Lawyers have voiced outrage at reports that the White House withheld evidence of Russian rewards on American soldiers by Republican lawmakers.
The president and his administration have faced scathing comments from various law experts after days of controversy over a report by The New York Times who alleged that Russia was giving rewards to US troops in Afghanistan.
Over the week, contention has erupted in Washington over allegations that Trump and his aides were briefed on intelligence and took no action.
Download the new Independent Premium app
Share the full story, not just the headlines
Senior White House officials briefed senior Republicans on the situation Monday after the reports.
The White House stated Monday that Trump had not been informed about intelligence since there was no “consensus” on the veracity of the information.
However, a report from The New York Times On Tuesday, he alleged that US officials had intercepted electronic data showing large financial transfers from Russia’s military intelligence agency to an account linked to the Taliban that corroborated the initial reward intelligence.
The New York Times The report also alleged that politicians at the Republican House briefing were not informed about intercepted financial transfers tracking data.
Lawyers have criticized the administration in light of these allegations, which suggest that if this information is withheld from politicians, it would undermine the White House’s position of denial.
On Monday, the Pentagon told Fox News that “there was no corroborating evidence” to support The New York Times’ reports
“It’s almost impressive how the Trump White House continues to make this series of scandals worse * *”, Steve Vladeck, expert in national and military security law justice published on Twitter.
“It’s bad enough that they lied all weekend about what they knew and when; now it turns out that they even fooled carefully selected Republicans in Congress whom they “reported” yesterday.
The New York Times The report also alleged that the information was provided to Trump in his daily brief in late February, according to two officials.
“The beginning of the journey was the interception of bank data showing large financial transfers from a bank account controlled by Russia’s military intelligence agency to an account linked to the Taliban. Two officials confirm that Trump was informed. At another time, we would be talking about impeachment. ” Los Angeles Times legal affairs columnist, lawyer and law professor Harry Litman said.
Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe called the actions reported by the Trump administration “stupidly stupid.”
“It appears that the Trump administration kept this information corroborating even from Republican lawmakers informed yesterday,” New York University law professor Ryan Goodman said in a link to The New York Times report.
Republicans, on the other hand, have repeatedly accused Democrats of “politicizing” intelligence reports.
Donald Trump and the White House have repeatedly denied that the President has been informed about intelligence.
“This was not reported to the president because, in fact, it was not verified,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Monday.
Other Associated Press and subsequent reports. The Washington Post They have claimed that senior White House officials were aware of intelligence in early 2019, a year earlier than previously reported.
Several American military sources said The Washington Post Taliban-linked militants were believed to have killed several Americans and other members of the coalition force with the Russian deal in mind. meIt is unclear exactly how many Americans or coalition troops from other countries may have been targeted by the program.
Russia and the Taliban have denied the existence of the program.
The White House did not respond to questions about Trump or other officials’ conscience about Russia’s provocations in 2019 when the AP contacted her.