Trump lawyer attacks Mueller report, sees nothing wrong in taking Russian info

In this Aug. 1, 2018, file photo, Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for President Donald Trump, speaks in Portsmouth, N.H. President Donald Trump's lawyers are putting the finishing touches on a rebuttal to the forthcoming report by special counsel Robert Mueller. (AP)
Updated 22 April 2019
Follow

Trump lawyer attacks Mueller report, sees nothing wrong in taking Russian info

  • The special counsel declined to bring charges, however, and Attorney General Bill Barr, a Trump appointee, said that cleared the president

WASHINGTON: Donald Trump’s top lawyer on Sunday attacked “calumny, lies and distortions” in the Mueller investigation report, and said there is “nothing wrong” with taking hacked information from Russia.
Rudy Giuliani mounted a combative defense of the president in Sunday talk show appearances that took aim at Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators, the evidence they amassed and the witnesses they cited.
The former New York mayor heaped special scorn on Senator Mitt Romney, a former Republican presidential candidate who said Friday he was “sickened” by the report’s findings and “appalled” that Trump’s election campaign “welcomed help from Russia.”
“What a hypocrite. What a hypocrite. Any candidate in the whole world in America would take information,” Giuliani said of Romney on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
He was referring to Democratic emails that were hacked by Russian operatives and disseminated by WikiLeaks in 2016 to hurt Trump presidential rival Hillary Clinton.
“Who says it’s even illegal?” Giuliani added. “Does the information turn out to be false, by the way? The information that was gleaned and disseminated, every newspaper printed it.”
Trump publicly encouraged Russia and WikiLeaks while top campaign officials, including his son and son-in-law, met in Trump Tower with a Russian promising dirt on Clinton.
“There is nothing wrong with taking information from the Russians. It depends on where it came from,” Giuliani said, adding that as a lawyer he would have advised against it.
“This didn’t become an international scandal because of immorality. It became an international scandal because the president was accused of violating the law falsely,” he said.
His comments echoed Trump, who mocked Romney on Twitter Sunday, after lashing out Friday at the “bullshit” Mueller report. The president was in Palm Beach, Florida where he attended Easter services.

The special counsel’s 22-month-long investigation concluded that Trump and his team did not collude with the Russian effort to sway the elections in his favor.
But it detailed 10 episodes of potential obstruction by Trump, including his firing of FBI director James Comey and demands that Mueller himself be removed.
The special counsel declined to bring charges, however, and Attorney General Bill Barr, a Trump appointee, said that cleared the president.
Democrats, who have a majority in the House of Representatives, now are considering whether to move to impeach the president, an effort likely to fail because Republicans control the Senate.
“We will have to decide, do we nonetheless go through an impeachment — because to do otherwise would signal that somehow this president’s conduct is okay, that future presidents can engage in this kind of corruption without consequence — or do we decide that we are better off doing oversight ... rather than a formal impeachment?” Representative Adam Schiff, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“That’s going to be a very consequential decision” and one that would be made “over the next couple weeks,” he said.
Representative Jerry Nadler, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, equivocated when asked on NBC about impeachment. “We may get to that, we may not,” he said, adding that lawmakers needed first to “go through all the evidence.”
So far, only two of the 18 declared Democratic presidential candidates — Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Obama cabinet member Julian Castro — have called for impeachment.

The White House’s strategy, meanwhile, was on bristling display in Giuliani’s talk show appearances: attack the investigators as biased and the witness testimony as self-serving and untruthful.
Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” Giuliani called the report “a prosecutor’s version of what happened.”
“It’s two or three pages of calumny, lies and distortion,” he said. “Half of it is not true.”
Some of the most damaging episodes detailed in the report came from former White House counsel Don McGahn, who described to investigators Trump’s escalating demands that Mueller be removed.
McGahn refused to do so and threatened to resign but was talked out of it.
“I’m telling you he’s confused. He gave three different versions,” Giuliani said on CNN.
The White House has prepared a rebuttal of the Mueller report but has yet to release it.
“We’re ready to put it out when we have to,” the president’s lawyer said.


House votes to slap back Trump’s tariffs on Canada in rare bipartisan rebuke

Updated 12 February 2026
Follow

House votes to slap back Trump’s tariffs on Canada in rare bipartisan rebuke

WASHINGTON: The House voted Wednesday to slap back President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canada, a rare if largely symbolic rebuke of the White House agenda as Republicans joined Democrats over the objections of GOP leadership.
The tally, 219-211, was among the first times the House, controlled by Republicans, has confronted the president over a signature policy, and drew instant recrimination from Trump himself. The resolution seeks to end the national emergency Trump declared to impose the tariffs, though actually undoing the policy would require support from the president, which is highly unlikely. It next goes to the Senate.
Trump believes in the power of tariffs to force US trade partners to the negotiating table. But lawmakers are facing unrest back home from businesses caught in the trade wars and constituents navigating pocketbook issues and high prices.
“Today’s vote is simple, very simple: Will you vote to lower the cost of living for the American family or will you keep prices high out of loyalty to one person — Donald J. Trump?” said Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who authored the resolution.
Within minutes, as the gavel struck, Trump fired off a stern warning to those in the Republican Party who would dare to cross him.
“Any Republican, in the House or the Senate, that votes against TARIFFS will seriously suffer the consequences come Election time, and that includes Primaries!” the president posted on social media.
The high-stakes moment provides a snapshot of the House’s unease with the president’s direction, especially ahead of the midterm elections as economic issues resonate among voters. The Senate has already voted to reject Trump’s tariffs on Canada and other countries in a show of displeasure. But both chambers would have to approve the tariff rollbacks, and send the resolution to Trump for the president’s signature — or veto.
Six House Republicans voted for the resolution, and one Democrat voted against it.
From Canada, Ontario, Premier Doug Ford on social media called the vote “an important victory with more work ahead.” He thanked lawmakers from both parties “who stood up in support of free trade and economic growth between our two great countries. Let’s end the tariffs and together build a more prosperous and secure future.”
Trump recently threatened to impose a 100 percent tariff on goods imported from Canada over that country’s proposed China trade deal, intensifying a feud with the longtime US ally and Prime Minister Mark Carney.
GOP defections forced the vote
House Speaker Mike Johnson tried to prevent this showdown.
Johnson insisted lawmakers wait for a pending Supreme Court ruling in a lawsuit about the tariffs. He engineered a complicated rules change to prevent floor action. But Johnson’s strategy collapsed late Tuesday, as Republicans peeled off during a procedural vote to ensure the Democratic measure was able to advance.
“The president’s trade policies have been of great benefit,” Johnson, R-Louisiana, had said. “And I think the sentiment is that we allow a little more runway for this to be worked out between the executive branch and the judicial branch.”
Late Tuesday evening, Johnson could be seen speaking to holdout Republican lawmakers as the GOP leadership team struggled to shore up support during a lengthy procedural vote, but the numbers lined up against him.
“We’re disappointed,” Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House’s National Economic Council, told reporters at the White House on Wednesday morning. “The president will make sure they don’t repeal his tariffs.”
Terminating Trump’s emergency
The resolution put forward by Meeks would terminate the national emergency that Trump declared a year ago as one of his executive orders.
The administration claimed illicit drug flow from Canada constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat that allows the president to slap tariffs on imported goods outside the terms of the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
The Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, said the flow of fentanyl into the US is a dire national emergency and the policy must be left in place.
“Let’s be clear again about what this resolution is and what it’s not. It’s not a debate about tariffs. You can talk about those, but that’s not really what it is,” Mast said. “This is Democrats trying to ignore that there is a fentanyl crisis.”
Experts say fentanyl produced by cartels in Mexico is largely smuggled into the US from land crossings in California and Arizona. Fentanyl is also made in Canada and smuggled into the US, but to a much lesser extent.
Torn between Trump and tariffs
Ahead of voting, some rank-and-file Republican lawmakers expressed unease over the choices ahead as Democrats — and a few renegade Republicans — impressed on their colleagues the need to flex their power as the legislative branch rather than ceding so much power to the president to take authority over trade and tariff policy.
Rep. Don Bacon, R-Nebraska, said he was unpersuaded by Johnson’s call to wait until the Supreme Court makes its decision about the legality of Trump’s tariffs. He voted for passage.
“Why doesn’t the Congress stand on its own two feet and say that we’re an independent branch?” Bacon said. “We should defend our authorities. I hope the Supreme Court does, but if we don’t do it, shame on us.”
Bacon, who is retiring rather than facing reelection, also argued that tariffs are bad economic policy.
Other Republicans had to swiftly make up their minds after Johnson’s gambit — which would have paused the calendar days to prevent the measure from coming forward — was turned back.
“At the end of the day, we’re going to have to support our president,” said Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said he doesn’t want to tie the president’s hands on trade and would support the tariffs on Canada “at this time.”