I've obtained passages from “A Warning,” the book by Anonymous, the current or former Senior White House official who authored the New York Times op-ed.

In the book, Anonymous claims that senior officials had no doubt that Pence would support invoking the 25th amendment if the majority of the cabinet agreed. The discussions about invoking the 25th amendment occurred, according to Anonymous, during the period after Bob Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel.

More Details In My Story: http://bit.ly/2oTB3ga

If you want to post this edition on social media, use this link: http://bit.ly/2WO26Gp

I hope you’ll subscribe to my newsletter by clicking the button above or the button at the end of this post. Please follow me on Twitter and Instagram.

Scoop: ABC News Execs Have Identified Former Employee Who Accessed Amy Robach Hot-Mic Footage, Sources Say

ABC News executives believe they know the identity of the former employee who accessed footage of anchor Amy Robach expressing frustration that her story about convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein had been shelved.

Two sources with knowledge of the situation tell me that ABC News executives know who the former employee is but don’t know if that person leaked the footage to Project Veritas, the right-wing activist group, or if they shared it with others who leaked the footage.

What ABC News executives do know is that the former employee is now working at CBS News, the sources said. I’m told that ABC News executives have informed their counterparts at CBS News that this person accessed the footage of Robach. It’s unclear if CBS News plans on taking any action against the employee.

In a statement, a spokesperson for ABC News told me, “We take violations of company policy very seriously, and we’re pursuing all avenues to determine the source of the leak.”

In an email, a CBS News spokesperson declined to comment. 

This is a developing story…this edition of my newsletter will be updated.

If you want to post this edition on social media, use this link: http://bit.ly/2BlcRWL

I hope you’ll subscribe to my newsletter by clicking the button above or the button at the end of this post. Please follow me on Twitter and Instagram.

Scoop: Donald Trump Jr. and Kimberly Guilfoyle to Appear on ‘The View’ 

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, is set to appear on the ABC panel show “The View” in November to promote his forthcoming book, “Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us,” according to two sources familiar with the show’s booking. 

Joining him on the program will be Kimberly Guilfoyle, the former Fox News host who is now serving as a senior adviser to the Trump campaign and has been dating Trump Jr. for more than a year. 

Their appearance on “The View” will mark the first time they’ve been interviewed together on a network television program. It’s also the first time either has appeared on “The View.” 

Trump Jr. and Guilfoyle will be guests on the 5,000th episode of “The View” which has been on the air since 1997.

Trump Jr. and Guilfoyle aren’t likely to find a receptive panel greeting them on the show. Three of the co-hosts, Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar and Sunny Hostin, are progressives who have been outspoken with their criticism of President Donald Trump and Trump Jr. Behar has frequently been criticized by conservatives and Trump supporters for her comments about the president and Vice President Mike Pence. 

The two conservative co-hosts of “The View,” Meghan McCain and Abby Huntsman, aren’t exactly expected to be a friendly audience, either. McCain’s late father, Sen. John McCain, was and continues to be a frequent target of the president and his supporters. 

And while Huntsman’s father, Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor and U.S. ambassador to China, served as Trump’s ambassador to Russia until recently, Abby Huntsman has been openly critical of the president and his administration, particularly in the past month as calls for impeachment have strengthened. 

The prospect of a contentious interview has never stopped “The View” from booking a guest; in fact, the show thrives on contentious interactions whether among co-hosts or between co-hosts and guests. 

Another Trump supporter will be appearing on “The View,” this coming week, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will be a guest on the program this Tuesday to promote his book “Trump vs China: Facing America’s Greatest Threat.”

If you want to post this edition on social media, please use this link: http://bit.ly/2lEp04A

I hope you’ll subscribe to my newsletter by clicking the button above or the button at the end of this post. Please follow me on Twitter and Instagram.

SCOOP: Former CIA Officer Has Not Had Upcoming Book Cleared By CIA, Sources Say

Former CIA Case Officer Amaryllis Fox has a book about her time in the intelligence agency coming out this October, but according to two sources, it has not officially been cleared for publication yet by the CIA. 

Even though she hasn’t received clearance yet, according to the sources, review copies of the book “Life Undercover: Coming of Age in the CIA,” from the august publishing house Knopf, have gone out to at least one news publication and myself, which could mean that Fox violated federal law. 

And an excerpt from Fox’s book, which contains information related to the CIA and intelligence activities (though it’s unclear if any of it is classified), was published in Vogue last month.

According to two sources, Fox did submit her manuscript to the CIA for clearance but it has not yet been cleared for publication.

When an individual joins the CIA, they sign a lifetime agreement that confirms they need to have any materials about the agency and intelligence matters cleared first by the CIA's Publications Review Board before sharing that information with the public. The board reviews the written materials and redacts any information that is classified or may cause harm to U.S. national security. Even if a former CIA official believes what they have written does not contain classified information, they still must submit it to the review board for clearance. Former CIA officials will often go back and forth with the review board, negotiating redactions, before they gain final clearance for publication. 

In a statement, a spokesperson for Knopf said, “Our understanding is that Amaryllis has coordinated with the PRB throughout the process of writing her book, from the proposal through the final manuscript.” 

I have reached out to the CIA for comment but have not heard back yet. 

With respect to the excerpt of Fox’s book published in Vogue, a source familiar with the matter says a Vogue fact-checker was in touch with the review board, but the source did not know if the board had cleared the excerpt for publication. It’s unusual for anyone but a former CIA official (or their attorney) to be in contact with the board. In fact, a well-placed source says the board will often decline to interact with outsiders.  I’ve reached out to a spokesperson for Vogue’s parent company, Condé Nast for comment.

The review board process is notoriously difficult, and former CIA officials like Nada Bakos, who served as an analyst and targeting officer for a decade, have had to sue the agency to get their books cleared for publication. But the law is clear: Until a former CIA official has clearance, which comes in the form of an official letter, they may not share any information with outsiders.  

In fact, the CIA says a former official shouldn’t even share a manuscript with ghostwriters or a publisher before they get clearance from the review board: 

“Publishing is more than having a printing house bind copies of a book. It means communicating by any means (including orally or electronically), information regardless of form to any person or entity other than the CIA’s PRB or a US Government official authorized by the CIA to receive such information for prepublication review. This encompasses materials including but not limited to: book reviews, Op-ed pieces, scholarly papers, scripts, screenplays, blogs, speeches, and other materials. Thus, material covered by a CIA Secrecy Agreement requiring prepublication review must be submitted and approved prior to discussing the material with or showing it to individuals such as a publisher, co-author, agent, editor, ghost-writer, personal representative, family member, or assistant.”

Further complicating matters, Fox sold the rights to her book and her life to Media Res, the production company run by producer Michael Ellenberg. Media Res sold the project as a drama series to Apple after a bidding war, and actress Brie Larson is set to star in and produce the series. 

It’s unclear if Media Res, Apple or Larson have actually received a copy of the book, although given that review copies have gone out to reporters, it’s likely they have. I have contacted representatives for Media Res, Apple and Larson and will update this story if they offer comment. 

According to The Hollywood Reporter, “Fox will produce and provide additional background information for the series.” If Fox’s background information is related to national security matters, she would also need to have that cleared with the CIA review board before sharing it with producers, according to a source familiar with review board procedures. It’s unclear if Fox has submitted or shared any background information to producers.

The penalties for failing to gain clearance of a book pre-publication are quite severe. In 2016, former Navy SEAL Matt Bissonnette, who was a part of the raid that led to Osama bin Laden’s death, forfeited more than $6 million in income from his book “No Easy Day” and related speeches. Unlike Fox, Bissonnette never even submitted his book for review to the US Department of Defense.

Bissonnette’s forfeiture ended years of federal criminal and civil investigations. 

I’m sending two newsletters back-to-back today as I’m covering radically different topics! Please forgive me!

If you want to post this edition on social media, use this link: http://bit.ly/2KNvKqL

I hope you’ll subscribe to my newsletter by clicking the button above or the button at the end of this post. Please follow me on Twitter and Instagram.

NEWS: US to Oppose Proposal by African Nations to Sell Ivory Stockpiles 

Elephants in Africa are in crisis because of poaching, climate change and a host of other issues.

But I just learned that they’re getting a bit of a reprieve from the Trump administration.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service just confirmed to me that the United States is officially opposing a proposal that would allow four nations in southern Africa—Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe—to sell their ivory stockpiles. These stockpiles mainly come from the ivory of dead elephants and those seized from traffickers. 

The proposal to sell ivory stockpiles was presented by three of the nations, Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe, at the CITES meeting in Geneva. CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an agreement among 183 countries on the regulation of wildlife trade and any wildlife products, including ivory sales. 

The reason this opposition is such a victory for elephants is that the last time Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe were allowed to sell their ivory stockpiles, in 2008, it led to a catastrophic rise in illegal poaching. At the time, the sale, which was made to Japan and China, was intended to flood the market and reduce prices, but it had the opposite impact; after the sale, elephant poaching increased by 66 percent and has only recently started to slow. In the past 10 years, hundreds of thousands of elephants have been slaughtered for their ivory. 

The countries seeking to get permission from CITES to sell their ivory stockpiles have been frustrated that they can’t decide what to do with the ivory from their elephants. They’ve implied directly, and indirectly, that the restrictions imposed on them by countries that don’t have elephants smack of neo-colonialism. 

Zimbabwe, which is facing a horrific economic crisis (inflation soared to 175 percent in June), is among the most strident voices on the subject of selling ivory stockpiles.

“Our ivory stockpile is worth over $300 million, which we can’t sell because countries without elephants are telling those with them what to do with their animals,” Nick Mangwana, a Zimbabwe government official, tweeted in May. 

Here’s a partial statement from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on its decision to oppose a limited sale of ivory from the four nations in southern Africa: 

“Given the continuous high levels of elephant poaching and illegal ivory trade, the United States believes it is premature to agree to a resumption of trade in ivory at this time. The United States believes that re-opening international trade in ivory, at this time, will further endanger elephant populations across Africa.

It is extremely difficult to differentiate legally acquired ivory from ivory derived from elephant poaching. USFWS criminal investigations and anti-smuggling efforts have clearly shown that the legal ivory trade can serve as a cover for illegal trade to launder illegally obtained ivory. Therefore, allowing legal ivory to enter the marketplace could mask trade in illegal ivory and contribute to increased elephant poaching, undermining the efforts to date that may have resulted in the slight reduction in poaching observed in some range countries or areas.”