Oct 28, 2019
House investigators are expected to press Charles Kupperman to corroborate key elements of an account that Trump built a shadow foreign policy team to pressure the Ukrainian president.
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from Philippines
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from Croatia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
House investigators are expected to press Charles Kupperman to corroborate key elements of an account that Trump built a shadow foreign policy team to pressure the Ukrainian president.
Charles M. Kupperman, the newly appointed deputy national security adviser, previously served on the board of directors for the anti-Muslim hate group Center for Security Policy (CSP).
When the Center for Security Policy was founded back in 1988, it was a respected conservative think tank focused on foreign affairs. Now, however, it has become “a conspiracy-oriented mouthpiece for the growing anti-Muslim movement in the United States,” known for “accusations that a shadowy ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ has infiltrated all levels of government and warnings that ‘creeping Shariah,’ or Islamic religious law, is a threat to American democracy.” One of its more restrained examples:
“At best, they [Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, and Barack Obama] are acquiescing to far-reaching concessions to the Muslim Brotherhood and its ilk. At worse [sic], they are enabling the MB’s efforts to destroy the West from within. So pervasive now is the MB’s ‘civilization jihad’ within the U.S. government and civil institutions that a serious, sustained and rigorous investigation of the phenomenon by the legislative branch is in order. To that end, we need to establish a new and improved counterpart to the Cold War-era’s HUAC [House Un-American Activities Committee] and charge it with examining and rooting out anti-American – and anti-constitutional – activities that constitute an even more insidious peril than those pursued by communist Fifth Columnists fifty years ago.”
The author is CSP’s founder and president, Frank Gaffney Jr., who has also:
Called Muslims “termites [that] hollow out the structure of the civil society and other institutions”;
Falsely accused President Obama of being a Muslim;
Falsely accused President Obama of giving military support to Al-Qaeda;
Falsely accused President Obama of having “kind of an affinity for, if not the violent beheading and crucifixions and slaying of Christians and all that, but at least for the cause for which these guys [Muslims] are engaged in such activities”; and
Falsely accused Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin of having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Needless to say, our Islamophobe-in-Chief loves the CSP, calling them “very highly respected people, who I know, actually,” and using a bogus and debunked CSP “poll” to justify his demand for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” Trump also loves Gaffney, who was a member of his transition team focusing specifically on the selection of Trump’s National Security Advisers.
Charles M. Kupperman was on the board of the CSP for at least ten years. That’s all the qualifications Trump needs; he has now appointed Kupperman as his new Deputy National Security Adviser.
Kerry Eleveld at Daily Kos:
Donald Trump is on course to kick off 2020 with a string of embarrassing revelations about everything from Ukraine to the Russia probe, potentially putting Senate Republicans in a horrific political bind early next year as they try to navigate a fraught impeachment trial. A Monday afternoon ruling dismissing a lawsuit filed in October by White House deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman served as a reminder that Trump's house-of-cards claim to “absolute immunity” is likely to crumble in spectacular fashion in the new year.
Kupperman, the top aide to former national security adviser John Bolton, had asked the court to decide whether he should comply with a congressional subpoena for testimony or honor Trump's assertion of absolute immunity. But U.S. District Judge Richard Leon declared the matter moot Monday after the House withdrew its subpoena in order avoid a lengthy court battle and the White House likewise argued for the case's dismissal.
Trump administration had argued McGahn had ‘absolute immunity’ as a top presidential adviser
A federal judge has landed a damaging blow on Donald Trump in the US president’s ongoing fight with Congress, ruling that the former White House counsel Donald McGahn must testify in the impeachment hearings despite claims that he had “absolute immunity” as a top presidential adviser.
The judgment from Ketanji Brown Jackson, of the US district court in Washington, has potentially far reaching implications for Trump as he struggles to fend off impeachment. Not only is McGahn an important witness in his own right – as Trump’s first White House counsel he had broad influence until he left the post in October 2018 – but the ruling could also affect other key witnesses called before Congress.
Those high-value witnesses include John Bolton, the former national security adviser who is reported to have been deeply unhappy about Trump’s posture on Ukraine, Bolton’s deputy Charles Kupperman and the current acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney. In each of those cases the White House has deployed the same argument – that the officials were so core to executive functions that they enjoyed immunity in the face of congressional subpoenas.
WASHINGTON (REUTERS) - White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on Monday (Nov 11) withdrew his request to join a lawsuit seeking a court ruling on whether witnesses must testify in the US House of Representatives impeachment probe into President Donald Trump, saying he would bring his own case, according to a court document.. Read more at straitstimes.com.
WASHINGTON (REUTERS) - White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on Monday (Nov 11) withdrew his request to join a lawsuit seeking a court ruling on whether witnesses must testify in the US House of Representatives impeachment probe into President Donald Trump, saying he would bring his own case, according to a court document.
Mr Mulvaney had earlier sought to participate in a lawsuit filed by Mr Charles Kupperman, a former deputy to ousted national security adviser John Bolton, seeking a court ruling on whether he should comply with a congressional subpoena or honor the Trump administration's order not to testify.
Mr Mulvaney withdrew the request following a conference call held by the judge assigned to Mr Kupperman's lawsuit, which was closed to media.
Mr Mulvaney said in a one-page court filing that he intended to"refile" his claims "in the matter discussed on this evening's telephonic conference, as a separate related case."
House Democrats have withdrawn a subpoena for Charles Kupperman, a former aide to ex-National Security Adviser John Bolton ...
A federal judge hearing arguments in a potentially critical impeachment inquiry case wants to hear from lawyers for the Trump White House, the House of Representatives and from impeachment witness Charles Kupperman on Thursday after Kupperman filed a lawsuit asking the federal court to decide whether he would need to testify.
(CNN) - A federal judge hearing arguments in a potentially critical impeachment inquiry case wants to hear from lawyers for the Trump White House, the House of Representatives and from impeachment witness Charles Kupperman on Thursday after Kupperman filed a lawsuit asking the federal court to decide whether he would need to testify.
Kupperman's House testimony had been set for Monday, but Kupperman didn't show up, citing White House and Justice Department reasoning that he was immune from testifying because of his previous work on the National Security Council.
Charles Kupperman, former deputy assistant to the president for national security affairs, filed a lawsuit late Friday asking a federal judge to rule on whether he must comply with a subpoena from House Democrats.