
The former Vice President has largely disappeared from the public view.
Interpretation: The former Veep is in the final stages of deliberations
about you-know-what.”
2020 Democrats Face Decision On Whether To Battle Trump Or Pay Him No Heed.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=008-7e7&t=c>
(1/16, Beaumont, Schor) reports that the field of 2020 Democratic
contenders “must decide how – and whether – to respond to [President]
Trump’s pugnacious and insensitive attacks on his political opponents. If
they punch back too hard, they could be accused of playing Trump’s game. If
they ignore him entirely, they risk appearing unprepared to take on a
president who knows few boundaries.” The AP says that some, like Sen.
Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), “indicate that, whenever possible, they plan to
ignore Trump’s personal needling and focus on issues.” Others, though,
“haven’t hesitated to tangle with Trump.” For instance, former Vice
President Joe Biden “said last March that he would have ‘beat the hell out
of’ Trump if they were in high school together, citing Trump’s now-infamous
2005 comments about assaulting women with impunity.”

In an online article, Fox News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=009-a98&t=c>
(1/15, Steinhauser) reported that early in her campaign, Warren “so far has
curiously avoided” mentioning Trump by name – “a tactic that’s apparently
part of a broader party strategy, albeit one that could leave candidates
like” her “limited in their ability to strike back at an incumbent who
shows no qualms about personally attacking every political foe.”
Some Democrats Worry Liberals Will Choose A 2020 Nominee Who Lacks Appeal
In Swing States.

McClatchy
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00a-3cf&t=c>
(1/17, Glueck, Roarty) reports that liberals “are emboldened as the 2020
presidential primary season begins, but other Democratic leaders are
already questioning whether a nominee chosen by” progressives “can both
excite the base and hold onto red-district voters who just helped deliver
them the House of Representatives. It’s a critical issue in general
election battleground states that Donald Trump won last time, from Florida
to Pennsylvania.” McClatchy says that “to win back swing states,” Democrats
“can’t afford to lose many of the centrist voters who supported Democratic
candidates across the country last fall – the type of voters who are
troubled by [President] Trump but are also leery of a progressive agenda
that they perceive as too extreme.”
Sanders Meets With Ex-Staff Members About Alleged Harassment On 2016
Campaign.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00b-5cf&t=c>
(1/16, Ember, Benner) reports that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Wednesday
had a meeting “with former staff members who conveyed their dismay over the
mistreatment of women during his 2016 campaign, in an effort to calm the
unrest over sexism that is overshadowing his possible 2020 bid.” The
sit-down, which took place in Washington, DC, was held “in response to a
recent letter sent by more than two dozen people who worked on Mr.
Sanders’s 2016 campaign, asking to meet with” him “and his leadership team
to discuss issues of harassment.” Sanders didn’t speak with the media
“afterward, and some attendees said they preferred to keep the discussions
private.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00c-521&t=c>
(1/16, Otterbein, Thompson) reported, “The former aides sought a meeting
with Sanders to ‘discuss the issue of sexual violence and harassment on the
2016 campaign, for the purpose of planning to mitigate the issue in the
upcoming presidential cycle,’ according to a copy of [the] letter.” Those
who sought the meeting “said that Wednesday was only the first step in a
process to create practical ways for improving the campaign’s culture. They
said they planned to conduct more fact-finding with other people from the
2016 campaign, and hoped not only to create a blueprint for Sanders but
also to produce something that can be shared publicly for all campaigns.”

In an online article, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00d-042&t=c>
(1/16, Krieg, Nobles) reported, “A former staffer for the Sanders campaign,
who asked her name not be revealed,” said that “Sanders was present for
‘about an hour’ and described him as ‘conciliatory.’ She said he opened his
remarks with an ‘honest apology.’ ‘It was clear that he came to listen and
to have us be heard,’ the former staffer said.”
Media Analyses: Gillibrand Emphasizing Her Gender Early In 2020 Democratic
Race.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00e-d16&t=c>
(1/16, Summers) reports that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who on Tuesday
“jumped into the presidential race,” on Wednesday visited “her upstate New
York hometown” of Troy, New York, where she offered a “preview [of] a
campaign that is expected to put gender front and center.” Appearing
outside a local eatery, Gillibrand “framed the campaign as an extension of
motherhood.” Said Gillibrand, “I’m going to run for president of the United
States because as a young mom, I will fight for your children as hard as I
would fight for my own.” Gillibrand was accompanied “by her husband,
Jonathan, their 10- and 15-year-old sons, and her mother, Polly.”

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=00f-9e0&t=c>
(1/16, Johnson) reports that as she “introduces herself to more Americans
this week,” Gillibrand “is presenting herself in a few different ways: the
mother of two young boys who...would ‘fight for other people’s kids as hard
as I fight for my own.’ The resident of a working-class town who likes dive
bars and swearing, has declined campaign donations from corporate political
action committees and knows that ‘a lot of people feel left behind.’ A
fighter who hasn’t been afraid to challenge members of her own party and
will ‘take on the systems of power.’ ... And a working woman who has to
deal with a male reporter asking her to comment on his assessment of her
likability.”

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=010-a26&t=c>
(1/16, Wang) reports that during her appearance in Troy, Gillibrand was
asked “about her unequivocal promise, just three months earlier, not to run
for president as she sought re-election to represent” New York. She
replied, “I continue to fight for New Yorkers as I’ve always done. But I
believe the urgency of this moment now is we have to take on President
Trump and what he is doing.”

*Gillibrand Says She Won’t Accept Super PAC Support. *Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=011-d30&t=c>
(1/16, Schneider, Niedzwiadek) reported during her Troy visit, Gillibrand
“rejected support from an individualized super PAC,” taking a stance “on
campaign finance that’s defining the early stage of the Democratic
primary.” Politico said that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has “called on
other 2020 candidates to reject super PAC support,” while ex-Rep. Beto
O’Rourke (D-TX), “who’s considering his own presidential run, did the same
in his 2018 Texas Senate run.”
After Visiting New Hampshire Last Weekend, Warren Returning This Friday.

The Springfield (MA) Republican
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=012-866&t=c>
(1/16, Young) reports that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) “will again make
her pitch to New Hampshire voters Friday as” she “mulls a 2020 presidential
run. Warren, who met with Granite State residents last weekend, will hold
an organizing event...in Claremont, N.H., her exploratory committee
announced Wednesday.” The event “will mark Warren’s third in New Hampshire
in just one week.”
O’Rourke Questions Whether “230-Plus Years” Old Constitution Still Relevant.

The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=013-268&t=c>
(1/16, Chasmar) reports that ex-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), a potential
White House hopeful, “recently questioned the modern-day relevance of the
US Constitution and whether the country should still be governed by ‘the
same principles that were set down 230-plus years ago.’ ‘I think that’s the
question of the moment: Does this still work?’ Mr. O’Rourke asked during a
taped conversation with two friends, which he aired to thousands in
response to President Trump’s Oval Office address to the American people
about the border wall.’” O’Rourke added, “Can an empire like ours with
military presence in over 170 countries around the globe, with trading
relationships...and security agreements in every continent, can it still be
managed by the same principles that were set down 230-plus years ago?”

*Carlson Rips O’Rourke Over Remarks On Constitution. *In his
opening monologue on Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=014-835&t=c>
(1/16), Tucker Carlson said that O’Rourke “is the favorite to win the
Democratic nomination,” and “walls are bad” is to date “the sum total of
what we know about [his] policy views,” expressed as part of an interview
with the Washington Post. Carlson said, “The real question is what the hell
is Beto O’Rourke talking about? It’s not like he is pretending to know. He
makes it perfectly clear he has no idea what he is saying.” He added that
what O’Rourke “wants to transform next is nothing less than the United
States of America, starting with the belief the country was founded on,”
but “the principles he refers to would include the Bill of Rights, freedom
of speech, freedom of assembly, and the rights to self-defense and fair
trial. Does any of that still matter?”

*Mulling 2020 Run, O’Rourke Sets Off On Road Trip. *The Texas
Tribune
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=015-7de&t=c>
(1/16, Svitek) reports that O’Rourke, who is being urged to run for
president, “has embarked on a trip outside Texas, the first stops of which
he detailed in a Medium post Wednesday.” In the post, O’Rourke wrote that
“he was traveling along US Route 54 from his El Paso hometown, through New
Mexico, across the Texas and Oklahoma panhandles, and into Kansas.” Said
O’Rourke, “Have been stuck lately. In and out of a funk. Maybe if I get
moving, on the road, meet people, learn about what’s going on where they
live, have some adventure, go where I don’t know and I’m not known, it’ll
clear my head, reset, I’ll think new thoughts, break out of the loops I’ve
been stuck in.”

The El Paso (TX) Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=016-09c&t=c>
(1/16, Mekelburg) reports that although O’Rourke “didn’t reference his
future plans,” his post “fueled speculation that he would” enter the 2020
race for the White House. In an online article, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=017-2eb&t=c>
(1/16, Zeleny, Bradner) reported, “The road trip follows weeks of O’Rourke
selling his authenticity by filming scenes at the border, across El Paso
and beyond. But the Medium posts and viral videos have done little to
answer one of the biggest questions looming over him: Is he ready to be
president?”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=018-a9b&t=c>
(1/16, Siders) reported that as he kicks off his “highly anticipated road
trip,” O’Rourke’s “former advisers are quietly sketching the outline of a
potential presidential run that would replicate – and on a national scale –
the grassroots-driven organizing model O’Rourke employed in his”
unsuccessful 2018 challenge to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Politico said, “Becky
Bond, a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign and an
adviser to O’Rourke’s 2018 Senate run, has been talking with operatives in
recent days about potential jobs on a 2020 campaign,” according to “two
sources.”
Stumping In New Hampshire, Castro Issues Call For “Tuition-Free” Public
Colleges, Apprenticeships.

The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=019-396&t=c>
(1/16, Hagen) reported that ex-HUD Secretary Julián Castro (D), a
presidential hopeful, on Wednesday “called for ‘tuition free’ public
colleges, apprenticeships and other certification programs as a way to make
the US workforce more competitive.” The Democrat “had initially called for
more ‘accessible and affordable’ higher education when he announced his
candidacy, but went a step further at a New Hampshire event on Wednesday.”
Said Castro, “We need to ensure, if we want to be competitive, that every
single American who wants a higher education can get one. That’s why I
believe that we need to work toward a tuition-free system of public
university, college, apprenticeship and certification programs in this
country to have the smartest, most well-prepared work force that we can in
this 21st century.”

*Castro Highlights His Latin American Roots. *The New Hampshire
Union Leader
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01a-7c3&t=c>
(1/16, Morin) reports that Castro also told “the story of his grandmother,
who at the age of 7 immigrated to San Antonio from Mexico. Signaling his
intention to run a campaign that embraces the immigration story of his own
Latin American roots, Castro drew parallels between the experiences of his
own family and those of today’s immigrants. ‘We had the chance to reach out
for the American dream, like so many other families throughout the
generations,’ said Castro of himself and his twin brother Rep. Joaquin
Castro.” He added, “I am quite sure that my grandmother, as she was growing
up as a young girl in 1920s Texas, never could have imagined that just two
generations after she had arrived in the United States, that one of her
grandsons would be a member of the United States Congress and the other
would be announcing his” run for president.
2020 Presidential Race Appears Likely To Shatter Record For Democrats’
Largest Field.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01b-5f9&t=c>
(1/16, Page) reports, “An unprecedented field is gathering for the
Democratic presidential nomination – a group that is smashing previous
records in size and diversity, in generation and geography. A sprawling
group of contenders with no presumptive front-runner sets the stage for an
unpredictable contest.” USA Today says that some “30 Democratic
officeholders and activists have signaled they are considering the contest,
and there may be more who are just waiting to be noticed. The field is
poised to outpace the 17 credible candidates who competed at some point for
the 1976 Democratic nomination, the largest number ever. For Republicans, a
record 17 credible candidates ran at some point for the 2016 nomination.”

*McClatchy Analysis: Crowded Democratic Race Sees Lack Of Seasoned
Campaign Operatives. *McClatchy
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01c-97c&t=c>
(1/16, Wollner) reports, “As more Democratic presidential hopefuls inch
closer to entering the 2020 contest, many are running into an early
roadblock: There aren’t enough staffers for everyone. In the critical early
voting states, there are a limited number of high-level operatives with
presidential campaign experience available.” Plus, “with no clear
frontrunner” and “several big names whose intentions remain unclear, some
staffers are hesitant to sign on to a campaign right away. ‘There are not
enough staffers to go around,’ said Jerry Crawford, a veteran of several
Democratic presidential campaigns in Iowa. ‘It’s a reflection that a lot of
candidates won’t have the resources to be competitive.’”
Leading the News
Republicans Weigh Alternative Venues After Pelosi Asks Trump To Skip State
Of Union Address.

Reaction to a letter
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01d-8dc&t=c>
by Speaker Pelosi to the President asking him not to deliver his State of
the Union address due to the ongoing government shutdown broke largely
along party lines, with a number of media analyses casting the letter as a
sharp escalation of partisan tensions in Washington. ABC World News
Tonight[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01e-6a7&t=c>
(1/16, story 6, 2:00, Bruce), for example, referred to a “bold power play”
by Pelosi, and the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=01f-477&t=c>
(1/16, Davis, Fandos) to “a reminder to Mr. Trump that...she has the power
to frustrate his agenda and upend his plans.” Along similar lines, CNN’s
The Lead[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=020-c60&t=c>
(1/16) reported that “Pelosi sending a clear message to...Trump: ‘This is
my House.’”

Special Correspondent Jamie Gangel said on CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=021-a8a&t=c>
(1/16), “This is Donald Trump’s wake-up call. What she did to Donald Trump,
what is his worst nightmare? Take away his audience. This is like taking
away your teenager’s cell phone. I really think she has won round
one.” The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=022-7f3&t=c>
(1/16, Dawsey) reports “Pelosi has moved aggressively to leverage her
decades of congressional experience to needle, belittle and undercut
Trump,” and the Washington Post’s Charles Lane said on Fox News’ Special
Report[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=023-dda&t=c>
(1/16), “The Democrats are loving this.”

NBC Nightly News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=024-bb1&t=c>
(1/16, story 4, 1:25, Alexander) reported “one of the biggest nights of the
year for...Trump may be off,” and the CBS Evening News[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=025-dae&t=c>
(1/16, story 3, 2:05, Garrett) said Pelosi “suggested the President could
submit the speech in writing.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=026-182&t=c>
(1/16, Costa) notes Pelosi “later told reporters that her letter was
intended as a suggestion and that she was not rescinding an invitation for
Trump to speak,” though Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=027-751&t=c>
(1/16, Cornwell, Oliphant) points out she told reporters that “if Trump
would not agree to reschedule the speech...he could deliver it from the
Oval Office.” USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=028-199&t=c>
(1/16, Collins, Jackson, Collins) quotes the Speaker as saying Trump “can
make (the speech) from the Oval Office if he wants.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=029-fb1&t=c>
(1/16, Lucey, Colvin, Mascaro) reports Pelosi “left unclear what would
happen if Trump insisted on coming despite the welcome mat being pulled
away,” but The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02a-e4d&t=c>
(1/16, Brufke) indicates “Republican leadership...suggested that Trump
should come to the Capitol to deliver his annual update even if she decides
to rescind the formal invitation.”

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02b-30e&t=c>
(1/16, Dawsey) reports Josh Holmes, “adviser to Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), called Pelosi ‘a total fighter,’” adding, “She
understands political leverage. She wields the knife.” Holmes also said,
however, that “her call to delay Trump’s speech was ‘a major screw-up’ and
predicted it would backfire.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02c-6e2&t=c>
(1/16, Bresnahan, Caygle, Bade) says “Pelosi privately refers to Trump as
the Whiner in chief.’” She has also “questioned his manhood,” and “calls
out Trump’s lies to his face and openly wonders whether he’s fit for the
job.” Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), “longtime Pelosi friend and political ally,”
is quoted as saying, “She’s satin and steel. He’s just untethered.”

In a story titled “Nancy Pelosi Might Have Just Blown Up The State
Of The Union. And That’s OK,” meanwhile, Jeff Greenfield writes for Politico
Magazine
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02d-d5c&t=c>
(1/16) that “in her historic letter...Pelosi essentially disinvited Trump
from delivering his address,” and cites two “concerns” she may have with
the event as planned, “First: What happens if the new and more militant
members of my caucus refuse to stand for the president, or interrupt his
speech with catcalls? Second: Do I really want to give this particular
president a national platform to make his case on the shutdown?” To
Greenfield, “She has good cause to worry about that second point.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02e-5a1&t=c>
(1/16, Colvin, Superville) says the US Constitution mandates a State of the
Union report to Congress, but “offers no specifics on how that should be
done,” and in fact, “the modern State of the Union address – the pageantry,
the televised address and the agenda-setting message – is a far more recent
phenomenon.” The AP also reports that “the practice of delivering an
in-person address before a joint session of Congress has not always been
the norm.” Karen Tumulty, in her Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=02f-49e&t=c>
(1/16) column, similarly cites 19th Century precedent in arguing that
Pelosi’s “proposal was not as radical as it might sound.”

At any rate, Republicans reacted with outrage yesterday. ABC World
News Tonight[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=030-035&t=c>
(1/16, story 6, 2:00, Bruce) reported “House Republican leader Kevin
McCarthy calls Pelosi’s move ‘unbecoming of a speaker.’” ABC also reported
that “the Speaker of the House does have the power to block the President
from delivering the State of the Union from the House chamber,” though “he
could deliver it elsewhere – possibly even from the Republican-controlled
Senate.” Republicans “are weighing their options.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=031-bcb&t=c>
(1/16, Caygle, Bade) quotes McCarthy as saying, “It’s not a security issue,
it’s politics and she knows it.” Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) “agreed with
McCarthy, calling Pelosi’s move ‘a slap in the face for the TSA workers,
the border patrol agents and air traffic controllers and many federal
employers that she and her party says they’re trying to protect.’” Sen.
John Kennedy (R-LA), meanwhile, “called Pelosi’s letter ‘petty’ but
predicted rescinding the invitation would backfire on Democrats.” Said
Kennedy, “I think she must think the American people are stupid. It’s petty
and most people are going to see that it’s petty. And I strongly encourage
her. Politically, it’s great for us.”

Fox News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=032-993&t=c>
(1/16, Singman) cast Pelosi as “facing a mounting backlash from
Republicans,” and the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=033-1f1&t=c>
(1/16, Costa) points out, meanwhile, that House Minority Whip Steve Scalise
“responded [to Pelosi] on Twitter, suggesting that Democrats were trying to
deny Trump an opportunity to make his case to the nation about the need for
border wall funding.” Wrote
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=034-cf6&t=c>
Scalise, “#ShutdownNancy shut down the government, and now #SOTU. What are
Democrats afraid of Americans hearing? That 17,000+ criminals were caught
last year at the border? 90% of heroin in the US comes across the southern
border? Illegal border crossings dropped 90%+ in areas w/ a wall?” Bloomberg
News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=035-2c2&t=c>
(1/16, News) also highlights Scalise’s tweet. Scalise later said on Fox
News’ The Ingraham Angle[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=036-f90&t=c>
(1/16), “The left has become unhinged. ... They have tried to do everything
to insult the President, to not even acknowledge that he is the President.”

Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) said on CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=037-583&t=c>
(1/16), “I think it’s disingenuous. In fact, I think it’s nuts for the
Speaker to say ‘We should reschedule and to dis-invite the President.’ ...
The second thing is the Speaker primarily wants for the President not to
have an opportunity to speak directly to the American people, especially
about this border security that has been such a divisive issue and, as you
said, led to the shutdown. So I think that’s her primary objective there is
to take away the microphone from the President, not because she’s concerned
about security.”

Townhall
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=038-f20&t=c>
(1/16, Benson) similarly argued that “the truth is that this is a political
play that has nothing to do with the ability of Secret Service and
Congress’ police force to protect the US Capitol building and its
occupants.” Pelosi just “doesn’t want to offer the president an enormous
platform from which to advance his arguments and inevitably blame Democrats
for their refusal to negotiate or compromise.”

The National Review’s Jonah Goldberg said on Fox News’ Special
Report[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=039-f09&t=c>
(1/16), “I think...Pelosi’s explanation for why she does want to do the
security thing buys into the idea that it is a ceremony for a king and it
is lame and dumb. ... If she doesn’t want him there she should say ‘We
don’t want you’ and own it.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03a-8a2&t=c>
(1/16, Caygle, Bade) reports “Democrats scoffed at that notion as they
streamed out of a closed-door meeting Wednesday morning, where Pelosi first
delivered the news of her letter to Trump.” Said House Progressive Caucus
Co-Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), “Why do we have to be concerned about
escalating the war when [Trump] is the one who every day escalates the war
and started this whole thing?” Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), meanwhile,
“said Pelosi’s letter was reasonable given the added security needed for
the speech, and pointed out Trump would have the option to deliver it in
writing.” The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03b-d0c&t=c>
(1/16, Andrews, Bender), Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03c-e76&t=c>
(1/16, Pollak), CQ Roll Call
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03d-622&t=c>
(1/16, McPherson) and The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03e-995&t=c>
(1/16, Lillis), among other news outlets, run similar accounts of Pelosi’s
letter and the ensuing partisan sniping.

*DHS, Secret Service Dispute Pelosi’s Claims About Security. *The Los
Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=03f-f0a&t=c>
(1/16, Wagner) notes that in her letter, Pelosi had argued the State of the
Union should not go forward “given the security concerns” due to the
shutdown “and unless government re-opens this week.” The Federalist
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=040-3f1&t=c>
(1/16, Orr) reported “senior law enforcement officials are responding to
Pelosi’s letter by debunking her false reasoning,” and the New York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=041-f56&t=c>
(1/16, Fredericks) that “the Secret Service and Department of Homeland
Security said they can handle security at...Trump’s State of the Union
address.”

ABC World News Tonight[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=042-96e&t=c>
(1/16, story 6, 2:00, Bruce) noted Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen
tweeted
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=043-a95&t=c>
, “The Department of Homeland Security and US secret service are fully
prepared to support and secure the State of the Union.” The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=044-84e&t=c>
(1/16, Lucey, Colvin, Mascaro) reports Republicans “saw her move as a ploy
to deny Trump the stage,” and Nielsen “denied anyone’s safety is
compromised” because of the shutdown, “saying...agencies ‘are fully
prepared to support and secure” the event. The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=045-f3a&t=c>
(1/16, Dinan) and The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=046-e2d&t=c>
(1/16, Fabian), among other news outlets, also report Nielsen’s response to
Pelosi.

The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=047-c76&t=c>
(1/16, Johnson), meanwhile, reports “the Secret Service was never contacted
by...Pelosi’s office or other Democratic congressional leadership regarding
their ability to protect the president, members of the administration and
Congress during the State of the Union, according to a senior law
enforcement official at the Department of Homeland Security.” Said a
“senior law enforcement official,” “The Secret Service was never contacted
by congressional leadership regarding our security plan or the Secret
Service’s ability to carry it out.” The Daily Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=048-bad&t=c>
(1/16, Johnson) also reports “multiple DHS officials and Secret Service
veterans have said that Pelosi is not being truthful in her remarks and
weaponizing the Secret Service for political reasons.”

*Pelosi On Secret Service Security Assurances: “I Don’t Care What
They Said.” *Under the headline “I Don’t Care What They Said,” the Daily
Caller
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=049-115&t=c>
(1/16, Picket) reports “Pelosi told reporters Wednesday night she ‘doesn’t
care’ if the Secret Service said it was prepared to appropriately secure
the State of the Union address despite the partial government shutdown.”

*Manchin: Pelosi Taking “Wrong Approach.” *Asking about Pelosi’s
letter, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said on MSNBC Live[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04a-0ce&t=c>
(1/16), “I’m not sure what her intentions are, but I think this is a wrong
approach to be taking.” He added, “We should have every type of respectful
dialogue we can. Where I come from, we don’t act this way.” Breitbart
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04b-883&t=c>
(1/16, Caplan) runs a story on Manchin’s comments.

Ed Henry said on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04c-990&t=c>
(1/16), “Pelosi’s gambit appears to be backfiring a bit. ... The President
could also benefit from other cracks in the Democratic side,” as Manchin
“seemed to rebuke Pelosi.”

*More Criticism Of Pelosi. *David Gergen said on CNN’s Anderson
Cooper 360[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04d-d8d&t=c>
(1/16), “She would have been better off arguing politics than the security
question. I think she left herself vulnerable for the first time because
she’d come across overall as a much tougher customer and a very wily
leader. ... It is clearly, she does not want to give the President a forum
to come in there and shoot at them and bang them over the head on the wall
and just give them another platform to go at that. He’s already had one and
she is saying ‘I don’t think you deserve a second crack at it.’”

Political commentator Mike Shields said on CNN’s Anderson
Cooper 360[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04e-c08&t=c>
(1/16), “We have a phrase for this: bollocks. It is absolute bollocks.
Think of what the President gets accused of: stepping on norms, being
bellicose and showing machismo just to delight his base, being petty and
scoring political points, and just flat-out lying to make a case. She hit
all four of those. ... She would have been better served to tell the truth
and say ‘He gave a fantastic State of the Union last year. He will have up
in the balcony victims of people from border security. I don’t want to hand
him that.’ This is a political power move.”

Conservative columnist Mary Katarine Ham said on CNN’s The Lead[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=04f-d3d&t=c>
(1/16), “Do I think more drama works to [Trump’s] advantage? Yes. Do I
think he planned it that way? No. I do have a lot of confidence the Secret
Service would pull off a giant event even in the event of a shutdown.”

The President’s daughter-in-law and senior adviser Lara Trump said
on Fox News’ Hannity[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=050-df4&t=c>
(1/16), “The reality is [Pelosi] is clever because they don’t want Trump to
give another State of the Union, one of his best speeches. ... But the good
news is the President can give it anywhere he wants. He doesn’t have to
give it in front of Congress on Capitol Hill. It is up to him where he
wants to do it. Good try on her part but I don’t think it will go over.”

*Hoyer Walks Back “The State Of The Union Is Off” Comment. *The
Federalist
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=051-325&t=c>
(1/16, Orr) notes House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) “said there is
nothing the president can do to change the speaker’s mind,” telling CNN’s
At This Hour[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=052-5c3&t=c>,
“Yep! The speaker is the one who invites the president to speak at a joint
session, and she has said as long as government is shut down we’re not
going to be doing business as usual. ... The state of the union is off.”
The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=053-daf&t=c>
(1/16, Caralle) reports “Hoyer’s office walked back his stunning
declaration Wednesday afternoon,” with his communications director, Mariel,
Saez, saying, “Mr. Hoyer had not read Speaker Pelosi’s letter and
mischaracterized it.”
Foreign Policy
Media Analyses: Syria Attack Undermines Trump’s Claim That ISIS Is Defeated.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=054-f48&t=c>
(1/16, Mroue) reports that “a number of US troops were killed in an
explosion while conducting a routine patrol in Syria on Wednesday.” The AP
points out in the first sentence of its report that the attack “came less
than a month after” President Trump “announced his intention to withdraw
troops from” Syria. The AP goes on to report that ISIS “claimed
responsibility for the morning attack, which local groups said killed 16
people in the US-patrolled town of Manbij.” The AP adds in the next
sentence, “The claim calls into question Trump’s claim that IS has been
defeated in Syria – his stated reason for pulling 2,000 American troops out
of the country.”

In the lead story for ABC World News Tonight[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=055-4b6&t=c>
(1/16, lead story, 2:50, Muir) noted White House Press Secretary Sarah
Sanders issued a statement saying, “Our deepest sympathies and love go out
to the families of the brave American heroes killed today in Syria. We also
pray for the soldiers who were wounded in the attack.” Barbara Starr
reported for CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=056-780&t=c>
(1/16, 6:02 p.m. EST) that this was “the largest single suicide attack
against American troops inside Syria.”

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=057-99d&t=c>
(1/16, Schmitt, Hubbard) reports that “two American troops and a contractor
were among 15 people killed.” The Times, also in the first sentence of its
article on the attack, says it happened “just weeks after President Trump
ordered the withdrawal of United States forces and declared that the
extremist group had been defeated.” According to the Times, “The bombing
puts Mr. Trump in the position of being squeezed between his decision to
withdraw American troops and his promise in a tweet on Sunday to hit the
Islamic State again, and ‘hard,’ if the group lashed out.” The Times says
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), “who has criticized the Syria withdrawal plan,
suggested the president’s stance emboldened Islamic State fighters and
encouraged such attacks.” Meanwhile, David Martin reported in the lead
story for the CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=058-af9&t=c>
(1/16, lead story, 2:35, Glor) indicated Graham also said the attack shows
that ISIS is “not defeated and they’ve been emboldened.” In its lead story, NBC
Nightly News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=059-26f&t=c>
(1/16, lead story, 2:30, Holt) showed Graham saying, “It set in motion
enthusiasm by the enemy we’re fighting. You make people we’re trying to
help wonder about us. I saw this in Iraq. And I’m seeing it in Syria.”

The first sentence of the report from the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05a-eb9&t=c>
(1/16, Loveluck) about the attack reads, “Multiple Americans were killed in
a suicide attack in Syria on Wednesday, the largest loss of life in the
Pentagon’s war against Islamic State militants there and a sign of the
potent threat that remains as the Trump administration begins to withdraw.”
The Post continues: “The attack occurred in the northern city of Manbij,
where American forces have conducted patrols after militants were flushed
from the area. In coming months, those troops are expected to depart in
keeping with President Trump’s decision to end the military mission in
Syria.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05b-ca7&t=c>
(1/16, McDowall, Stewart), the Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05c-50c&t=c>
(1/16, Bulos) and Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05d-475&t=c>
(1/16, Abdulrahim, Youssef), among other news outlets, run similar stories.

*Pence Fails To Mention Attack In Address Claiming ISIS Has Been
Defeated. *According to the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05e-8d9&t=c>
(1/16, Loveluck), Vice President Pence, “speaking at the State Department
several hours after the US casualty reports, did not mention the bombing or
the deaths, but instead hailed Trump’s leadership in combating the
militants in Syria.” Pence is quoted as saying, “We are bringing our troops
home. ... The caliphate has crumbled, and ISIS has been defeated.”

Likewise, Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=05f-b76&t=c>
(1/16, Wroughton) reports that Pence “did not mention the deaths in an
address to 184 chiefs of US diplomatic missions gathered in Washington from
around the world for a speech that sounded more like a campaign rally than
a strategic overview of US foreign policy.” According to Reuters, “Earlier,
a spokeswoman for Pence’s office, Alyssa Farah, said the vice president had
been briefed about the soldiers’ deaths and expressed his sympathy.” The New
York Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=060-61b&t=c>
(1/16, Steinbuch), The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=061-f41&t=c>
(1/16, Samuels) and Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=062-f1c&t=c>
(1/16, Boyer), among other news outlets, run similar reports on Pence’s
address.

Jim Acosta reported for CNN’s Situation Room[image: Image removed
by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=063-78a&t=c>
(1/16) that “the White house did not seem to have its message straight,”
with Pence declaring victory over ISIS despite the bombing earlier that
morning. In a second segment, Acosta reported for CNN’s Situation Room[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=064-3ee&t=c>
(1/16, 5:08 p.m. EST) that “a White House official tried to explain, saying
that the White House had not yet publicly confirmed the deaths of US
soldiers at the time Pence was speaking.” However, Acosta reported, “The US
coalition against ISIS did tweet a message about those deaths a full hour
before the vice president’s speech.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) said on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=065-b0a&t=c>
(1/16), “I think the bombing is proof you have to stay. ... We know a lot
of ISIS travel to Syria to fight the west, they’re going to be willing to
travel to the United States to fight the West, too. I’ve always said this
and I believe this, fighting terrorism is not a choice we have. What we can
choose is where we fight terrorism. And when you make a statement like,
‘ISIS is defeated and the caliphate is defeated,’ what you’ve done is
empower the recruiters of ISIS to say, ‘Look, we did it, we outlasted the
United States! I told you we could do it. We had tough times, like was
prophesied, but what we’ll do is come back from this even stronger.’”

*Kurdish Commander: US Troops in Syria “Playing A Very Big Role” In
Fight Against ISIS. *Charlie D’Agata reported for the CBS Evening News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=066-c4e&t=c>
(1/16, story 2, 2:45, Glor) from Syria on the importance of US forces
fighting on the ground to Kurdish forces. Commander Simko Shka said,
“They’re playing a very big role. … Their forces have been very effective,
we give them coordinates for ISIS locations and their air force and
artillery do all they can.” However, D’Agata reported, “While these ground
forces are making progress, on the sharp end of this fight, no one here is
talking about ISIS being defeated. “

*After White House Meeting, Rand Paul Says Trump Committed To US
Troop Withdrawal. *Fox News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=067-0f9&t=c>
(1/16, Griffen, Brown, Emanuel, Pergram, Lam) reports that following “a
closely watched White House meeting on Syria and Afghanistan,” Sen. Rand
Paul (R-KY) indicated that President Trump “remains committed to pulling
troops out of those countries despite a deadly terrorist attack that killed
US military personnel in Syria earlier in the day.” In a statement after
the White House meeting, Paul said, “I have never been prouder of President
Donald Trump. In today’s meeting, he stood up for a strong America and
steadfastly opposed foreign wars. Putting America First means declaring
victory in Afghanistan and Syria. President Trump is delivering on his
promises.”
Talks Fail To Bridge US-Russia Differences Over Missile Treaty.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=068-d9d&t=c>
(1/16, Emmott) reports that the US has “rejected a Russian offer to save a
landmark treaty that keeps nuclear missiles out of Europe because it could
not be properly verified, setting the stage for Washington to withdraw from
the pact next month.” After a meeting in Geneva between Russian and US
officials, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security
Andrea Thompson “said Moscow was refusing to allow proper inspection of a
new Russian missile system that Washington says breaks the 1987
Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF).” Said Thompson, “We weren’t
able to break any new ground yesterday with Russia. ... Based on
yesterday’s discussions and corresponding rhetoric today, we see no
indication that Russia would choose compliance.”

The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=069-d1c&t=c>
(1/16, Blake) reports the talks came as President Vladimir Putin said in an
interview published Wednesday that Russia “has no interest in a new arms
race.” At the same time, however, Putin warned the Administration against
withdrawing from the INF. During an interview “with Serbian media,
according to an English translation released by the Kremlin,” Putin said,
“Indeed, the United States is basically pursuing a course towards
dismantling the system of international agreements on arms control that
prevent it from bolstering its military capabilities, or trying to adhere
to the agreements selectively, i.e. only insofar as they serve its
interests. The declaration of the intention to withdraw from the INF Treaty
has become just another step in a sequence of similar actions. It is
obvious that such a course will have the gravest consequences.”

*Senate Fails To Advance Bill That Would Reimpose Sanctions On
Russian Oligarch. *In what Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06a-642&t=c>
(1/16, Zengerle) calls “a victory” for President Trump, “legislation to
keep sanctions in place on companies that have been controlled by the
Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, including the giant aluminum firm Rusal,
stalled” in the Senate on Wednesday. Reuters says “the vote was 57-42 to
end debate on the measure, as 11 of Trump’s fellow Republicans joined
Democrats in favor of the resolution,” which “fell short of the 60 votes
necessary to advance to a final passage vote.” Reuters adds that “many
members of Congress have been questioning the US Treasury Department’s
decision in December to ease sanctions on the core businesses of Deripaska
– Rusal, its parent, En+, and power firm EuroSibEnergo.”

The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06b-be0&t=c>
(1/16, Dinan) says “Democrats’ attempt to undermine President Trump’s
decisions on Russia sanctions went down to defeat in the Senate on
Wednesday,” meaning “the Treasury Department’s plans to relax sanctions on
three Russian companies can move forward.” To the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06c-1f4&t=c>
(1/16, Vogel), Republicans “who voted against the administration plan were
adhering to what had once been party orthodoxy: taking a hard line against
Moscow.”
At Least 21 Dead In Al-Shabaab Attack In Kenya.

The CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06d-70d&t=c>
(1/16, story 6, 1:50, Glor) reported 21 are dead in the wake of yesterday’s
terror attack in Kenya, including American businessman Jason Spindler, who
survived the September 11 attacks in New York. CBS (Patta) added Al-Shabaab
militants stormed into a luxury Nairobi hotel “complex with firearms,
grenades, blew it up, and then rushed in, going from office to office.” Not
long after 9/11, Spindler “gave up a high-powered Wall Street career to
work in developing countries, a decision that ultimately led him to Nairobi
and a late lunch break in a restaurant targeted by an Al-Shabaab suicide
bomber.” Ian Pannell reported on ABC World News Tonight[image: Image
removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06e-bf2&t=c>
(1/16, story 7, 1:35, Muir), “The 19-hour siege that claimed at least 21
lives.” Among them, Spindler, who “lived in Nairobi for the past several
years doing humanitarian work.” Kelly Cobier reported on NBC Nightly
News[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=06f-193&t=c>
(1/16, story 2, 1:30, Holt), “Most of the victims were Kenyan.”

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=070-300&t=c>
(1/16, Houreld, Miriri) reports Kenyan security forces killed all the
militants who stormed the complex. At least 21 were killed but “fifty
people believed to have been in the complex remained unaccounted for on
Wednesday afternoon, the Kenya Red Cross said, raising the possibility of a
much higher final death toll.” Al Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab “said they
carried out the attack in revenge for US President Donald Trump’s decision
to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.” CCTV clips showed at least
five assailants dressed in black, some sporting green grenade belts.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=071-b63&t=c>
(1/16, Curtis) reports the attack “demonstrated al-Shabab’s continued
ability to strike Kenya’s capital despite setbacks on the battlefield.”
Although “US airstrikes and African Union forces in Somalia have degraded
the group’s ability to operate, it is still capable of carrying out
spectacular acts of violence in retaliation for the Kenyan military’s
campaign against it.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=072-f16&t=c>
(1/16, Bearak) reports the assault, which “seemed to be aimed at Kenyan
professionals and foreigners,” showed “al-Shabab’s ability to carry out
attacks outside Somalia despite a dramatic increase in airstrikes against
the group by the Kenyan air force and US military.” Similarly, the New York
Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=073-b50&t=c>
(1/16, Kyama, Oduor, De Freytas-Tamura) reports, “The attack underscored
the persistence and potency of the Shabab.” President Uhuru Kenyatta said
in a speech, “We will seek every person involved in planning, funding and
executing this heinous act.” He “made clear in his speech that the fight
against the Shabab and other militant groups would be a long one, while
trying to strike an optimistic note.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=074-05e&t=c>
(1/16, O'Grady) also covers Spindler’s death.
May Follows Confidence Vote Victory With Attempt To Find Path To Brexit.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=075-be4&t=c>
(1/16, Macaskill, Piper) reports that Prime Minister Theresa May “won a
confidence vote in the British parliament on Wednesday before proposing
immediate talks with other party leaders in an attempt to break the
deadlock on a Brexit divorce agreement.” Reuters says the 325 to 306
confidence vote came “just 24 hours after handing her Brexit deal a
crushing defeat that left Britain’s exit from the European Union in
disarray.” According to Reuters, “After the results of the confidence vote
were announced to cheers from Conservative lawmakers, May said she believed
parliament had a duty and a responsibility to find a solution that would
deliver Brexit.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=076-fc1&t=c>
(1/16) says, “despite the reprieve, May faces a monumental struggle to find
a way out of her country’s Brexit impasse,” and “has until Monday to come
up with a new blueprint for Britain’s EU exit.” The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019011701biden&r=email-a100&l=077-f3a&t=c>
(1/16, Adam) reports that “immediately after beating back the move to
topple her, May invited leaders of other parties to meet with her
individually to try to hammer out a deal that could pass a bitterly divided
Parliament.” However, the Post says “the deep divisions that caused
lawmakers to reject May’s initial plan persist,” as “Labour and the Liberal
Democrat party leaders said they first wanted May to rule out a ‘no-deal’
Brexit, which they say would wreak havoc on British wo