Want smart analysis of the most important news in your inbox every weekday along with other global reads, interesting ideas and opinions to know? Sign up for the Today’s WorldView newsletter.

During two separate photo ops at the White House on Tuesday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan waited silently while reporters barraged President Trump with questions about his sharing of top-secret intelligence with Russia’s foreign minister and ambassador in Washington last week. Trump responded only once to the gathered journalists, offering an insouciant remark about his “very, very successful meeting with the Russian foreign minister.”

For Erdogan, accustomed to taking center stage (but not accustomed to humoring the news media), it must have been an interesting moment.

It was the first meeting between two controversial leaders who don’t often mince their words, and it was a big one. While Turkey and the United States are long-standing allies, their relationship has been rocky in recent years, with the Obama administration frustrated by Ankara’s Syria policy as well as by Erdogan’s increasingly authoritarian rule.

Ahead of the Turkish leader’s visit to the White House, some observers saw potential for a showdown between frenemies, while others suggested it was an opportunity for a dramatic reset. Trump, after all, was the only Western leader to congratulate Erdogan after his camp won a razor-thin — if suspect — victory on a constitutional referendum in April. But with Trump engulfed in the backlash from his latest spectacular unforced error, neither outcome occurred.

At WH, Erdogan credits Trump for a « legendary triumph » in the 2016 election. Trump, smiling, mouths, « Thank you. »

— Ed O’Keefe (@edatpost) May 16, 2017

Standing side by side in the White House’s Roosevelt Room, Erdogan and Trump delivered statements that were friendly and formulaic. Using similar language, Trump hailed Turkish military prowess — “Turkish courage in war is legendary,” he said — while Erdogan praised Trump’s “legendary triumph” in last year’s presidential election. Trump concluded proceedings by declaring that the United States and Turkey will have an “unbeatable” friendship.

The bromides, though, do little to paper over the obvious divisions between the two countries. As we’ve discussed before, there are two main sticking points.

First, there’s American support for the YPG, a faction of Syrian Kurdish fighters that Turkey sees as an extension of its own Kurdish separatist insurgency. Both Ankara and Washington consider the PKK, the Kurdish separatist party in Turkey, a terrorist organization. But successive administrations in Washington have “de-linked” the YPG and its affiliates from the PKK. Last week, much to Turkey’s chagrin, the Trump administration confirmed it would arm the YPG ahead of a campaign to capture the Syrian city of Raqqa, the Islamic State’s de facto capital.

The second issue has to do with Turkey’s calls for the extradition of Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish Islamic cleric who has lived for two decades in the United States and is viewed by many back home as the key figure behind last year’s failed attempt to oust Erdogan.

During his brief statement, Erdogan mentioned both Gulen and the threat of the YPG. Trump offered what could be interpreted as a sop to the Turkish position, speaking of the PKK — a group with a secular, Marxist-Leninist ideology — and the Islamic State in the same breath as Turkish officials often do, but said nothing about Turkey’s well-established concerns about the Syrian Kurds or the cleric-in-exile.

#Erdogan warns US on cooperation with PYD/YPG: Terror groups have no future in Mideast pic.twitter.com/zaDkmB0Cpv

— ANADOLU AGENCY (ENG) (@anadoluagency) May 16, 2017

That’s probably for the best. Both leaders find themselves in tricky spots: Trump is mired in an endless wave of gaffes and scandals, while Erdogan faces deepening opposition at home and has seen his aggressive plans for regime change in Syria implode. Both will make do with muddling along.

According to reports, Turkey will even accept Trump’s arming of the YPG — with certain conditions. “The United States must stick with its promise to ensure that none of the weapons it gives the YPG are used against Turkey and that it will not allow the YPG to run Raqqa, even through its Arab proxies,” wrote Turkish journalist Amberin Zaman ahead of Erdogan’s arrival. “It can offer Turkey a role in the governance and reconstruction of Raqqa and encourage cooperation between the YPG’s Arab partners and Turkey’s Arab protégés.”

Meanwhile, Turkey will continue to launch strikes on PKK and YPG positions in both Syria and Iraq, and the United States is likely to look the other way.

“Turkish officials specifically conveyed to their American counterparts at the highest levels almost in every meeting that Turkey would continue to hit the YPG whenever Ankara feels [it] necessary or feels threatened,” wrote Ragip Soylu, the Washington correspondent for Sabah, a pro-Erdogan newspaper. “A senior Turkish official would not confirm, but many other sources suggested that Turkey sees the area at a 30-kilometer distance across the border in Syria as a red line for YPG movement.”

As for Gulen, both sides may be happy to see no movement on the issue.

“I wonder if Erdogan wants Gulen to be extradited,” said Soner Cagaptay, author of the recent book “The New Sultan: Erdogan and the Crisis of Modern Turkey.” In recent years, Erdogan’s nationalist bluster has relied on the spectral existence of external threats and conspiracies against his rule. But if Gulen, an ailing septuagenarian, appeared in Turkish court and got sent to jail, Cagaptay pointed out, “he ceases being the eternal enemy, and instead becomes more of a martyr rather than a nefarious coup plotter.”

Turkish media also notes that the two first sons-in-law were sat across from one another at the Trump-Erdogan lunch https://t.co/P4l7Og1IQv

— Ayla Jean Yackley (@aylajean) May 16, 2017

Trump and Erdogan aren’t about to kick-start a new era of U.S.-Turkish ties. The U.S. foreign policy community has long since given up on Ankara as a dependable ally, while leaders in Europe have suggested NATO allies reconsider the use of a pivotal air base in Turkey. Erdogan’s own brand of nationalism means he seems destined to now always keep the West at arm’s length.

“Turkey is no longer viewed as a top tier ally by key actors in the U.S. policy debate, and instead is viewed as an irritant who failed to take decisive steps against the Islamic State in the early days of the war,” wrote Aaron Stein, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

But, at least in their first meeting, it seemed neither leader came away with a new headache to reckon with or a new ax to grind.

Want smart analysis of the most important news in your inbox every weekday along with other global reads, interesting ideas and opinions to know? Sign up for the Today’s WorldView newsletter.

The news of the past two days about President Trump has drawn one broad battle line: Journalists and their sources vs. the Trump administration.

The battle line has allowed skeptical Republicans in Congress to hedge their criticism of the president sharing classified information with Russia, or asking FBI Director James Comey to lay off an investigation into Trump’s former adviser, with “if this is true.”

But it’s getting harder and harder for Republicans to use that caveat, especially now that Comey has crossed the battle lines — and apparently has proof to back up that Trump acted improperly.

Now, Republicans face a difficult choice: Do they keep giving the president the benefit of the doubt that he’s done nothing improper? Or do they take concrete steps to get more evidence, wherever it may lead?

[Compete live coverage: How key Washington players are reacting]

The “evidence” option is scary for Republicans. To start seriously questioning the president’s version of events, they will have to turn down a path that could lead to the last place they’ve ever wanted to go: Direct confrontation with their party’s first president in eight years, and perhaps, ultimately, a direct challenge to his authority.

Already, one of the most powerful Republican members of Congress, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), has started walking. The chair of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee is tasked with overseeing the government, and on Tuesday night, hours after the existence of the Comey memos was first revealed by the New York Times, Chaffetz requested the FBI hand over all its records of communication between Trump and Comey.

Right now, it’s just a request. And it’s not really much different in substance than what lots of Republicans have been saying over the past few days: They’d like Trump to provide information. They’d like the alleged “tapes” of his Oval Office conversations with Comey, or a transcript of his conversations with Russian diplomats, so they can get a clearer picture of what happened.

“We need to have all the facts, and it is appropriate for the House Oversight Committee to request this memo,” Ashlee Strong, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), said in a statement to The Post about Chaffetz’s actions.

But the White House (and, in the case of the Comey-Trump memos, the FBI) could just decide not to hand anything over.

Here’s our fork in the road.

Chaffetz is prepared for resistance in the Trump administration. He issued a threat Tuesday that represents a significant escalation between Congress and Trump: a subpoena. If the FBI doesn’t hand over its Comey-Trump communications, Chaffetz indicated he will issue a legal directive requiring them to, or else face fines, jail time or a vote of contempt of Congress.

.@GOPoversight is going to get the Comey memo, if it exists. I need to see it sooner rather than later. I have my subpoena pen ready.

— Jason Chaffetz (@jasoninthehouse) May 16, 2017

“Truth,” Chaffetz told The Post’s Carol Leonnig Tuesday night about what he’s seeking. “Let’s see how real these memos are…. And see where they take us.” (Worth noting: Chaffetz could be departing Congress at any minute, leaving this investigation in limbo.)

But as Chaffetz hints, more information could come with more problems for Republicans.

Trying to find out what happened is a direct challenge to the Trump administration’s version of events. They deny Trump ever asked Comey to lay off an investigation into one of his top former advisers.

Let’s say Chaffetz and the rest of the committee do get the Comey memos (with or without a subpoena) and find something close to a smoking gun — communication by Comey that directly contradicts the White House and suggests Trump tried to obstruct justice.

Then what?

Republicans would not be able to turn back from what would likely happen next.

Congress could hold hearings into whether Trump obstructed justice, at which point the battle lines would become Trump vs. an FBI director whom a significant number of Senate Republicans didn’t think Trump should have fired.

Congress could also vote to appoint an independent commission — made up of bipartisan political luminaries outside Congress — to produce a report on what happened. Their other option is to appoint a special prosecutor, usually a lawyer outside the government given wide latitude to investigate and, if necessary, charge people with crimes. So far, very few Republicans support either of those measures.

After that, Congress’s choices get even more antagonistic: They could vote to hold the president in contempt, or even start proceedings for the “i” word.

And it all starts with Republicans deciding that what the White House says about these damning news stories is worth questioning.

Many smart Republicans have no doubt played this scenario out already to its end conclusion: Once you start demanding more information for Trump administration, it becomes nearly impossible to turn back from what they find.

At least one powerful Republican lawmaker has decided that’s worth the risk of damaging the party’s first GOP president in eight years. Will others?

The family of slain Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich refuted Fox News reports that he had leaked work e-mails to WikiLeaks before he was fatally shot last year in the District.

The reports, which gained traction on social media, said an FBI forensics examination showed Rich transferred 44,053 DNC e-mails and 17,761 attachments to a now-deceased WikiLeaks director.

Rich’s parents, Joel and Mary Ann, said Tuesday through a spokesman that they do not believe their son gave any information to WikiLeaks. Rich was shot on July 10, 2016 near his home in Northwest Washington’s Bloomingdale neighborhood.

D.C. police have repeatedly said they believe Rich was killed in a random robbery attempt, but several conspiracy theories have emerged about his death. No arrests have been made.

“As we’ve seen through the past year of unsubstantiated claims, we see no facts, we have seen no evidence, we have been approached with no emails and only learned about this when contacted by the press,” Rich’s family said in a statement. “We are a family who is committed to facts, not fake evidence that surfaces every few months to fill the void and distract law enforcement and the general public from finding Seth’s murderers.”

[How killing of Seth Rich became politicized]

Several federal and local law enforcement authorities also said Tuesday they were not aware that Rich sent any DNC information to WikiLeaks.

“There is nothing that we can find that any of this is accurate,” said Dustin Sternbeck, the chief spokesman for D.C police, which is leading the investigation into Rich’s death.

FBI spokespeople declined to comment, saying the agency is not involved in the case, and referred questions to D.C. police.

Law enforcement officials have said for months that Rich’s computer and e-mail activity have been examined and suggest nothing that would connect him to WikiLeaks, which, twelve days after Rich’s death, published 20,000 emails that embarrassed Hillary Clinton and the DNC and forced the ouster of its chairwoman. “We’ve seen nothing that would change that,’’ said one law enforcement official.

The DNC said in a statement: “We know of no evidence that supports these allegations. We are continuing to cooperate with investigators and have no further comment.”

The allegations were reported by Fox News, including WTTG-TV, the District’s Fox News affiliate. The reports cited a private investigator, Rod Wheeler, who Fox said was hired by the family and had previously worked for D.C. police. He also has been an on-air contributor to the Fox-5 news station. Fox also cited an unnamed federal official who said Rich had transferred thousands of emails to a WikiLeaks director. Fox’s source asserts those emails were transferred between January 2015 and May 2016.

Rich’s killing has been the subject of intrigue, with speculation centered on Russia, the DNC and the bitter presidential campaign. WikiLeaks has added $20,000 to a reward to find Rich’s killer but has not said whether he had been working with or in contact with the group. Rich worked on a computer program to help people get more easily to the polls.

[WikiLeaks adds to reward to help find Seth Rich’s killer]

The Rich family spokesman, Brad Bauman, also said Wheeler had not been hired by the family but by a “third-party” who Bauman says has a political agenda. He declined to identify the person citing legal concerns. He said Wheeler offered his services to the family “claiming he wanted to help.” Bauman said Wheeler and the family had an agreement that Wheeler not talk to the media.

“This is devastating to the family,” Bauman said. “They have confidence in the police investigation and believe that every single one of these fake news stories actually harms the ability of the police department to get to the bottom of what actually happened.”

Wheeler said he worked for D.C. police from 1989 to 1998 and was at one time a detective in the homicide unit. He said in an interview that he was told by a D.C. police detective involved in the investigation that there is evidence that DNC files were possibly transferred from Rich’s computer to a WikiLeaks representative. He declined to identify his source, and he did not return phone calls seeking comment after Rich’s family had publicly criticized him.

D.C. police said Wheeler worked as an officer from 1990 to 1995 and they were checking records to determine if he served in homicide. Sternbeck, the police spokesman, said Wheeler was fired from the agency.

Ann E. Marimow, Devlin Barrett and Keith L. Alexander contributed to this report.

Read more:

Decades after a nun was slain, police exhume a priest’s body. This cold case is Netflix’s latest mystery.

Hateful acts may be rising, but will court cases follow?

Murder cases without the victim’s body are difficult, prosecutors say, but winnable

President Trump’s national security adviser said Tuesday that the president’s decision to reveal highly classified information during a meeting with Russian officials last week was « wholly appropriate » — the latest attempt by the White House to contain the explosive disclosure that Trump potentially  jeopardized a crucial intelligence source on the Islamic State.

H.R. McMaster, the president’s top security adviser, repeatedly described the president’s actions in a press briefing just a day after a Washington Post story revealed that Trump had shared deeply sensitive information with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during an Oval Office meeting last week.

« In the context of that discussion, what the president discussed with the foreign minister was wholly appropriate to that conversation and is consistent with the routine sharing of information between the president and any leaders with whom he’s engaged, » McMaster said. « It is wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information he thinks is necessary to advance the security of the American people. That’s what he did. »

McMaster refused to confirm whether the information the president shared with the Russians was highly classified. However, because the president has broad authority to declassify information, it is unlikely that his disclosures to the Russians were illegal — as they would have been had just about anyone else in government shared the same secrets. But the classified information he shared with a geopolitical foe was nonetheless explosive, having been provided by a critical U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so delicate that some details were withheld even from top allies and other government officials.

McMaster added that Trump made a spur-of-the-moment decision to share the information in the context of the conversation he was having with the Russian officials. He said that « the president wasn’t even aware of where this information came from » and had not been briefed on the source.

« I wanted to make clear to everybody that the president in no way compromised any sources or methods in the course of this conversation, » the national security adviser said.

McMaster’s pushback came just hours after Trump himself acknowledged Tuesday morning in a pair of tweets that he had indeed revealed highly classified information to Russia — a stunning confirmation of the Washington Post story and a move that seemed to contradict his own White House team after it scrambled to deny the report.

Trump’s tweets tried to explain away the news, which emerged late Monday, that he had shared sensitive, “code-word” information with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during the White House meeting last week.

Trump described his talks with the Russians as “an openly scheduled” meeting at the White House. In fact, the gathering was closed to all U.S. media, although a photographer for the Russian state-owned news agency was allowed into the Oval Office, prompting national security concerns.

[Russia denies Trump shared classified details during Oval Office meeting]

“As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety,” Trump wrote Tuesday morning. “Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS terrorism.”

As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2017

…to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS terrorism.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2017

Trump’s tweets undercut his administration’s frantic effort Monday night to contain the damaging report. The White House trotted out three senior administration officials — McMaster, deputy national security adviser Dina Powell and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson — to attack the reports, though they never quite said the initial report was incorrect. Instead, they insisted, as McMaster did again Tuesday, that the president had never revealed sensitive sources and methods.

The president’s admission follows a familiar pattern. Last week, after firing FBI Director James B. Comey, the White House originally claimed that the president was acting in response to a memo provided by Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein.

But in an interview with NBC’s Lester Holt, Trump later admitted that he had made the decision to fire Comey well before Rosenstein’s memo, in part because he was frustrated by the director’s investigation into possible collusion between his presidential campaign and the Russian government.

At the time, Trump was surprised by the almost universal bipartisan backlash to his decision, and he raged at his staff, threatening to shake up his already tumultuous West Wing. His communications team — Communications Director Mike Dubke and press secretary Sean Spicer — bore the brunt of the president’s ire.

On Monday night, following the Washington Post story, the president again was frustrated with Dubke and Spicer, according to someone with knowledge of the situation.

But his decision Tuesday to undermine his own West Wing staff in a series of tweets is unlikely to help him bring stability to his chaotic administration, just days before he departs on a 10-day trip abroad.

In a later tweet, Trump returned to one of his favorite topics when accused of wrongdoing — leaks.

“I have been asking Director Comey others, from the beginning of my administration, to find the LEAKERS in the intelligence community,” Trump wrote.

I have been asking Director Comey others, from the beginning of my administration, to find the LEAKERS in the intelligence community…..

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2017

The irony seemed to be lost on Trump that — at least in the case of sharing classified intelligence with the Russians — he was, in fact, the original leaker.

Read more: 

Lawmakers express shock and concern about Trump disclosure of classified information

Trump will have to navigate diplomatic land mines abroad. Here’s how he’s preparing.

Russia denies classified details shared by Trump during Oval Office meeting

SEATTLE — The Latest on the appeal of President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban (all times local):

1:05 p.m.

At his daily briefing, White House press secretary Sean Spicer declined to address questions on why President Donald Trump hasn’t disavowed his revised travel ban targeting some Muslim nations.

A three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle on Monday heard arguments in a lawsuit filed over the ban by Hawaii. The judges are being asked to overturn an order blocking Trump’s directive.

Spicer expressed confidence that the executive order will be upheld by the appeals court.

“The executive order is fully lawful and will be upheld. We fully believe that,” Spicer said.

___

10:52 a.m.

Arguments have wrapped up in a federal appeals court in Seattle over President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

The three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had tough questions for each side.

They asked an administration lawyer about what one judge called Trump’s “profound” campaign statements calling for a ban on Muslims entering the United States.

They asked a lawyer for the state of Hawaii challenging the ban about whether the national security rationale spelled out in the president’s executive order neutralized any claim that the travel ban was motivated by discrimination.

The judges gave no indication of when they might rule.

___

10:26 a.m.

A federal appeals court judge is questioning a lawyer for Hawaii about past cases in which he argued that the president has broad authority over immigration matters.

Judge Michael Hawkins pointed to arguments that former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal made in previous cases.

Katyal said he stands by those arguments, but that doesn’t mean the president’s authority is unbounded.

The judges in Seattle are hearing arguments over Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging the travel ban, which would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

___

10:12 a.m.

An attorney for the state of Hawaii says President Donald Trump has never repudiated his campaigns statements calling for a ban on Muslims from entering the U.S.

During arguments in Seattle, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Paez questioned attorney Neal Katyal about Trump’s statements, calling them “profound.”

But the judge wondered whether Trump is forever forbidden from adopting an executive order along the lines of his travel ban.

Katyal said no, and suggested the president could work with Congress on legitimate measures.

___

10:06 a.m.

A Trump administration lawyer says the president’s travel ban is nothing like the internment of Japanese citizens during World War II.

Judge Richard Paez questioned Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall on whether the case wasn’t like one — now largely reviled — in which the Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of Japanese Americans.

Wall responded that Trump’s order is nothing like that, and if it were, he wouldn’t be defending it before the court.

The judges in Seattle are hearing arguments over Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging the travel ban, which would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

___

10:01 a.m.

A lawyer for President Donald Trump says he has clarified campaign rhetoric in which he called for a ban on Muslims.

Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall told a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle that, in enacting his revised travel ban targeting mostly Muslim nations, that “over time, the president clarified that what he was talking about was Islamic terrorist groups and the countries that sponsor or shelter them.”

The judges in Seattle are hearing arguments over Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging the travel ban, which would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

___

9:49 a.m.

A federal appeals court is peppering a lawyer for President Donald Trump about whether his travel ban discriminates against Muslims.

Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall says the executive order halting travel from six majority Muslim nations doesn’t say anything about religion, and neither the state of Hawaii nor an imam from that state who wants his mother-in-law to visit has standing to sue.

Judge Richard Paez asked Wall how Trump’s order can be squared with a federal law banning discrimination based on nationality in immigration.

Arguments are underway in Seattle over whether to reinstate the travel ban.

The hearings are being broadcast live on C-SPAN and other cable news stations.

___

9:38 a.m.

Arguments are underway in Seattle over whether to reinstate President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall is telling a three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that the president has broad authority over immigration.

Judge Ronald Gould says each side has been allotted 30 minutes but will be granted more if necessary, given the significance of the case.

___

8:45 a.m.

Advocates for refugees and immigrants are rallying outside a federal courthouse in Seattle where judges are scheduled to hear arguments over Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban

Dozens of activists gathered Monday morning, some carrying “No Ban, No Wall” signs.

The protesters were on hand about an hour before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the case. The judges will decide whether to uphold a Hawaii judge’s decision in March that blocked the ban.

Trump’s new travel ban would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

___

8:20 a.m.

A courtroom at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle is starting to fill up in advance of arguments over President Donald Trump’s travel ban while protests were expected outside the building.

Three judges appointed by former President Bill Clinton — Michael Hawkins, Ronald Gould and Richard Paez — are due to hear arguments over whether to uphold a Hawaii judge’s decision to block the ban in March.

Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall will argue for the administration, while Neal Katyal, a former acting attorney general, will represent the state of Hawaii, which sued to block the ban.

___

1:09 a.m.

For the second time in a week, government lawyers will try to persuade a federal appeals court to reinstate President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban — and once again, they can expect plenty of questions about whether the ban was designed to discriminate against Muslims.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled arguments Monday in Seattle over Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging the travel ban, which would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Last week, judges on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over whether to affirm a Maryland judge’s decision putting the ban on ice. They peppered Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall with questions about whether they could consider Trump’s campaign statements calling for a ban on Muslims entering the U.S.

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

The Syrian government has constructed and is using a crematorium at its notorious Sednaya military prison near Damascus to clandestinely dispose of the bodies of prisoners it continues to execute inside the facility, the State Department said Monday.

Thousands of executed detainees have been dumped in mass graves in recent years, said acting assistant secretary of state Stuart Jones. “What we’re assessing is that if you have that level of production of mass murder, then ­using the crematorium would . . . allow the regime to manage that number of corpses . . . without evidence.”

“We believe that the building of a crematorium is an effort to cover up the extent of mass murders taking place in Sednaya prison,” he said in a briefing for reporters.

The Syrian regime, Jones said, “has treated opposition forces and unarmed civilians as one and the same,” continuing to “systematically abduct and torture civilian detainees, often beating, electrocuting and raping these victims,” and authorizing “the extrajudicial killings of thousands.”

The State Department distributed satellite photographs it said documented the gradual construction of the facility outside the main prison complex and its apparent use this year. Jones said that “newly declassified” information on this and other atrocities by the government of President Bashar al-Assad came from “intelligence community assessments,” as well as from nongovernmental organizations such as Amnesty International and the media.

“These atrocities have been carried out seemingly with the unconditional support from Russia and Iran,” Assad’s main backers, Jones said. Neither government commented on the new U.S. allegation.

[How a woman in England tracks civilian deaths in Syria, one bomb at a time]

Accusations of mass murder and incinerated bodies, evoking the Holocaust, contrasted with last week’s Washington visit by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. They were pictured shaking hands and broadly smiling with President Trump before an Oval Office meeting in which discussions centered on Syria.

The Russians also met with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and Jones said the release of new intelligence comes at “an opportune time to remind people about the atrocities that are being carried out inside of Syria all the time.”

The newly released information included a satellite photo of the snow-covered Sednaya complex with an L-shaped building labeled “probable crematorium.” Assessment of the facility, Jones said, included the presence of “the discharge stack, the probable firewall, the probable air intake — this is in the construction phase — this would be consistent if they were building a crematorium.” In a photo taken Jan. 15, he said, “we’re look[ing] at snowmelt on the roof that would be consistent with a crematorium.”

Jones said the information had not been shared with the Russians. He also said he was not suggesting that either Russia or Iran was involved with the facility.

But Tillerson, he said, “was firm and clear with Minister Lavrov. Russia holds tremendous influence over Bashar al-Assad. A key point that took place in that bilateral meeting was telling Russia to use its power to rein in the regime.”

“The regime must stop all attacks on civilians and opposition forces, and Russia must bear responsibility to ensure regime compliance,” Jones said.

Jones called Tillerson’s meeting with Lavrov “productive.” But “I would not say that they mapped out a specific way forward on how to address the issue of Syrian atrocities, or even how to move forward on the Geneva process” on the eve of the next round of years-long United Nations efforts to bring representatives of Assad and the rebels to the negotiating table, due to begin Tuesday.

One of Lavrov’s principal goals in last week’s meetings was to solicit Trump administration support for a cease-fire and the establishment of safe zones within ­Syria as part of a May 4 pact signed by Russia, Iran and Turkey. The Turkish government has backed anti-Assad rebels in Syria along with the United States, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is due to meet with Trump at the White House on Tuesday.

[U.S.-Turkish relations deeply strained ahead of Erdogan’s visit to White House]

Although Trump has also called for safe zones within Syria and said he discussed them early this month in a telephone call with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, the administration more recently has been publicly lukewarm about the Russia-led plan.

“In light of the failures of the past cease-fire agreements, we have reason to be skeptical,” Jones said. Earlier truces negotiated under the Obama administration were violated by both Syria and Russia.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump said the United States should concentrate on the fight against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq and cease involvement in Syria’s civil war. But he changed course last month, approving a cruise missile strike on a Syrian government air base after concluding it was used by Assad to launch a chemical weapons attack against civilians.

Jones described “the continued brutality of Assad” as a threat to the region, “as well as to the national security interests of the United States and our allies.” Asked if there is consideration of military action to destroy the crematorium, he said, “We’re not going to signal what we are going to do and what we’re not going to do.”

“At this point, we are talking about this evidence and bringing it forward to the international community, which we hope will put pressure on the regime to change its behavior,” Jones said.

Cease-fires under the Russia-Iran-Turkey agreement, in designated parts of northwestern, central and southern Syria, have largely held in recent weeks. But violence continues on other fronts not included in the plan, and suggests that Assad’s forces are positioning themselves to launch an all-out assault on the largest of the safe zones, Idlib province, when the deal breaks down. If that happens, almost a million displaced civilians could find themselves caught in the crossfire between pro-government forces and an al-Qaeda-linked coalition that appears willing to fight until the end.

More than 400,000 people have died in the Syrian civil war, according to the United Nations, with at least half the entire prewar population of about 22 million now living as refugees or displaced from their homes. Many of the dead are civilians killed by government action, including, Jones said, “well-documented airstrikes and artillery strikes, chemical weapons attacks, arbitrary arrests, extrajudicial killings, starvation, sexual violence, and denial of essential services such as food, water and medical care.”

According to “numerous” ­nongovernmental organizations, Jones said, “the regime has abducted and detained between 65,000 and 117,000 people between 2011 and 2015,” a period in which Amnesty International has said that nearly 18,000 detainees died. The Syrian Network for Human Rights estimated in March that at least 106,727 people were still arrested or had been forcibly disappeared.

Prisoners are held in a network of prisons across Syria. The Sednaya detention complex, run by Syria’s powerful military police about 20 miles outside Damascus, is the most notorious. A recent Amnesty International report described it as a “human slaughterhouse.”

Jones cited “multiple sources” in saying that “the regime is responsible for killing as many as 50 detainees per day at Sednaya,” where he said up to 70 people were packed in cells designed for five. Former prisoners have described mass hangings.

[A journey into Syria’s secret torture wards]

In interviews with The Washington Post, former detainees described conditions so atrocious that many prisoners died from torture, medical neglect or starvation.

Most political prisoners said they had been held in the “Red Building,” a facility the regime largely emptied of mostly Islamist and jihadist prisoners in the early months of the anti-Assad uprising that began in early 2011. Among those taken from the cells and hanged, former prisoners said, were students, engineers, activists and human rights lawyers.

Louisa Loveluck in Beirut contributed to this report.