A "senior official in the Trump administration" wrote an anonymous op-ed in The New York Times on Wednesday, claiming there's a "resistance" within the White House. Amateur detectives want to know who it is. There are dozens of potential culprits, but these administration officials have so far denied responsibility. Kathryn Krawczyk
Vice President Mike Pence. The vice president is "above such amateur acts," his communications director tweeted Thursday morning.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The top diplomat told reporters a "disgruntled, deceptive bad actor" wrote the letter, but it wasn't him, per NBC News.
Secretary of Defense James Mattis. A Pentagon spokeswoman simply told Reuters that "it was not [Mattis'] op-ed."
National Intelligence Director Dan Coats. Despite recently criticizing Trump, neither Coats nor his "principal deputy" wrote the piece, he said in a statement.
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson. A spokesperson told The Guardian that Carson isn't responsible.
Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen. This "political attack" is beneath her, a spokesperson told NBC News.
Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin. "It is laughable to think this could come from the secretary," Mnuchin's public affairs assistant tweeted.
Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney. Not him, a spokesperson told NBC News.
Secretary of Energy Rick Perry. "Hiding behind anonymity and smearing the president ... makes you a coward," Perry tweeted.
Ambassador to Russia John Huntsman. His time spent communicating with Moscow taught him to "never send an anonymous op-ed," a spokesperson says.
First Lady Melania Trump. Whoever wrote it is "sabotaging this country," she told CNN.
White House Counsel Don McGahn. He'll be leaving the White House soon, but still didn't write it, per CNN.
Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta. He "does not play these sophomoric Washington games," a spokesperson said.
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie. It's not him "nor anyone else at the VA," a spokesperson told CNN.
Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. He tweeted that he's "thoroughly appalled" by it.
Small Business Administration Administrator Linda McMahon. Nope, she tweeted.
Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar. Nah, per The Guardian.
CIA Director Gina Haspel. A spokesperson told NBC News: "No!"
Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley. No, she told CNN.
Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler. "That's a no," a spokesman said.
Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao. "For those who have inquired," no, a spokeswoman told CNN.
Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. She "does not play Washington insider games," the department's press secretary tweeted.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. It's a "complete and total fabrication," he said in a statement to CNN.
White House counselor Kellyanne Conway. "Of course not," she told NBC News.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Even Trump's public enemy is a no, a spokesperson told CNN.
National Security Agency Director Paul Nakasone. Not him, per an NSA tweet.
This list has been updated as more officials have denied responsibility.
Billionaire Michael Bloomberg knows mayors. He was, after all, the leader of the nation's largest city, but even after giving up the reigns to New York, Bloomberg has spent a lot of time building relationships with city leaders through philanthropy. Now, he's hoping some mayors might help boost his young Democratic presidential campaign, The New York Times reports.
So far, eight mayors across the country are backing Bloomberg. All eight attended his boot camp for mayors at Harvard University, where they had access to advice from Bloomberg-funded experts, and more than half have reportedly received millions of dollars in grants and support packages from Bloomberg.
The mayors maintain they're endorsing Bloomberg because of his platform and ideas, not because they felt pressured on account of his aid. But some did acknowledge that his philanthropy helped establish his credibility. "Lots of people have money," said Stockton, California, Mayor Michael Cobbs, who endorsed Bloomberg's campaign earlier this week. "But the way he uses his money speaks to how he's someone who has a vision for [the Democratic Party]."
There's plenty of mayors who attended Bloomberg's Harvard program or received grants from his foundation that haven't endorsed him yet, as well, though. So it's hardly a given that he'll rack up much more support from mayors, especially when considering that one mayor who attended the Harvard program is now his Democratic presidential competitor, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Buttigieg, for what it's worth, probably has a leg up on Bloomberg when it comes to the mayoral vote after more than 50 city executives pledged their support back in September. Read more at The New York Times. Tim O'Donnell
As Sudan's transitional civilian government continues its nascent rule, the country's former President Omar al-Bashir, who was removed from power after 30 years earlier this year following nationwide protests, was sentenced Saturday to two years detention in a state-run reform center on financial irregularities and corruption charges. Some of his supporters briefly disrupted the proceedings before being forced out of the courtroom.
The 75-year-old is reportedly protected somewhat by a law that prevents anyone over the age of 70 from serving jail time. He will reportedly serve his sentence after a verdict is reached in another case in which he is accused of ordering security forces to kill the protesters in the movement that led to his removal, and he was also questioned about the 1989 coup in which he was brought to power. One of his lawyers said they would appeal the verdict.
The International Criminal Court in The Hague is also pursuing al-Bashir for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide in Sudan's Darfur region, but none of the cases against him in Sudan are connected to those allegations. Read more at Al Jazeera and BBC. Tim O'Donnell
Come back with a better plan.
That's essentially what California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on Friday told Pacific Gas & Electric after he rejected the utility company's plan to pull itself out of bankruptcy and pay victims of California's wildfires. Newsom said the proposal didn't meet safety requirements under state law and that PG&E fell "woefully short" of the safety benchmark. The company reportedly won't receive state assistance without implementing major changes to its plan. Without that money, it's future is murky.
"For too long, PG&E has been mismanaged, failed to make adequate investments in fire safety and fire prevention, and neglected critical infrastructure," Newsom said in a letter. "PG&E has simply violated the public trust."
PG&E, whose faulty equipment has received blame for sparking some the state's recent fires, is on the hook for $30 billion in financial liabilities from California. The company didn't actually need Newsom's approval, but asked him to weigh in anyway. Now it looks like the gamble backfired, and PG&E is pushing back against Newsom's comments, arguing its plan does conform to the safety requirements.
PG&E has until Tuesday to revise its plan. Read more at The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times. Tim O'Donnell
North Korea appears committed to that year-end deadline.
The country conducted its second successful test this week geared toward strengthening Pyongyang's nuclear deterrent at the Sohae satellite launch site Friday, state media said Saturday. Although North Korea's Academy of Defense Science didn't specify what was tested, the trial may have included technologies to improve intercontinental ballistic missiles, The Associated Press reports. North Korea considers ICBMs as strategic defensive weapons.
The test, in addition to one on Dec. 7, is widely seen as an attempt to pressure the Trump administration to make major concessions in nuclear negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang. North Korea set a year-end deadline for the United States to change course from its insistence on unilateral denuclearization before it sets out on a "new path."
Still some experts don't believe North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will reverse course too drastically and create tensions that existed in 2017 by running nuclear and ICBM tests. Instead, they predict he'll try to provoke Trump with military activities that don't pose a direct threat to Washington and by strengthening Pyongyang's alliance with Moscow and Beijing, AP reports. Read more at Reuters and The Associated Press. Tim O'Donnell
President Trump now has three chances to keep his financial records a secret.
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear Trump's appeal of three cases that involve subpoenas for his financial records, giving no explanation for the decision. Oral arguments for the separate cases are likely slated for March, with a decision expected at the end of June.
In three separate cases, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, the House Oversight Committee, and the House Financial Services and Intelligence Committees requested Trump's financial records from his banks and other businesses he worked with. Trump's lawyers sued to block those subpoenas, but in each case, courts ruled against them. So they appealed the decisions to the Supreme Court, first getting stays on the rulings to block the records' immediate release to the oversight committee, and then getting the whole case accepted Friday.
Previous judges have noted that past presidents released their tax returns to the public, and Trump's lawyers subsequently argued that the subpoenas are not a legitimate legislative inquiry. Kathryn Krawczyk
President Trump has at least three Jewish friends. He just asks them all the same questions.
On at least four occasions over the past few months, Trump has pulled out a story where he's purportedly asking a friend which of his administration's moves have been bigger for the Jewish people. The friend always gives the same answer — but Trump changes the name of who he's talking to each time, The Washington Post reports.
"Charlie, let me ask you what’s bigger for the Jewish people," Trump recalled asking Charles Kushner, the disgraced real estate developer and father of Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, at a Hanukkah event on Wednesday. "Giving the embassy to Jerusalem" and recognizing it as Israel's capital or supporting Israel's sovereignty in the disputed Golan Heights. "Neither," Kushner apparently replied. "The biggest thing of all is what you did by ending the Iran nuclear catastrophe."
Yet just a few hours earlier, Trump told nearly the same story, this time involving the even shiftier New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft. A few days earlier, it was Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson who Trump asked about Israeli accomplishments. And back in September, it was a nondescript "people" who told him they loved his withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal.
Read the full accounts or watch them mashed up side-by-side at The Washington Post. Kathryn Krawczyk