EMAIL DETAILS

Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing


*From:* Bulletin Intelligence <Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 12, 2019 7:55 AM
*To:* Biden@BulletinIntelligence.com
*Subject:* Office of Vice President Biden Intelligence Briefing for
Tuesday, March 12, 2019


*Click to access
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=000-4dd&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=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=001-551&t=c>

*To: Vice President Joe Biden*

*Tuesday, March 12, 2019 8:00 AM EDT*
Today's Table of Contents

*Biden in the News* <#SECTION_1>

• Monmouth National Poll: Biden 28%; Sanders 25%; Harris 10%; Warren 8%.
<#S1>

• Biden Supporters Expect Him To Enter 2020 Race. <#S2>

• Biden Has “Significant Support” Among South Carolina’s African Americans.
<#S3>

• WPost’s Cohen: Other Than Biden, 2020 Democrats Lacking In Experience On
Foreign Affairs. <#S4>

• Politico Mag Examines Biden-Warren Clash On Bankruptcy Law. <#S5>

• Opinion Writers Weigh In On Biden’s Appeal, Baggage. <#S6>

• Klobuchar Refuses To Comment On Biden Quote About Busing. <#S7>

• HuffPost: Biden’s Stance On Filibuster Shifted When He Became Vice
President. <#S8>

• Snopes: Claim Biden Said He Was Conservative On Most Issues Except Civil
Rights Is True. <#S9>

• Article Examines Biden’s Net Worth. <#S10>

• Democratic Donors Worry Party Is Moving Too Far Left. <#S11>

• Emboldened African-American Women Flex Their Political Muscles Ahead Of
2020. <#S12>

• Potential 2020 Hopeful O’Rourke Reportedly To Make First Trip To Iowa
This Weekend. <#S13>

• Gillibrand Accused Of Mishandling Harassment Allegations Against Top Aide.
<#S14>

• Hewitt: With A Focus On National Security, Moulton “Perfect Challenger”
To Take On Trump. <#S15>

• Abrams On A Presidential Bid: “2020 Is Definitely On The Table.” <#S16>

• Politico: Those Close To De Blasio Pan Notion Of Him Mounting 2020 Bid.
<#S17>

• Democrats To Hold 2020 Convention In Milwaukee. <#S18>

*Leading the News* <#SECTION_2>

• Trump Budget Boosts Defense And Border Security While Cutting Many Other
Areas. <#S19>

*Foreign Policy* <#SECTION_3>

• Ex-VP Cheney Challenges Pence Over Trump’s Foreign Policy At Private
Retreat. <#S20>

• Pelosi Invites NATO Secretary-General To Address Congress. <#S21>

• US Envoy: Sanctions On North Korea Will Remain Until It Is Fully
Denuclearized. <#S22>

• Pentagon Begins Work On Missile Systems Banned By Treaty With Russia.
<#S23>

• Pompeo Denies Allegations US Caused Blackout In Venezuela. <#S24>

• Pompeo, Shanahan, Kushner Meet With Jordan’s Abdullah. <#S25>

• Netanyahu Opponent Thinks Trump Could Recognize Golan To Swing Israeli
Election. <#S26>

*Domestic Policy* <#SECTION_4>

• Trump Tells GOP Senators To “Get Tough” And Support Emergency Declaration.
<#S27>

• White House: Trump Will Decide On Any Manafort Pardon “When He’s Ready.”
<#S28>

• Pelosi Opposes Impeaching Trump, Who Is “Just Not Worth It.” <#S29>

• Sanders Declines To Confirm Whether Trump Believes Democrats “Hate Jewish
People.” <#S30>

• Trump Donor Claimed She Could Offer Access To President. <#S31>

• Book Casts Ivanka Trump, Kushner As Trump’s “Enablers.” <#S32>

• Plane Crash Brings Boeing Company Shares Down, Even As US Stock Market
Rallies. <#S33>

*Cancer Research* <#SECTION_5>

• Trump’s 2020 Budget Proposal Includes Cuts To Several HHS Agencies,
Including NIH, NCI. <#S34>

• CAR-T Therapy Reportedly Hurting Hospitals’ Finances. <#S35>

*Editorials/Op-Eds* <#SECTION_6>

• New York Times. <#S36>

• Washington Post. <#S37>
Biden in the News
Monmouth National Poll: Biden 28%; Sanders 25%; Harris 10%; Warren 8%.

In an online article, NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=002-0be&t=c>
(3/11, Kamisar) reported that a Monmouth University nationwide poll
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=003-554&t=c>
of 310 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, taken March 1-4, shows
former Vice President Joe Biden leading a hypothetical 2020 Democratic
presidential primary field with 28%, followed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
at 25%, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) at 10%, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) at
8%, ex-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX) at 6%, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) at 5%, Sen.
Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) at 3%, and others lagging further behind.

*Michigan Poll: Biden 40%; Sanders 23%; Harris 12%; Warren 11%. *The
Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=004-dc7&t=c>
(3/11, Burke) reported that an Emerson College poll
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=005-bba&t=c>
of 314 Michigan Democratic voters, taken March 7-10, show Biden leading a
hypothetical 2020 Democratic presidential primary with 40%, followed by
Sanders at 23%, Harris at 12%, and Warren at 11%; no other contender topped
5%. In hypothetical general election matchups, the poll (743 Michigan
voters) shows “each of the leading Democratic candidates” leading President
Trump, with Biden topping the GOP incumbent “by the widest margin,” at
54%-46%.

*Media Analyses: Biden, Sanders Clear Frontrunners In Democratic
Race. *Discussing the Monmouth College poll results in a blog post on the
website of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=006-84a&t=c>
(3/11), Philip Bump said that if Biden and Sanders “both lock up 15 to 20
percent of the Democratic electorate, it makes it very hard for them not to
do well in the primaries. In 2016, Trump won the Republican nomination in
part by enjoying a solid core of support in a crowded field. If 40 percent
of the vote is committed to Biden and Sanders, it would take a remarkable
consolidation from some other candidate to keep them from running 1-2 in a
lot of contests.”

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=007-161&t=c>
(3/11, Balz) reports that “for the past two months, the Democratic
nomination contest has been about newcomers, women and the image of
diversity in a new party,” but now, “suddenly, it’s about two older white
men,” as “the spotlight has fallen on” Biden and Sanders. The Post says,
“Every early poll – national and state – puts Biden and Sanders ahead of
others who are in the race or are seriously thinking about running.” The
latest “is a Des Moines Register-CNN Iowa poll” that “showed Biden and
Sanders with more than half the vote combined, and no one else in double
digits.” The Post adds that the early polls “suggest that as the contest
takes shape, the structure is Biden and Bernie vs. the field.”

The Boston Globe
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=008-86c&t=c>
(3/11, Prignano) says that if Biden launched a bid “soon, he may enter the
race as a front-runner,” with Sanders trailing “closely” behind, according
to the Monmouth and Des Moines Register/CNN polls. The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=009-f1f&t=c>
(3/11, Manchester) reported that GOP pollster Jim Hobart on Monday “told
Hill. TV that name ID has” provided Biden and Sanders “a financial leg up
in the 2020 race. ‘I think it’s very clear that right now Joe Biden and
Bernie Sanders are the front-runners,’ Hobart, a partner at Public Opinion
Strategies,” said, adding, “Does that have a lot do to with name ID? Sure,
but name ID, if you don’t already have it, it’s expensive to get, and it’s
difficult to get. So, I think that they have reasons to be happy with these
numbers.”

Writing for the Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00a-149&t=c>
(3/11), Joshua Spivak, a senior fellow at the Hugh L. Carey Institute for
Government Reform at Wagner College, says that while “early polls” have
shown Biden atop the Democratic field, “there is another reason to believe
that” he “is a leading position: Recent history has shown that vice
presidents have a strong advantage in presidential primaries.” Spivak adds
that “seven out of 12 recent vice presidents have sought and won their
party’s nomination for the presidency.”

Writing on the website of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00b-024&t=c>
(3/11), Jennifer Rubin said that Biden’s “entry will establish him as the
undisputed front-runner, but unlike Hillary Clinton, a front-runner whose
nomination is far from certain. ... Biden will either be the Jeb Bush of
2020 (a favorite who crashed and burned), or the 2016 version of [Hillary]
Clinton – the dominant figure who marches to an inevitable primary
victory.”

Writing for the Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00c-577&t=c>
(3/11), Joseph Simonson said, “The arrival on Capitol Hill of young women
of color, such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, appeared
to signal the dawn of a new generation of Democrats. But, for now at least,
it is the old guard of the party that dominates its 2020 presidential
field. The two front-runners are white men with a combined age of 153 years
and a total of 87 years in politics,” Biden, 76, and Sanders, 77.

Writing for Bloomberg Opinion
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00d-5d0&t=c>
(3/11), Jonathan Bernstein says, “With polls showing Biden and Sanders on
top – not just nationwide, but in the early-voting states as well – I’ve
seen a few pundits wondering whether the contest is less open than it once
seemed. I think that’s a mistake. ... Much of politics – debates,
advertising, electioneering – amounts to candidates trying to teach voters
a few good things about themselves, with most voters paying little
attention until the election is just around the corner. In other words:
Yes, it’s very possible that Biden, Sanders or both will still be in the
lead on caucus night in Iowa – but don’t count on it, and certainly don’t
assume that polling leads at this point are stable.”
Biden Supporters Expect Him To Enter 2020 Race.

Several media outlets continue to offer reports speculating on whether
former Vice President Joe Biden will enter the 2020 presidential race. The CBS
Evening News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00e-bd5&t=c>
(3/11, story 4, 2:05, Glor) reported that Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) says
Biden “is likely to join the race for president.” Coons: “He’s someone who
I am confident is going to run. I’m optimistic he’s going to run.” The
Wilmington
(DE) News Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=00f-3eb&t=c>
(3/11, Newman) reports that Coons, speaking Monday on “CBS This Morning,”
said, “Everything is put in place but that last decision, which
understandingly is a big decision.” Coons added, “Joe Biden is someone who
sees the divisions in our country and inspires us, reminds us in the ways
we’ve overcome the past and will lift us up. I personally have witnessed
him comforting and encouraging Americans who have suffered great loss.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=010-946&t=c>
(3/11, Morin) reported that Coons “said Biden’s experience is what will
push him ahead of the rest of the candidates. ‘He has more experience both
in the Senate and as vice president in the executive and legislative than
any other candidate running,’ Coons said. ‘Arguably than all other
candidates combined.’ ‘We don’t need someone who’s doing on-the-job
training,’ he said.”

In an online article, ABC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=011-29c&t=c>
(2/19, Nagle) reported that “some politicos close to” Biden, “who have
spoken with him in private, say they believe he will mount a bid. Robert
Wolf, a top Democratic donor and former economic adviser to former
President Barack Obama who has known Biden for over a decade, spoke with
him last week and believes Biden is ‘90 percent there’ on a run.” Said
Wolf, “It was clear that this was different than 2015. This was someone who
seemed ready to run and trying to figure out when best to announce.” Wolf
added, “He feels he’s coming off an incredible midterm and he’s sitting in
the best position to take on [President Donald] Trump across the country.”

In an online article, NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=012-6b4&t=c>
(3/11, Memoli) reported, “For the first time since the midterm elections,”
Biden this week “will headline a pair of political events that may serve as
a final test drive of the message he could take into the 2020 campaign.”
Today, Biden “addresses the International Association of Firefighters for
what could amount to a pre-emptive endorsement event. ‘You’re going to see,
‘Run Joe Run,’ the gold and black ‘Firefighters for Biden,’’ IAFF General
President Harold Schaitberger told NBC News Monday.” Schaitberger “said
that while Biden is not officially a candidate, he sees the delay ‘as more
strategical about the timing of a likely announcement than maybe the actual
decision on whether to announce.’ ‘I’d be very surprised’ if he didn’t run,
he said.” Biden on Saturday will speak at a Delaware Democratic Party
dinner in Dover.

Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=013-926&t=c>
(3/12, Epstein) reports that Biden today “will address a meeting of the”
IAFF, which “has long supported him and signaled it will back him if he
runs in 2020.” Biden “appears poised to enter the race unless he has a
last-minute change of heart, according to people who have spoken with him
in recent weeks. He would enter as a frontrunner, though it’s unclear
whether he’d be able to maintain that advantage on the campaign trail.
‘He’s going through this strategic process to consider everything that one
has to consider to make the decision,’ said...Schaitberger, who last spoke
with Biden just over a week ago. ‘If he pulls the trigger to run, so will
we,’ he said of an endorsement for Biden.”
Biden Has “Significant Support” Among South Carolina’s African Americans.

McClatchy
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=014-7c4&t=c>
(3/11, Glueck) reports that former Vice President Joe Biden “is a Caucasian
septuagenarian with decades of Washington experience in a party that prizes
youth and diversity and is clamoring for progressive change. But when it
comes to the contest for African-American support...in” South Carolina,
“Biden shouldn’t be underestimated. That’s the assessment of
African-American faith leaders, state legislators, voters and party
operatives in South Carolina, an early-voting state where black voters make
up the majority of the Democratic electorate. ‘There is still significant
support for the vice president in the African-American community,’ said
Rev. Joseph Darby, an influential Charleston pastor who calls Biden a
longtime friend.”
WPost’s Cohen: Other Than Biden, 2020 Democrats Lacking In Experience On
Foreign Affairs.

In his Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=015-618&t=c>
(3/11) column, Richard Cohen says that a number of announced and potential
2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls “are personifications of the
contemporary phenomenon that the presidency can be an entry-level job.
Certainly that’s the case with Donald Trump, who held no previous political
position and has gone on to shred any belief in the gifted amateur.” Cohen
says that former Vice President Joe Biden is the only Democratic contender
with experience in “the one area where presidential authority is absolute:
foreign affairs.” Cohen adds, “I want someone with some experience under
the belt, at the least someone who has done some reading in the field. ...
The Democratic Party ought to take Trump not only as a foe but as a lesson,
too. Experience matters.”
Politico Mag Examines Biden-Warren Clash On Bankruptcy Law.

Under the heading “Biden Vs. Warren: Round 1,” Theodoric Mayer writes
for Politico
Magazine
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=016-f26&t=c>
(3/12), “On a February morning in 2005 in a hearing room in the Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Joe Biden confronted Elizabeth Warren over a
subject they’d been feuding over for years: the country’s bankruptcy laws.”
After recounting how the pair jousted over “a bill meant to address the
skyrocketing rate at which Americans were filing for bankruptcy” –
legislation that Biden supported and Warren opposed – Mayer says that the
pair “are expected to find themselves facing off again, this time on a much
larger stage. And while a bill that passed in 2005 is unlikely to dominate
the 2020 Democratic primaries, the fight over the bankruptcy legislation
helped shape Warren politically and could be a surprising liability for
Biden in the” Democratic presidential primary.
Opinion Writers Weigh In On Biden’s Appeal, Baggage.

In his Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=017-356&t=c>
(3/11) column, William McGurn says that with his centrist approach and
sense of decency, former Vice President Joe Biden could pose a serious
threat to President Trump in 2020. However, McGurn chides Biden for – in
the wake of criticism for the left – backtracking on calling Vice President
Mike Pence a “decent guy.” McGurn says that if Biden is to win the
Democratic nomination, he’ll have to sport a tougher veneer in dealing with
criticism from the left than he displayed in the Pence episode.

In his syndicated column that appears on the website of the Baltimore
Sun
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=018-2ee&t=c>
(3/11), Jules Witcover says that the decisions of ex-New York Mayor Michael
Bloomberg (D) and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) to not mount 2020 White House
runs have “enhanced Mr. Biden’s hope to be the candidate of the party’s
broad moderate-to-liberal constituency.” While several contenders are
running “in the more progressive lane,” says Witcover, Biden “has had a
long political career of leading liberal causes, especially in the areas of
workers’ rights, protection of women and children and civil rights,
enabling him to compete also for that expanding Democratic flock. His early
strenuous opposition to school busing in his home state of Delaware in the
1970s, however, has already generated criticism of that prospect.”

Writing for Slate
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=019-3b3&t=c>
(3/11), Josh Voorhees said that Biden “would face many hurdles if he gets
into the race – his age and his record chief among them – but it’s far from
certain any are the deal breakers that some pundits and prognosticators
have suggested. To be clear, I do not think Biden should win the Democratic
nomination; I simply fear that he will. Despite a record that looks
conservative in hindsight, a worldview that is troubling in the present,
and an identity that does little for the future, Biden appears to be too
well-known, well-liked, and well-connected to be denied the nomination.”

In his New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01a-53b&t=c>
(3/11) column, Jamelle Bouie says, “For decades Biden gave liberal cover to
white backlash. He wasn’t an incidental opponent of busing; he was a leader
who helped derail integration. He didn’t just vote for punitive legislation
on crime and drugs; he wrote it. His political persona is still informed by
that past, even if he were to repudiate those positions now. Biden could
lead Democrats to victory over [President] Trump, but his political style
might affirm the assumptions behind Trumpism.” On its website, Slate
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01b-70a&t=c>
(3/12, Harris) provides a link to an episode of the “What Next” podcast, in
which Bouie discusses Biden’s record, particularly on race-related issues.

Writing for National Review
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01c-80d&t=c>
(3/11), Jim Geraghty highlighted Bouie’s column and other articles that
have offered critical assessments of Biden’s record on race-related issues.
However, Geraghty says that with Biden having served two terms as President
Obama’s vice president, “how much will African Americans, the
Democratic-primary electorate, and the voters as a whole buy into the idea
in 2019 that Joe Biden was somehow racist or pandered to racists?” Geraghty
adds that Biden appears well positioned to offer a strong rebuttal, if
attacked on race-related issues.
Klobuchar Refuses To Comment On Biden Quote About Busing.

The Tampa Bay (FL) Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01d-3c6&t=c>
(3/11, Contorno) provided a transcript of a Sunday interview the newspaper
conducted with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), a presidential candidate. The
interviewer said, “There’s a quote from the 1970s from Joe Biden that has
been circulating the last couple days about the efficacy of busing.”
Klobuchar replied, “Yea, I haven’t read that quote. You should ask Joe
Biden.” Asked, “Well do you believe that busing and desegregation of
schools should continue,” Klobuchar responded, “I think desegregation of
schools is very important but I’m not going to comment on Joe Biden’s
quote.”
HuffPost: Biden’s Stance On Filibuster Shifted When He Became Vice
President.

The Huffington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01e-04e&t=c>
(3/11, Bobic) reported that while serving in the Senate, former Vice
President Joe Biden “routinely joined Democratic efforts to sustain
filibusters of programs and nominations put forth by Republican Presidents
George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan,” speaking “out repeatedly about the
virtues of the” Upper Chamber “as a ‘cooling saucer’ for democracy, due in
large part to its long-standing supermajority requirement. But once he
joined Barack Obama in the White House,” Biden’s “appreciation for the
filibuster waned.” HuffPost said that when Senate “Democrats went nuclear
in 2013 to eliminate the filibuster on all nominations other than those to
the Supreme Court,” Biden supported the move.
Snopes: Claim Biden Said He Was Conservative On Most Issues Except Civil
Rights Is True.

Snopes
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=01f-b08&t=c>
(3/11, Kasprak) ran a “Fact Check” on the claim that former Vice President
Joe Biden once said, “When it comes to civil rights and civil liberties,
I’m a liberal but that’s it. I’m really quite conservative on most other
issues.” Snopes ruled the claim “True,” saying that Biden was quoted as
making the statement in a 1974 article published by Washingtonian.
Article Examines Biden’s Net Worth.

Go Banking Rates
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=020-73d&t=c>
(3/11, Dennison) ran a piece offering “a look at the wealth of” Former Vice
President Joe Biden, saying that his “net worth is $900,000, according to
Celebrity Net Worth. Most of his wealth likely comes from his eight years
as vice president, during which he received an annual salary of at least
$230,700. However, his pension might total more than $248,000 per year.”
The article said, “By Biden’s own admission, he considered himself ‘the
poorest man in Congress’ and said that he had no listed investments, ABC
News reported in 2014. On the other hand, his 2015 tax return, which was
filed jointly with his wife, Jill Biden, also showed that they had an
adjusted gross income of $392,233.”
Democratic Donors Worry Party Is Moving Too Far Left.

The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=021-3df&t=c>
(3/11, Miller) reports big Democratic donors are worried that the party “is
moving too far left.” Florida billionaire Marsha Laufer, “who bundled more
than $13 million for Hillary Clinton in 2016, is sitting on the sidelines
for 2020” and “other Democratic moneymen expressed similar concerns, though
they would not go on the record to criticize the pack of presidential
hopefuls occupying the far-left lane in the primary race.” The Times cites
“one prominent Democratic bundler,” who “privately conceded ‘real concerns’
that [Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)] were
providing fuel for President Trump to make his re-election campaign into a
run against socialism.”

*NYTimes Analysis: Activists Dragging “Fringe” Issues “Into The
2020 Conversation.” *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=022-bf2&t=c>
(3/12, Ember, Herndon) reports that South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete
Buttigieg (D), a presidential hopeful, was asked at an event in February,
“Would you support a packing of the courts to expand the Supreme Court by
four members?” The Times says that query was “posed by a person involved
with Pack the Courts, a liberal activist group that favors adding judges in
order to flip the ideological tilt of the high court – known as
court-packing. The success of the strategy – pushing an issue that had
mostly thrived on the fringe into the 2020 conversation – illustrates how
activists are leveraging the early stages of the Democratic primary”
contest “to elevate their agendas” on issues ranging from “reparations” to
“ending the Senate filibuster.” Democratic hopefuls “are increasingly being
urged to address these topics in interviews, at events and during media
appearances.”
Emboldened African-American Women Flex Their Political Muscles Ahead Of
2020.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=023-ef8&t=c>
(3/11, Berry) reported that in the wake of “historic midterms, when they
helped Democrats recapture the House of Representatives, women of color are
moving fast to leverage their newfound political clout for the 2020
presidential election. They’re hosting a presidential forum” and “ramping
up get-out-the-vote efforts and preparing more women to run for Congress.
‘There’s never been a moment for women of color in politics like there is
now,’ said Aimee Allison, president and founder of She the People, a
national network.” The organization “will host a presidential forum in
Houston in April – the first by a group led by women of color.”
Potential 2020 Hopeful O’Rourke Reportedly To Make First Trip To Iowa This
Weekend.

The Des Moines (IA) Register
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=024-017&t=c>
(3/11, Pfannenstiel, Opsahl) reports that ex-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX)
“will make his first trip to Iowa this weekend, further fueling
speculation” that he “will soon enter the 2020 presidential race. According
to an announcement video posted to Twitter, O’Rourke will join volunteers
on behalf of Iowa Democrat Eric Giddens, who is running in a special
election for a state senate seat against Republican Walt Rogers.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=025-916&t=c>
(3/11, Siders, Strauss, Cadelago, Korecki) reported that O’Rourke “is
beginning to staff up in Iowa and has been in talks about visiting the
first-in-the-nation caucus state as early as this week.” Norm Sterzenbach,
“a former executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party, is assisting
O’Rourke in the state and was reviewing resumes from potential staffers as
recently as last week, according to two sources.” Paul Tewes, “who ran
Obama’s 2008 operation in the state, is also helping O’Rourke. So is
Margaret Jarosz, who was working for Sen. Sherrod Brown in Iowa before he
elected not to run for president, the sources said. David Plouffe, Obama’s
2008 campaign manager, has also made calls on O’Rourke’s behalf, according
to three Democrats.” In an online article, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=026-812&t=c>
(3/11, Buck, Bradner) offered a similar report.

The CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=027-20b&t=c>
(3/11, story 4, 2:05, Glor) reported O’Rourke “is the subject of a
conservative attack ad in Iowa, even though he’s not yet in the race.”
The Dallas
Morning News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=028-ca4&t=c>
(3/11, Gillman) reports that “the anti-tax Club for Growth will unleash an
ad blitz in Des Moines aimed at planting doubts among Democrats about”
O’Rourke’s “liberal bona fides --- not to weed out faux liberals from the
2020 pack, but because polls show that he would be a huge threat in Texas
if he wins the nomination. ... ‘We have internal polling that shows that
[President] Trump and Beto are statistically tied in Texas in a
presidential head-to-head, and that’s hugely significant,’ Club president
David McIntosh said by phone on Monday.”
Gillibrand Accused Of Mishandling Harassment Allegations Against Top Aide.

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=029-5a0&t=c>
(3/11, Saul) reports that a former aide to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
“resigned last year after accusing top aides to the senator of mishandling
a sexual harassment complaint she filed against a colleague.” Gillibrand’s
office “investigated the claim and kept the worker on staff, but dismissed
him last week after Politico presented new details about the allegations to
her Senate office.” The Times says “the allegations stand in contrast to
Ms. Gillibrand’s record as an advocate for women’s causes who has battled
sexual harassment in the workplace, a message she has made central to her
candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02a-df8&t=c>
(3/11, Thompson, Strauss) reported that in July, the female staffer alleged
one of Gillibrand’s closest aides, Abbas Malik, “repeatedly made unwelcome
advances after the senator had told him he would be promoted to a
supervisory role over her.” The female aide also said Malik “regularly made
crude, misogynistic remarks in the office about his female colleagues and
potential female hires.” However, he “kept his job” until last week, after
Politico “presented the office with its own findings of additional
allegations of inappropriate workplace conduct by Malik.”

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02b-5e3&t=c>
(3/11, Spector) reports Gillibrand spokeswoman Whitney Mitchell Brennan
said in a statement that despite this case, the Senator is “committed to
ensuring allegations are handled seriously, investigated, and followed by
appropriate punishment, which is why she helped pass stronger sexual
harassment protections in Congress and prioritizes proper harassment
training to better prevent these occurrences and encourage future
reporting.”

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02c-b26&t=c>
(3/11, Sonmez) reports that Gillibrand “told reporters outside the Capitol
on Monday evening that she had no regrets about the way her office handled
the case. ‘As we do in all cases, we take these kinds of allegations very
seriously,’ Gillibrand said.” She added “that her staffers had conducted a
‘professional and thorough investigation’ last year during which they were
able to substantiate claims of derogatory comments made by Malik but were
‘not able to substantiate the sexual harassment claims.’”
Hewitt: With A Focus On National Security, Moulton “Perfect Challenger” To
Take On Trump.

In his Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02d-9fb&t=c>
(3/11) column, conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt says that “if Marine
Corps veteran – four tours in Iraq and the recipient of a Bronze Star –
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.)” enters the 2020 race for president,
“Democratic voters in the primaries will be startled by his seriousness on
national security. They should notice he is the perfect challenger to
[President] Trump.” Hewitt says that “there are a lot of Republicans who
would have to give him a hard look, as they will any Democrat who spends
time making the case that he or she won’t spend a presidency apologizing
for the United States, but defending it.”
Abrams On A Presidential Bid: “2020 Is Definitely On The Table.”

In an online article, CNN
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02e-9af&t=c>
(3/11, Watkins) reported that ex-state Rep. Stacey Abrams (D-GA), “a rising
star in the Democratic Party,” despite having lost last year to now-Gov.
Brian Kemp (R-GA), on Monday said “it was possible she could seek her
party’s presidential nomination next year. Abrams’ comment came after an
interview at the South by Southwest conference in Texas, where” she
“reportedly said she previously thought 2028 would be the earliest she
could run for president, but over Twitter, she clarified: ‘Now 2020 is
definitely on the table.’” Abrams is also considering a 2020 challenge to
Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) or a 2022 rematch with Kemp.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=02f-af6&t=c>
(3/11, Bluestein) reported that while at the South by Southwest conference,
Abrams spoke “about a spreadsheet she made years ago that had 2028 as the
earliest she could run for president. ‘In the spreadsheet, with all the
jobs that I wanted to do, 2028 was the earliest I would be ready to stand
for president because I would have done the work that I thought necessary
to be effective in that job,’ she said.” However, Abrams on Monday tweeted,
“Now 2020 is definitely on the table.”

NBC News
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=030-583&t=c>
(3/11) reported that Abrams, “people familiar with her thinking say, thinks
it’s important that an African-American woman with her experience be seen
as a credible potential presidential candidate. After all, allies note,
former congressman Beto O’Rourke lost his 2018 campaign too, but that
hasn’t stopped the political world from seeing him as a potential top-tier
2020 candidate.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=031-581&t=c>
(3/11, Arkin) reported that Abrams “has given a timeline of late March or
early April for a decision on her next moves, and she did not update that
timeline in the interview Monday.”
Politico: Those Close To De Blasio Pan Notion Of Him Mounting 2020 Bid.

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=032-37e&t=c>
(3/11, Nahmias, Goldenberg) reported that New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D)
may be considering a White House bid, “but many of those closest to him
aren’t on board. As de Blasio touted his liberal record in Iowa and South
Carolina in recent weeks, nearly three dozen former and current aides,
consultants and allies who spoke to POLITICO panned the idea or doubted
that” he “would run for the Democratic nomination.” Politico added, “Some
say the 2020 field, a dozen-strong and growing, leaves no room for de
Blasio,” and a number argue “that he has too many glaring, unresolved
problems at home. Others say the never-truly-popular de Blasio...lacks
charisma. ... The idea of a de Blasio candidacy is ‘f---ing insane,’ said
one former aide, laughing out loud. Another self-described friend of the
mayor called the idea ‘idiotic.’”
Democrats To Hold 2020 Convention In Milwaukee.

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=033-77b&t=c>
(3/11, Barrow, Bauer, Moreno) reports Democratic Party leaders announced
Monday that the 2020 Democratic National Convention will be held in
Milwaukee, “highlighting the battleground state of Wisconsin that helped
elect President Donald Trump.” DNC Chairman Tom Perez “chose Milwaukee over
Houston and Miami after deliberations lingered longer than party leaders or
officials from the three finalist cities had expected.”

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=034-a25&t=c>
(3/11) reports the convention, which will be held July 13-16, marks “the
first time the party will hold it in a Midwestern city other than Chicago
in over a century, the party said in a statement.” The Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=035-03c&t=c>
(3/11, Glauber, Spicuzza) says the Democrats’ decision “was political.
Winning Wisconsin and other Midwestern states is critical if the party is
to unseat President Donald Trump.” Similarly, ABC World News Tonight[image:
Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=036-f7a&t=c>
(3/11, story 10, 0:15, Muir) said that for Democrats, the selection of
Milwaukee “signal[s] their commitment to try to win back the Midwest.”

In an “analysis,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=037-ec4&t=c>
(3/11, Gilbert) reports that in choosing Milwaukee to host the convention,
Democrats are “saying that re-taking Wisconsin and Michigan and
Pennsylvania is a core strategic priority.” They “also are saying with
their convention pick that they are not content to lose rural and
blue-collar white voters by ever-bigger margins, since those voters make up
a huge segment of the electorate in the blue wall states. Historically,
Democrats have done better with these kinds of voters in these particular
states than they have done nationally. But Clinton lost rural and
blue-collar whites by far bigger margins in Wisconsin than Barack Obama did
in 2008 or 2012.”

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=038-62a&t=c>
(3/11, Lerer, Goldmacher) says Wisconsin “holds a searing place in the
Democratic Party psyche after Hillary Clinton, the party’s last
presidential nominee, opted not to campaign in the traditionally blue state
during the general election – a decision that some blamed for her
22,000-vote defeat in the state.” Moreover, “party officials worried about
the optics of hosting a convention in Houston, a city dominated by the oil
and gas industry, at a time when Democratic activists are focused on
combating climate change.”

Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=039-d66&t=c>
(3/11, Korecki, Thompson) reported, “In recent weeks, top Midwestern
Democrats and business leaders engaged in a frenzied effort to bring the
convention to their region, insisting that holding it in Wisconsin would
help repair the frayed relationship between the party and heartland voters.
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and even Illinois
Gov. J.B. Pritzker were involved in the behind-the-scenes overtures to the
DNC.”

A Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03a-265&t=c>
(3/11) editorial says Democrats’ decision to hold the convention in
Milwaukee reflects their desire not to lose blue-collar liberals, rural
white, and older voters. The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03b-a14&t=c>
(3/11, Wagner, Sonmez) reports Wisconsin GOP chief Mark Jefferson said it
“only fitting” that Democrats selected Milwaukee, which has “elected three
socialist mayors (the most recent of whom left office in 1960).” Said
Jefferson, “No city in America has stronger ties to socialism than
Milwaukee.”
Leading the News
Trump Budget Boosts Defense And Border Security While Cutting Many Other
Areas.

The White House unveiled President Trump’s budget proposal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03c-67e&t=c>
for the 2020 fiscal year on Monday. Coverage juxtaposes the President’s
request for more funding for defense and border security with the major
cuts proposed to many other departments and programs, and analyses stating
that the proposal is expected to go nowhere on Capitol Hill due to
Democratic control of the House and the inclusion of some proposals that
even Republicans have balked at in the past. Several outlets also highlight
the fact that even with the proposed cuts, the spending sought would break
records.

On ABC World News Tonight[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03d-140&t=c>
(3/11, story 4, 1:45, Muir), Jonathan Karl reported that “the White House
rolled out a new record-shattering budget proposal” on Monday, proposing
“more than $4.7 trillion in federal spending next year alone, and trillions
more in debt over the next decade, something candidate [Donald] Trump
promised he wouldn’t do. ... He also promised he would eliminate the
national debt within eight years. And as you know, the debt at the end of
his first year was at $20 trillion. Last year, it went to $21 trillion,
last month, $22 trillion.” OMB Acting Director Russ *Vought*: “The last
Administration nearly doubled the national debt. When this President ran
for office, he made a commitment to the American people that he would
attempt to tackle the debt within eight years.” Karl: “But he added $2
trillion, more than $2 trillion, to the national debt.” *Vought*: “He came
into office and had an economic recovery that was needed to put people back
to work.”

The CBS Evening News[image: Image removed by sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03e-953&t=c>
(3/11, story 3, 0:30, Glor) reported, “Trump today sent Congress a record
$4.7 trillion budget that would boost defense spending by five percent to
$750 billion. He wants $8.6 billion for completion of a border wall,
perhaps setting up a new fight with Congress. The President would slash
funding for the Environmental Protection Agency by nearly a third,
education by 10 percent. His plan projects a $1.1 trillion deficit.”
*Vought* said on Fox News Special Report[image: Image removed by sender.
Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=03f-4a6&t=c>
(3/11), “We are facing a $22 trillion national debt, trillion dollar
deficits as far as the eye can see. This President has put forward record
spending reductions as an Administration to be able to get our fiscal house
in order.”

Kaitlan Collins said on CNN’s The Lead[image: Image removed by
sender. Video]
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=040-ed0&t=c>
(3/11), “The White House proposal is going nowhere on Capitol Hill, where
Democrats have declared it dead on arrival, claiming Trump hasn’t learned
his lesson from the government shutdown when he walked away without a
single dollar in new wall funding.” Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=041-640&t=c>
(3/11, Rampton, Gibson) reports House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey
said, “President Trump has somehow managed to produce a budget request even
more untethered from reality than his past two.” Senate Appropriations
Committee ranking member Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) “said in a statement
that Trump’s plan ‘is not worth the paper it is printed on.’” The Wall
Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=042-8e5&t=c>
(3/11, Davidson) reports House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson
was also critical, saying, “The lack of seriousness that the President
brings to budget negotiations only further damages his relationship with
Congress. Democrats wholeheartedly reject his proposal.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=043-197&t=c>
(3/11, Mascaro) reports that Trump has “proposed a record $4.7 trillion
federal budget for 2020...relying on optimistic 3.1 percent economic growth
projections alongside accounting shuffles and steep domestic cuts to bring
future spending into promised balance in 15 years.” USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=044-9dc&t=c>
(3/11, Fritze) says the White House “is eager to sell three messages with
the president’s third budget: that Trump hasn’t given up on building his
long-promised border wall, that he wants to increase military spending and
that he hopes to slash just about everything else.”

The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=045-cdb&t=c>
(3/11, Tankersley, Tackett) says the budget proposal “is replete with
aggressively optimistic economic assumptions and appeals to his core
constituents, and it envisions deep cuts to programs that Democrats hold
dear.” However, the Times points out that “a few domestic spending programs
would see increases, if Mr. Trump’s budget were to become law,” including
“efforts to reduce opioid addiction and a 10 percent increase in health
care spending for veterans.” The Times says the President also wants “a new
school-choice program, $200 billion in infrastructure spending and efforts
to reduce the cost of prescription drugs.”

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=046-3d3&t=c>
(3/11, Stein) says the President’s budget proposal “stands as a sharp
challenge to Congress and the Democrats trying to unseat him in 2020” in
that it “would dramatically expand spending on programs and initiatives
popular with Republicans, such as $750 billion in new defense spending and
$8.6 billion for barriers on the Mexico border.” Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=047-02f&t=c>
(3/11, Emma, Scholtes) reports the plan “would impose mandatory work
requirements for millions of people who receive welfare assistance through
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid and housing
programs.” The Hill
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=048-a89&t=c>
(3/11, Elis) reports it would also “raise overall defense spending to $750
billion, up from $716 billion in 2019, while slashing nondefense programs
to $567 billion, down from the $597 billion allocated in 2019.”

The Los Angeles Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=049-4a8&t=c>
(3/11, Bierman) writes that “while past presidents used the release of
their annual spending plans as an opportunity to lay out short- and
long-term visions, and to influence subsequent negotiations on Capitol
Hill, Trump has taken the lack of regard for budgets to new lows,
reflecting his own lack of interest in policy details, his administration’s
thin staffing and its overall ambivalence about the nitty-gritty of
policy-making.”

Heather Long of the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04a-c80&t=c>
(3/11) writes that Trump’s budget “basically has no chance of getting
enacted. Even Republicans balk at some of Trump’s proposed cuts. But the
150-page budget reveals a lot about Trump’s top priorities as his
reelection campaign gets into full swing, and he looks to make it clear
there are big differences between his vision for America and that of his
Democratic rivals. In short, Trump wants more spending on the military and
veterans and less spending on education, housing, welfare, transportation
and science.”

The Wall Street Journal
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04b-223&t=c>
(3/11) says in an editorial that entitlement spending is overwhelming the
federal budget, and argues that the President is right to try to hike
defense spending despite this. However, the Journal says Trump’s argument
for cuts is hurt by his declaration of a national emergency in order to use
defense funds to pay for a US-Mexico border wall.

USA Today
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04c-81e&t=c>
(3/11) editorializes, “Amid all of the outrages of the Trump administration
and Congress, the fact that the federal budget deficit has surged by 77
percent above the same period last year somehow got lost. ... Many
Democrats are pushing have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too spending plans that
almost perfectly mirror Republicans’ have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too tax
cuts.”

Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04d-943&t=c>
(3/11, Wasson, Sink) and CQ Roll Call
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04e-82f&t=c>
(3/11, Lerman) are among the other sources reporting on the budget.

*Trump Proposing “Sizable Reduction” Of Medicare. *In an article
titled “Trump Proposes Big Cuts To Health Programs For Poor, Elderly And
Disabled,” the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=04f-8f2&t=c>
(3/11, Stein, Goldstein) reports that the budget plan proposes “a sharp
slowdown in Medicaid spending that would shift more than $1 trillion over
10 years by steering the entitlement program into a system of block grants
that would give states far more freedom to set their own rules about how to
cover the poor.” The Post says the budget plan “also calls for a sizeable
reduction for Medicare, the federal insurance for older Americans that
President Trump has consistently vowed to protect.” The Washington Examiner
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=050-a02&t=c>
(3/11, Leonard) reports the budget “does not outline specific cuts to
Medicare,” but “envisions spending reductions through Congress passing
prescription-drug legislation and through efforts to reduce improper
payments to healthcare providers.”

*Budget Calls For Deep Cuts To State Department, USAID. *The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=051-a43&t=c>
(3/11, Morello) reports the budget proposal would “slash” the budget for
the State Department and the US Agency for International Development “by
almost 24 percent, with particularly steep cuts to humanitarian aid,
refugee assistance and global health programs.” State Department officials
“defended the budget, saying the United States remains the world’s largest
contributor to global health and humanitarian efforts.”

*Request Seeks 15% Cut To USDA. *Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=052-186&t=c>
(3/11, Pamuk) reports the budget plan “proposed a 15 percent cut for the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, calling its subsidies to farmers ‘overly
generous’ at a time they are going through the worst crisis in decades due
to depressed commodity prices and Trump’s trade tariffs.” According to
Reuters, the budget plan “requested $20.8 billion for the USDA, a $3.6
billion or 15 percent cut from the 2019 estimate.”

*Plan Would Cut Education Department Budget By About 12%. *The
Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=053-28c&t=c>
(3/11, Douglas-Gabriel) reports Trump “is again proposing to cut billions
of dollars from the Education Department, seeking to eliminate after-school
programs, teacher training and grants for other school needs.” But the
proposal would also “create a $5 billion program to help children attend
private schools.” The Post says the “request to cut more than $8.5 billion
– about 12 percent – from the Education Department budget is unlikely to
gain traction in Congress.”

*Proposal Would Require Federal Workers To Pay More Toward
Retirement. *The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=054-047&t=c>
(3/11, Yoder) reports, “Federal employees would pay more toward their
retirement benefits from salaries that generally would be frozen” under the
budget proposal, which “repeats numerous ideas from President Trump’s prior
two budget proposals that failed to gain enactment even with Congress fully
under Republican control.” House Majority Leader Hoyer “called it a
‘nonstarter’ that ‘once again attacks our hard-working federal workforce by
freezing their pay and threatening their retirement savings.’”

*Budget Does Not Include Funding For Rebuilding Of FBI
Headquarters. *The Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=055-8d1&t=c>
(3/11, Mordock) reports Assistant Attorney General for Administration Lee
Lofthus said Monday that the Administration “will not ask for additional
funding for its $3.3 billion plan to tear down and rebuild the FBI
headquarters in downtown Washington,” postponing any request for new money
for the project “while it confers with Congress on the proposal.”

*Trump Seeks To More Than Double DOD “War-Fighting Account.”
*The Washington
Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=056-0e2&t=c>
(3/11, Sonne) reports the budget proposal also calls for “a massive
increase in the Pentagon’s war-fighting account. ... Known as the Overseas
Contingency Operations budget, or OCO, the war-fighting account is excluded
from the spending caps set out in the 2011 Budget Control Act because it
funds ongoing war efforts such as the conflicts in Afghanistan, Syria and
Iraq.” The budget proposal seeks “$165 billion for the account in the 2020
fiscal year, up from $69 billion this year.”

*NASA Budget Request Focuses On Moon Program. *The New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=057-701&t=c>
(3/11, Chang) reports, “In a shifting of priorities at NASA, the Trump
administration’s proposed budget for next year adds $600 million for an
outpost high above the moon and the beginning of development for landers to
take astronauts back to the lunar surface.” The proposal also “emphasizes a
more commercial approach for moon exploration.”

*Media Analyses: GDP Unlikely To Grow Fast Enough To Meet Trump’s
Projections. *Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=058-464&t=c>
(3/11) writes, “For President Trump’s budget to work, the economy will have
to grow at sustained rates not seen in years.” The President “calls it
‘MAGAnomics,’ saying he is convinced that Americans, with his leadership,
can defy the prognosticators and produce economic growth at an average of
about 3 percent each year over the next decade.” But budget analysts “said
there’s no chance that happens. They used words like ‘fantasy’ or ‘absurd’
to describe the White House’s predictions.” The CBO has said GDP “will grow
at an annual rate of 2.7 percent this year and drop below 2 percent the
rest of this decade.”

Jim Tankersley similarly writes in the New York Times
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=059-d2d&t=c>
(3/11) under the headline “Trump’s Economic Outlook Is Rosy. That Could Be
A Problem” that “there are signs, in the indicators Mr. Trump watches
closely, that his economic policies are beginning to work against his
economic goals. Waning stimulus” from the 2017 tax cut “and economic damage
from his global trade war are undermining the president’s oft-stated
objective of increasing growth” and reducing budget and trade deficits.
Foreign Policy
Ex-VP Cheney Challenges Pence Over Trump’s Foreign Policy At Private
Retreat.

The Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05a-8ce&t=c>
(3/11, Parker) reports that a “chummy discussion between Vice President
Pence and former vice president Richard B. Cheney quickly turned into a
vigorous back-and-forth over President Trump’s foreign policy at a private
gathering on Saturday, with Cheney comparing the president’s instincts to
those” of former President Obama, according to a transcript obtained by The
Washington Post. At the closed-door retreat hosted by the American
Enterprise Institute, Cheney “respectfully but repeatedly and firmly
pressed Pence on a number of the president’s foreign policy moves – over
which Cheney expressed concerns – from taking a harder line” toward NATO to
deciding to withdraw troops from Syria. The Post says Cheney’s questions
for Pence “provide a revealing glimpse into the churning and often strained
debates inside the Republican Party, where longtime GOP hawks such as
Cheney have increasingly balked at Trump’s engagement with autocrats and
his noninterventionist approach to US military efforts in the Middle East.”

According to Politico
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05b-2b0&t=c>
(3/11, Johnson), “Cheney lit into...Pence behind closed doors over the
direction of the Trump administration’s foreign policy, flouting a set of
agreed-upon subjects and forcing Pence on the defensive over...Trump’s
foreign policy.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05c-6b1&t=c>
(3/11, Miller) reports “Cheney warned that American allies were questioning
the dependability of the US as a result of the Trump’s public statements.”
Cheney also “raised alarm over news reports that Trump does not spend
sufficient time with his intelligence briefers as well as over frequent
staff churn in key national security postings.”

*Boot: Trump Turning US Foreign Policy “Into A Protection Racket.” *Max
Boot writes in his Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05d-dfc&t=c>
(3/11) column that President Trump has “become notorious for speaking like
a mob boss. He is acting like one, too, turning US foreign policy into a
protection racket and soldiers into a strong-arm squad that needs to be
paid off – or else.” Boot notes that “at the president’s insistence, the
administration is formulating plans to demand a vast increase in the
subsidies that allies pay to support US forces on their soil.” Boot says
Trump “is acting like a landlord demanding a rent increase from deadbeat
tenants. But our allies aren’t tenants – and they aren’t freeloaders. They
are partners in a collective security enterprise that benefits the United
States more than anyone else.”
Pelosi Invites NATO Secretary-General To Address Congress.

In what the AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05e-b8b&t=c>
(3/11, Kellman) calls “defiance” of President Trump, House Speaker Pelosi
on Monday invited NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to address a
joint meeting of Congress to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the
trans-Atlantic alliance. Pelosi, “in rare agreement with Republicans,
extended the warmly-worded invitation to speak April 3 as one of several
events in the US capital celebrating the treaty’s signing in 1949.” The AP
says that in both “tone and substance, the invitation is stiff pushback to
the NATO criticism Trump campaigned on in 2016.”

According to the Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=05f-b64&t=c>
(3/11, Costa), Senate Majority Leader McConnell and Pelosi “held quiet
talks about the idea of an invitation to...Stoltenberg as they eye ways to
honor NATO as it celebrates its 70th anniversary in April and underscore
the US commitment to the group’s values and importance in securing global
order, according to three people familiar with the discussions who were not
authorized to speak publicly.” Bloomberg
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=060-c4c&t=c>
(3/11, Edgerton) reports both McConnell and House Minority Leader McCarthy
are “supporting the invitation.” Bloomberg says “foreign policy is one area
where Republicans have been willing to challenge Trump, particularly in
support of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.”
US Envoy: Sanctions On North Korea Will Remain Until It Is Fully
Denuclearized.

Reuters
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=061-951&t=c>
(3/11, Brunnstrom, Spetalnick) reports US special envoy Stephen Biegun said
Monday that “diplomacy is still very much alive” with North Korea in the
wake of the Hanoi summit. However, Reuters says Biegun also “cautioned that
Washington was closely watching activity at a North Korean rocket site,”
and said North Korea “needed to show it was fully committed to giving up
its nuclear weapons.” According to Reuters, Biegun “stressed that US-led
sanctions, which Pyongyang wants dropped, would remain in place until North
Korea completed the process of denuclearization.”

The AP
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=062-711&t=c>
(3/11, Burns) reports Biegun said “the missing variable” in making a deal
is the North’s unwillingness to offer complete, verifiable
denuclearization. Said Biegun, “We are not going to do denuclearization
incrementally.” Under Kim’s proposal at the Hanoi summit, “We’d lift that
pressure in exchange for only a portion of those weapons of mass
destruction programs,” Biegun said. “That would have put us in a position –
a very difficult position – of essentially subsidizing what would
potentially be ongoing development of weapons of mass destruction in North
Korea. We need a total solution.”

Axios
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=063-4e5&t=c>
(3/11, Lawler) reports that “in the lead-up to the Hanoi summit, US
officials seemed to hint at openness to a step-by-step process,” but the
“rhetoric has been more hawkish since.” Biegun, however, “denied the
position was shifting.” A Washington Post
<http://mailview.bulletinintelligence.com/mailview.aspx?m=2019031201biden&r=email-c274&l=06