And that has made it an instant target for criticism.

The board, part of the Department of Homeland Security, was announced last week. But DHS has released few details on how the board will function and what powers it will have.

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was attacked again Wednesday by Republican members of Congress who have already called for the board to be disbanded. Some civil liberties advocates also worry the group could violate freedom of speech.

With disinformation campaigns working to shape opinions on everything from the war in Ukraine to the presidential election in the United States, the rocky start for the board may undermine its effectiveness and hurt the efforts to staunch the harm that false narratives can cause.

“It is just an episodic failure,” said Brian Murphy, a former director of DHS’ intelligence arm, of the board’s launch. “And it has set the true disinformation professionals, wherever they live, back.”

Testifying before Congress on Wednesday, Mayorkas said the board would examine how DHS currently counters disinformation and make sure the agency “does not infringe on freedom of speech, rights of privacy, civil rights and civil liberties.” DHS already has an office of civil rights and civil liberties.

“It is going to establish what should have been established years ago: standards, definitions, guidelines and policies,” he said.

The board’s bungled rollout could also hurt existing efforts to identify and stop foreign disinformation campaigns, which have been labeled a national security threat by both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Russia, China and other adversaries have used social media to push messages at U.S. audiences that stoke division and spread conspiracy theories or falsehoods. In recent months, Russia has waged an aggressive disinformation campaign across platforms to claim images and reports of dead bodies and attacks in Ukraine are fake.

The top Republicans on two key congressional panels wrote to the department on Friday demanding more information. Even privately, congressional staffers say they know little about the board or how it’s being funded beyond the spare public announcements made by the department’s leadership.

“Given the complete lack of information about this new initiative and the potential serious consequences of a government entity identifying and responding to ‘disinformation,’ we have serious concerns about the activities of this new Board,” wrote Reps. Mike Turner of Ohio and John Katko of New York, the top Republicans on the House Intelligence and Homeland Security committees.

DHS that same day held a call with congressional staffers and the board’s new director, Nina Jankowicz, an author and expert on Russian disinformation.

According to one person on the call, Jankowicz said there was a broad vision for what the board would do but did not offer specifics to some questions, including how her organization would work with existing anti-disinformation efforts with DHS. The department also has not provided Congress with detailed written plans beyond a summary it sent to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, the same day the department publicly announced the creation of the board.

The person was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Ninety-five percent of Americans identified misinformation last year as a problem when they’re trying to access important information, according to a poll conducted by The Pearson Institute and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

But the difference between opinion and disinformation is often contested — and many argue the government shouldn’t be responsible for drawing the line.

The board’s creation spurred outrage across social media, with dozens of conservative pundits and Republican politicians dubbing it the “Ministry of Truth,” a reference to the government agency responsible for creating propaganda in George Orwell’s novel “1984.” The term “Ministry of Truth” trended on Twitter for hours.

Thousands of posts focused on Jankowicz, including past social media posts that criticized Republicans and questioned the veracity of stories about Hunter Biden, the president’s son. Other posts used anti-Semitic language to attack Jankowicz, who is not Jewish, and Mayorkas, who was born to Jewish parents.

While the board was set up in part to combat Russian disinformation, it instead fueled conspiracy theories and more stories in Russian state media. One Kremlin-backed piece carried the headline: “Biden’s ‘Ministry of Truth’ is another propaganda tool.”

Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah on Wednesday echoed that point to Mayorkas directly on Wednesday, calling the board a “terrible idea” that “communicates to the world that we’re going to be spreading propaganda in our own country.”

Homeland Security initially said the board would have the two-part mission of countering Russian disinformation activities and false narratives smugglers use to induce people in Latin America to try to reach the U.S.-Mexico border.

“For anyone who’s out there who may be concerned about the increase in migrants to the border, this is the kind of apparatus that’s working to address disinformation,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said during a briefing on Monday.

On Monday, the department also announced it would provide quarterly reports to Congress.

Trying to tamp down concerns about “thought police,” Mayorkas said in a television interview to CNN on Sunday that “we in the Department of Homeland Security don’t monitor American citizens.”

In fact, DHS does. The sprawling department, created in response to the security failures leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, has broad authorities to track and collect data on American citizens. It has repeatedly been accused of misusing those powers. In a bulletin earlier this year, DHS said it was using social media to identify potential conspiracy theories that might inspire domestic violence or terrorism. In a statement on Monday, the agency also released examples of how it has responded to misinformation in the past, including during Hurricane Sandy in 2012 when falsehoods spread about drinking water and shelter locations.

And organizations tracking disinformation monitor social media, where it’s sometimes impossible to determine the nationality or location of individual users. Disinformation researchers often identify popular conspiracy theories and trending falsehoods in the U.S. by monitoring public social media groups, pages and accounts.

DHS won’t have the ability to remove posts or accounts that it deems are spreading disinformation. That power still rests with the tech companies themselves, said Katie Harbath, a former public policy director for Facebook who is now the International Republican Institute’s technology and democracy director.

The new disinformation board could help the platforms spot some information operations they might be missing, she said.

“DHS is going to have to do what they normally do,” Harbath said. “If there’s a post they think should be taken down or fact-checked, they can report that to the platforms, but the platforms are going to make their own call.”

___

Associated Press writers Farnoush Amiri and Ben Fox contributed to this report.

___

This story was first published on May 4, 2022. It was updated on May 5, 2022, to make clear that Disinformation Governance Board Director Nina Jankowicz is not Jewish and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was born to Jewish parents.

The post DHS disinformation board’s work, plans remain a mystery first appeared on Federal News Network.

Experts and intelligence officials broadly agree the proposed Foreign Malign Influence Center is a good idea. The U.S. has lacked a cohesive strategy to fight influence operations, they say, with not enough coordination among national security agencies. Adversaries that tried to interfere in the last two presidential elections continue to bombard Americans with disinformation and conspiracy theories at a time of peril for democracy in the U.S. and around the world.

But the intelligence community and Congress remain divided over the center’s mission, budget and size, according to current and former officials. While separate efforts to counter interference continue, a person identified this year as a potential director has since been assigned elsewhere and the center likely will not open anytime soon.

“It really is just giving a gift to Russia and China and others who clearly have their sights set not only on the midterm elections but on ongoing campaigns to destabilize American society,” said David Salvo, deputy director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy and a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund.

The nation’s top intelligence official had advocated for the center before taking office. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines last year co-chaired a German Marshall Fund task force supporting it. In a statement, spokeswoman Nicole de Haay said the director’s office “is focused on creating a center to facilitate and integrate the Intelligence Community’s efforts to address foreign malign influence.”

But some lawmakers are concerned about further expanding the mission of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. ODNI was originally envisioned as a small coordinating body to address the intelligence-sharing failures preceding the Sept. 11 attacks. It has several centers that critics say are well-meaning attempts to solve problems but end up causing unnecessary duplication.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner said that while he supports the center, there were “legitimate questions about how large such an organization should be and even about where it would fit” with existing government efforts to fight foreign interference.

“We want to be sure that this center enhances those efforts rather than duplicating them or miring them in unnecessary bureaucracy,” the Virginia Democrat said in a statement. “I don’t have any real doubt that we will ultimately stand the center up in the relatively near future, but we need to be sure we get it right.”

It’s unclear who would lead the center. Separately, there is also a vacancy for a new election threats executive after the previous executive, Shelby Pierson, ended her term and returned to another intelligence post. Pierson had been in the spotlight last year after giving lawmakers a closed-door briefing on Russia’s efforts to intervene in the 2020 election in favor of former President Donald Trump. That angered Trump, who berated the then-director of national intelligence and later replaced him. Trump has promoted falsehoods about elections and pushed Republicans to follow his lead.

Experts on democracy have long warned that what the government refers to as “malign influence” is a national security threat. Social media has helped make disinformation a cheap and powerful tactic for adversaries who can push false or altered stories, videos and images, and amplify falsehoods already circulating among Americans to promote their own interests and create chaos.

U.S. and other Western authorities have accused Russia of spreading disinformation about the coronavirus and vaccines, stealing data from local and state election servers, and pushing false stories intended to exploit divisions over race and civil rights. Intelligence agencies have found that Russia used influence operations to interfere with the 2016 presidential election in favor of Trump’s campaign and conducted operations in Trump’s favor in 2020.

The U.S. assessed China ultimately did not interfere in the 2020 election, but Beijing has been accused of promoting false theories about the COVID-19 pandemic and trying to sway businesses and all levels of government. Iran was accused of sponsoring emails appearing to try to intimidate Democratic-leaning voters as well as other measures that were intended to undercut support for Trump and undermine faith in U.S. democracy.

Experts say the new center can warn Americans about interference and produce better information for policymakers. While the FBI, the National Security Agency and several other government agencies have long worked on foreign interference, “we are not organized in a way where we are building a coherent threat picture,” said Jessica Brandt, an expert on foreign interference and disinformation at the Brookings Institution.

But there are risks in the intelligence community ramping up its monitoring of what Americans see and read. The FBI and NSA have been accused of unlawfully spying on Americans. That history contributes to many Americans’ distrust of the intelligence community, as do Trump’s attacks on intelligence professionals and what he has derided as the “deep state.”

Opponents note the U.S. also has a history of covert interference in other countries and has helped overthrow governments seen as anti-American. A column published by the Kremlin-backed RT.com alleged the proposed center “is just official cover for American intelligence interference in domestic politics.”

The intelligence community also risks being seen as political or infringing on First Amendment rights if it takes the same untruths spread by Americans and labels them as foreign interference when they’re spread by an adversary.

The center “is going to have to figure out this enormous challenge to convey threats to American elections, American democracy, at a time when there seem to be two completely different realities,” said Salvo of the German Marshall Fund.

Congress authorized the center in late 2019 and directed ODNI to create it. Several people who worked in intelligence matters at that time, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe confidential discussions, say they didn’t know of any effort by the Trump White House to stop the center. Instead, leaders within ODNI disagreed on how to structure the new center or whether it should be a “virtual center” without an office.

According to one of the people, William Evanina, the former chief of ODNI’s counterintelligence center, offered to take the malign influence center under his authority, but the office ultimately did not choose that option. Evanina declined to comment.

After President Joe Biden took office, ODNI presented a plan for a small center with a few dozen staff members to the intelligence and appropriations committees in the House and Senate. But even as Congress required the center’s creation, key lawmakers from both parties have expressed concerns about the plan.

A proposal to fund the center this summer failed and it is unlikely to be completed while the government is operating with temporary funding. The center may now be included if a full spending plan is approved in early 2022.

Suzanne Spaulding, an election security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, called for the U.S. government to act quickly.

“Time is not on our side,” Spaulding said. “Disinformation is a national security threat and should be treated with the urgency that a national security threat engenders.”

__

In a earlier version of this story, The Associated Press erroneously reported that Iran sponsored an email campaign intended to intimidate Democratic-leaning voters into supporting former President Donald Trump during the 2020 presidential election. In a report published in March by President Joe Biden’s administration, intelligence officials assessed Iran sponsored intimidating emails and took other measures to exacerbate divisions in the U.S. and try to undercut Trump’s reelection prospects.

The post US delays intelligence center targeting foreign influence first appeared on Federal News Network.

Most agents’ penalties were significantly reduced from recommendations of an internal review board, according to the House Oversight and Reform Committee staff report. In the end, 43 others were suspended without pay, 12 got written reprimands and three were disciplined in other ways, such as suspension with pay.

Customs and Border Protection’s Discipline Review Board proposed that 24 of the 60 agents be fired after news organizations reported on the group in July 2019 but only two were. It investigated 135 allegations of misconduct.

One fired agent in Texas with 10 years in the Border Patrol posted an image of Pepe the Frog, “a symbol of the alt-right and white supremacy,” and doctored images of President Joe Biden touching U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the report said. The other, California-based agent, who was at the agency for 20 years and was disciplined in 2005 for undisclosed reasons, published homophobic memes and a doctored image of then-President Donald Trump raping a member of Congress. The report doesn’t name the lawmaker but Ocasio-Cortez has said she was depicted being raped on the Facebook group, named “I’m 10-15.

“I’m 10-15,” which is Border Patrol code for migrants in custody, had about 9,500 current and former agents as members, including two agency chiefs, the report said. Carla Provost, who was chief from August 2018 until January 2020 after more than a year as acting head, joined in 2017 and told authorities that she used it to get an “unfiltered gauge” of reactions to her statements. Rodney Scott, who succeeded Provost until being forced out in August, said his membership enabled him to communicate with staff and “know what the workforce is talking about.”

CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility, akin to a police department’s internal affairs office, found insufficient evidence to discipline Provost or Scott, the report said. Provost searched Facebook for “I’m 10-15” and was active on the social media site around the time of the offensive posts but didn’t contribute inappropriate content. Scott said he twice spotted questionable content involving migrants but that it didn’t rise to the level of reportable misconduct.

House investigators said the images and content are “antithetical to the CBP ethos and undermine the work carried out by dedicated CBP employees every day.”

“Unfortunately, the agency failed to take adequate steps to prevent this conduct or impose consistent discipline on agents who engaged in it, creating a serious risk that this conduct could continue,” investigators wrote.

Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol, said Monday that it is part of an internal departmental review ordered by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas “to identify and terminate intolerable prejudice, and to reform policies and training.”

“CBP will not tolerate hateful, misogynist, or racist behavior or any conduct that is unbecoming of the honor we hold as public servants,” the agency said in a statement.

The post 2 border agents are fired for offensive Facebook posts first appeared on Federal News Network.

The revelation comes two weeks after The Washington Post disclosed that the Justice Department had last year seized phone records belonging to three of its journalists who covered the Russia investigation.

CNN said the Justice Department informed Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr in a May 13 letter that it had obtained phone and email records covering a two-month period between June 1 and July 31, 2017.

“CNN strongly condemns the secret collection of any aspect of a journalist’s correspondence, which is clearly protected by the First Amendment,” CNN President Jeff Zucker said in a statement published by the network. “We are asking for an immediate meeting with the Justice Department for an explanation.”

The Justice Department confirmed that the records were formally sought last year, though it did not reveal anything else about the investigation and what story might pertain to. CNN said that in the two-month period listed in the letter, Starr’s reporting included stories on Syria and Afghanistan and coverage of U.S. military options in North Korea that were being offered to President Donald Trump.

“The records at issue relate to 2017 and the legal process to seek these records was approved in 2020,” Justice Department spokesman Anthony Coley said in a statement. “Department leadership will soon meet with reporters to hear their concerns about recent notices and further convey Attorney General (Merrick) Garland’s staunch support of and commitment to a free and independent press.”

The letter indicated that the government sought records of Starr’s Pentagon phone extension, the CNN Pentagon booth phone number and her home and cellphone records. The government also said it had obtained “non-content information” from her emails, which would include information about the senders and recipients but not the actual content of the communications.

The Justice Department under former Attorney General Eric Holder announced revised guidelines for obtaining records from the news media during criminal leak investigations, removing language that news organizations said was ambiguous and requiring additional levels of review before a journalist could be subpoenaed.

The updated policy was a response to outrage among news organizations over Obama administration tactics seen as overly aggressive and hostile toward newsgathering.

Bruce Brown, the executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said Thursday that the phone record seizure amounted to a “big story that just got bigger.”

“That a journalist from another news organization had communications records seized by the Trump Justice Department suggests that the last administration’s efforts to intrude into reporter-source relationships and chill newsgathering is more sweeping than we originally thought,” Brown said.

He called for the Justice Department to explain exactly what happened and “how it plans to strengthen protections for the free flow of information to the public.”

_____

Follow Eric Tucker on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP

The post CNN: Trump Justice Department seized reporter phone records first appeared on Federal News Network.

Her withdrawal marks the first high-profile defeat of one of Biden’s nominees. Thirteen of the 23 Cabinet nominees requiring Senate approval have been confirmed, most with strong bipartisan support.

“Unfortunately, it now seems clear that there is no path forward to gain confirmation, and I do not want continued consideration of my nomination to be a distraction from your other priorities,” Tanden wrote in a letter to Biden. The president, in a statement, said he has “utmost respect for her record of accomplishment, her experience and her counsel” and pledged to find her another role in his administration.

Tanden’s viability was in doubt after Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and a number of moderate Republicans came out against her last month, all citing her tweets attacking members of both parties prior to her nomination.

Manchin, a key moderate swing vote in the Senate, said last month in a statement announcing his opposition that “her overtly partisan statements will have a toxic and detrimental impact on the important working relationship between members of Congress and the next director of the Office of Management and Budget.” Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, meanwhile, cited Biden’s own standard of conduct in opposing Tanden, declaring in a statement that “her past actions have demonstrated exactly the kind of animosity that President Biden has pledged to transcend.”

Tanden needed just 51 votes in an evenly-divided Senate, with Vice President Kamala Harris acting as a tiebreaker. But without Manchin’s support, the White House was left scrambling to find a Republican to support her.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who was seen as the last Republican holdout open to supporting Tanden, said Tuesday night that she never told the White House she was a no vote on Tanden, and that the administration never asked. But her support was believed to be key to Tanden’s nomination after a number of other centrist Republicans came out against her, and Murkowski met with the nominee this week.

Murkowski told reporters she had asked Tanden, as she does all the nominees, to understand the challenges the Biden administration’s policies are having on Alaska, where the economy is heavily dependent on oil and gas drilling and related activities.

“I have walked each and every one of them through these priorities, these challenges that we’re facing right now as, as, Alaskans, and I’m saying, what can you do to help me?” Murkowski said. “Because we’ve got an industry that is that is really in a fragile position right now because of the administration executive orders.”

The White House stuck with Tanden even after a number of centrist Republicans made their opposition known, insisting her experience growing up on welfare and background working on progressive policies as the president and CEO of the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress made her the right candidate for the moment. White House chief of staff Ron Klain initially insisted the administration was “fighting our guts out” for her.

Tanden faced pointed questions over her past comments about members from both parties during her confirmation hearing. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent and prominent progressive lawmaker, accused her of issuing “vicious attacks” against progressives, and hadn’t said whether he’d support her nomination.

Tanden apologized during that hearing to “people on either the left or right who are hurt by what I’ve said.” Just prior to the hearing, she deleted hundreds of tweets, many of which were critical of Republicans.

Collins cited those deleted tweets in her statement, saying that the move “raises concerns about her commitment to transparency.” She said Congress “has to be able to trust the OMB director to make countless decisions in an impartial manner, carrying out the letter of the law and congressional intent.”

As recently as Monday, the White House indicated it was sticking by Tanden’s nomination, with press secretary Jen Psaki noting Tanden’s “decades of experience” in defending their pick.

“We will continue of course to fight for the confirmation of every nominee that the president puts forward,” Psaki insisted, but she added, “We’ll see if we have 50 votes.”

A leading advocate for Tanden, Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., the chair of the Congressional Asian and Pacific American Caucus, called the withdrawal a “tragedy” that leaves the Cabinet with just one Asian American member.

“We expect the highest levels of professionalism and civility from our leaders in government, which is precisely what Neera displayed in taking responsibility for her past comments and committing to a change in tone. I’m disappointed that such a qualified candidate was subject to such a negative double standard,” Chu said.

The head of the Office of Management and Budget is tasked with putting together the administration’s budget, as well as overseeing a wide range of logistical and regulatory issues across the federal government.

Tanden’s withdrawal leaves the Biden administration without a clear replacement. The apparent front-runner on Capitol Hill to replace Tanden was Shalanda Young, a former staff director for the House Appropriations Committee who has been actively pushed by members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Other names mentioned include Ann O’Leary, a former chief of staff for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and Gene Sperling, who served as a top economic adviser to both Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

———

Associated Press writer Lisa Mascaro contributed reporting.

The post Budget nominee Tanden withdraws nomination amid opposition first appeared on Federal News Network.

A total of 109 Republicans, including Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, a member of GOP leadership, joined with Democrats on Monday to approve the override, which would be the first of Trump’s presidency. The Senate is expected to consider the measure later this week.

Trump slammed GOP lawmakers on Twitter, charging that “Weak and tired Republican ‘leadership’ will allow the bad Defense Bill to pass.″

Trump called the override vote a “disgraceful act of cowardice and total submission by weak people to Big Tech. Negotiate a better Bill, or get better leaders, NOW! Senate should not approve NDAA until fixed!!!″

The 322-87 vote in the House sends the override effort to the Senate, where the exact timing of a vote is uncertain.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., wants a vote as soon as Wednesday, but Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders objected to moving ahead until McConnell allows a vote on a Trump-backed plan to increase COVID-19 relief payments to $2,000.

“Let me be clear: If Sen. McConnell doesn’t agree to an up or down vote to provide the working people of our country a $2,000 direct payment, Congress will not be going home for New Year’s Eve,” said Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats. “Let’s do our job.”

McConnell said Tuesday that approval of the $740 billion National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, is crucial to the nation’s defense and to “deter great-power rivals like China and Russia.”

The bill “will cement our advantage on the seas, on land, in the air, in cyberspace and in space,” McConnell said. The bill also provides a 3% pay raise for U.S. troops, improvements for military housing, child care and more, McConnell said.

“For the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces, failure is not an option. So when it is our turn in Congress to have their backs, failure is not an option here either,” he said.

Trump rejected the defense measure last week, saying it failed to limit social media companies he claims were biased against him during his failed reelection campaign. Trump also opposes language that allows for the renaming of military bases that honor Confederate leaders.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said after the House vote that lawmakers have done their part to ensure the NDAA becomes law “despite the president’s dangerous sabotage efforts.”

Trump’s “reckless veto would have denied our service members hazard-duty pay,” removed key protections for global peace and security and ”undermined our nation’s values and work to combat racism, by blocking overwhelmingly bipartisan action to rename military bases,” Pelosi said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “disappointed” with Trump’s veto and called the bill “absolutely vital to our national security and our troops.”

“This is the most important bill we have,” Inhofe said Tuesday on the Senate floor. “It puts members of the military first.”

Trump has succeeded throughout his four-year term in enforcing party discipline in Congress, with few Republicans willing to publicly oppose him. The bipartisan vote on the widely popular defense bill showed the limits of Trump’s influence in the final weeks before he leaves office, and came minutes after 130 House Republicans voted against a Trump-supported plan to increase COVID-19 relief checks to $2,000. The House approved the larger payments, but the plan faces an uncertain future in the Republican-controlled Senate, another sign of Trump’s fading hold over Congress.

Besides social media and military base names, Trump also said the defense bill restricts his ability to conduct foreign policy, “particularly my efforts to bring our troops home.” Trump was referring to provisions in the bill that impose conditions on his plan to withdraw thousands of troops from Afghanistan and Germany. The measures require the Pentagon to submit reports certifying that the proposed withdrawals would not jeopardize U.S. national security.

The House veto override was supported by 212 Democrats, 109 Republicans and an independent. Twenty Democrats opposed the override, along with 66 Republicans and an independent.

The Senate approved the bill 84-13 earlier this month, well above the margin needed to override a presidential veto. Trump has vetoed eight other bills, but those were all sustained because supporters did not gain the two-thirds vote needed in each chamber for the bills to become law without Trump’s signature.

Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Trump’s declaration that China benefited from the defense bill was false. He also noted the shifting explanations Trump had given for the veto.

“From Confederate base names to social media liability provisions … to imaginary and easily refutable charges about China, it’s hard to keep track of President Trump’s unprincipled, irrational excuses for vetoing this bipartisan bill,” Reed said.

Reed called the Dec. 23 veto “Trump’s parting gift to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and a lump of coal for our troops. Donald Trump is showing more devotion to Confederate base names than to the men and women who defend our nation.”

The defense bill guides Pentagon policy and cements decisions about troop levels, new weapons systems and military readiness, personnel policy and other military goals. Many programs, including military construction, can only go into effect if the bill is approved.

The post Trump lashes out at GOP after override vote on defense bill first appeared on Federal News Network.

House members voted 322-87 to override the veto, well above the two-thirds needed to override. The Senate, which is expected to vote on the override this week, also needs to approve it by a two-thirds majority.

Trump rejected the defense bill last week, saying it failed to limit social media companies he claims were biased against him during his failed reelection campaign. Trump also opposes language that allows for the renaming of military bases that honor Confederate leaders.

The defense bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, affirms 3% pay raises for U.S. troops and authorizes more than $740 billion in military programs and construction.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said after the vote that the House had done its part to ensure the NDAA becomes law “despite the president’s dangerous sabotage efforts.”

Trump’s “reckless veto would have denied our service members hazard-duty pay,” removed key protections for global peace and security and ”undermined our nation’s values and work to combat racism, by blocking overwhelmingly bipartisan action to rename military bases,” Pelosi said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the bill “absolutely vital to our national security and our troops,” adding, “Our men and women who volunteer to wear the uniform shouldn’t be denied what they need — ever.”

Trump has succeeded throughout his four-year term in enforcing party discipline in Congress, with few Republicans willing to publicly oppose him. The bipartisan vote on the widely popular defense bill showed the limits of Trump’s influence in the final weeks before he leaves office, and came minutes after 130 House Republicans voted against a Trump-supported plan to increase COVID-19 relief checks to $2,000. The House approved the larger payments, but the plan faces an uncertain future in the Republican-controlled Senate, another sign of Trump’s fading hold over Congress.

Trump has offered a series of rationales for rejecting the defense bill. He urged lawmakers to impose limits on Twitter and other social media companies he claimed are biased against him, as well as to strip out language that allows for the renaming of military bases such as Fort Benning and Fort Hood that honor Confederate leaders. Trump also claimed without evidence that the biggest winner from the defense bill would be China.

In his veto message, Trump also said the bill restricts his ability to conduct foreign policy, “particularly my efforts to bring our troops home.” Trump was referring to provisions in the bill that impose conditions on his plan to withdraw thousands of troops from Afghanistan and Germany. The measures require the Pentagon to submit reports certifying that the proposed withdrawals would not jeopardize U.S. national security.

The veto override was supported by 212 Democrats, 109 Republicans and an independent. Twenty Democrats opposed the override, along with 66 Republicans and an independent.

House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy of California missed the vote, but Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, a member of Republican leadership, supported the override, as did Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas, the top Republican on the House Armed Services panel. Thornberry is retiring this year and the bill is named in his honor.

The Senate approved the bill 84-13 earlier this month, well above the margin needed to override a presidential veto. Trump has vetoed eight other bills, but those were all sustained because supporters did not gain the two-thirds vote needed in each chamber for the bills to become law without Trump’s signature.

Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Trump’s declaration that China gained from the defense bill was false. He also noted the shifting explanations Trump had given for the veto.

“From Confederate base names to social media liability provisions … to imaginary and easily refutable charges about China, it’s hard to keep track of President Trump’s unprincipled, irrational excuses for vetoing this bipartisan bill,” Reed said.

Reed called the Dec. 23 veto “Trump’s parting gift to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and a lump of coal for our troops. Donald Trump is showing more devotion to Confederate base names than to the men and women who defend our nation.”

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said Trump’s veto “made it clear that he does not care about the needs of our military personnel and their families.”

The measure guides Pentagon policy and cements decisions about troop levels, new weapons systems and military readiness, personnel policy and other military goals. Many programs, including military construction, can only go into effect if the bill is approved.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in a rare break with Trump, had urged passage of the defense bill despite Trump’s veto threat. McConnell said it was important for Congress to continue its nearly six-decade-long streak of passing the defense policy bill.

The post House votes to override Trump’s veto of defense bill first appeared on Federal News Network.

The 84-13 vote mirrored an earlier, overwhelming margin in the House, suggesting that both chambers have enough votes to override a potential veto.

The Senate vote had been expected Thursday but was delayed after Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky objected to the measure, saying it could limit Trump’s ability to draw down U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Germany.

Congress has approved the bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, for nearly 60 years in a row. The current version affirms 3% pay raises for U.S. troops and authorizes more than $740 billion in military programs and construction.

Trump has vowed to veto the bill unless lawmakers impose limits on social media companies he claims were biased against him during the election. Trump has also said he wants Congress to strip out a provision of the bill that allows renaming of military bases such as Fort Benning and Fort Hood that honor Confederate leaders.

Paul said Friday that his main point in filibustering the bill “was to point out that the president should have the prerogative to end a war, not just to start wars.″

Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, hailed the bill’s passage, calling it “the most important bill we’ll do all year.”

The defense authorization law “is what the Constitution tells us we have to do” in Congress, Inhofe said. ”We must protect freedom, democracy and peace, and support our troops. I look forward to it becoming law before the end of the year.”

The bill’s approval was never in doubt, although Paul’s actions cast uncertainty on the timing. Paul said Friday that “neoconservatives” such as Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., “are inconsistent in saying they want … to give the commander-in-chief powers to begin war, but then they want to restrain and hamstring a president from ending a war. I think it’s a pretty important principle to discuss so we did hold things up for a day.”

Two amendments addressing troop deployment could create “535 commanders-in-chief in Congress,” Paul said, hampering the president’s ability to draw down troops in Afghanistan and Germany. Democrats support the measure because they oppose Trump, Paul said, but the amendment would also apply to future presidents, including President-elect Joe Biden.

One amendment, co-sponsored by Cheney and Democratic Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, an Afghanistan veteran, would block troop withdrawals in Afghanistan unless the Pentagon submits inter-agency reports certifying that the drawdowns would not jeopardize national security. A separate provision pushed by Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, and other lawmakers would limit planned troop withdrawals in Germany.

Paul singled out Cheney by name in a floor speech, saying she and her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, share a neoconservative belief in “perpetual war.”

“The philosophy of these people is about war and substantiating war and making sure that it becomes and is perpetual war,” Paul said.

Cheney called Paul’s actions “inexcusable” and charged that he was risking delay of hazardous duty pay to hundreds of thousands of service members and blocking Congress from completing its greatest duty: providing for the nation’s defense.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in a rare break with Trump, urged passage of the measure despite Trump’s threat to veto it. McConnell, R-Ky., said it was important for Congress to continue a nearly 60-year streak of passing the National Defense Authorization Act.

“This NDAA will unlock more than $740 billion for the training, tools and cutting-edge equipment that our service members and civilian employees need to defend American lives and American interests,” McConnell said. “It will give our troops the 3% pay raise they deserve. It’ll keep our forces ready to deter China and stand strong in the Indo-Pacific.”

The Democratic-controlled House overwhelmingly approved the defense bill on Tuesday, defying Trump’s veto threat and setting up a possible showdown with the Republican president in the waning days of his administration.

A total of 140 Republicans joined 195 Democrats in backing the bill, which received support from more than 80% of the House — well above the two-thirds support required to override a potential veto.

Trump tweeted Tuesday that he will veto “the very weak” defense bill unless it repeals Section 230, a part of the communications code that shields Twitter, Facebook and other tech giants from content liability. The White House said in a policy statement that “Section 230 facilitates the spread of disinformation online and is a serious threat to our national security and election integrity. It should be repealed.”

The dispute over social media content — a battle cry of conservatives who say the social media giants treat them unfairly — interjects an unrelated but complicated issue into a bill that Congress takes pride in having passed unfailingly for nearly 60 years. It follows Trump’s bid over the summer to sabotage the package with a veto threat over Confederate base names.

“The administration respects the legacy of the millions of American servicemen and women who have served with honor at these military bases, and who, from these locations, have fought, bled and died for their country,” the White House statement said.

If he does veto the defense bill, Congress could cut short its Christmas recess to hold override votes.

“I think we can override the veto, if in fact he vetoes,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. “I hope he does not veto. I hope he reconsiders.”

The defense measure guides Pentagon policy and cements decisions about troop levels, new weapons systems and military readiness, military personnel policy and other military goals. Many programs can only go into effect if the bill is approved, including military construction.

Romney called Trump’s plan to remove thousands of U.S. troops from Germany “a grave error” and “a gift to Russia” that undermines the mutual commitment of Europe and the U.S. to deter Russian and Chinese aggression.

The post Senate sends Trump defense bill he has vowed to veto first appeared on Federal News Network.

On Twitter Tuesday night, Trump took aim at Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects companies that can host trillions of messages from being sued into oblivion by anyone who feels wronged by something someone else has posted — whether their complaint is legitimate or not.

Trump called Section 230 “a serious threat to our National Security & Election Integrity,” adding, “Therefore, if the very dangerous & unfair Section 230 is not completely terminated as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will be forced to unequivocally VETO the Bill.”

Trump has been waging war against social media companies for months, claiming they are biased against conservative voices.

In October he signed an executive order directing executive branch agencies to ask independent rule-making agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, to study whether they can place new regulations on the companies.

Since losing the presidential election, Trump has flooded social media with unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. Twitter has tagged many such Trump tweets with the advisory, “This claim about election fraud is disputed.”

Tuesday’s veto threat is another potential roadblock for the passage of the annual defense policy measure, which is already being held up in Congress by a spat over military bases named for Confederate officers. The measure, which has passed for 59 years in a row on a bipartisan basis, guides Pentagon policy and cements decisions about troop levels, new weapons systems and military readiness, military personnel policy and other military goals.

The post Trump threatens defense veto over social media protections first appeared on Federal News Network.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) sent a letter letter Saturday to TSA Administrator David Pekoske, months after news reports that the U.S. government launched a national security review of the app, which is popular with millions of U.S. teens and young adults. Schumer also cited a Department of Homeland Security policy prohibiting TikTok on agency devices.

The TSA said in a statement Sunday that a “small number of TSA employees have previously used TikTok on their personal devices to create videos for use in TSA’s social media outreach, but that practice has since been discontinued.”

In his letter, Schumer said national security experts have raised concerns about TikTok’s collection and handling of user data and personal information, locations and other content. He also noted in the letter that Chinese laws compel companies to cooperate with China’s government and intelligence collection.

“Given the widely reported threats, the already-in-place agency bans, and the existing concerns posed by TikTok, the feds cannot continue to allow the TSA’s use of the platform to fly,” Schumer said in a statement to The Associated Press.

Over the past few months, the agency has posted a number of videos reshared on other social media platforms such as Twitter, which have amassed hundreds of thousands of views.

The agency said it never directed viewers to TikTok or published content directly to the platform, despite videos reposted on other TSA social media accounts having the TikTok logo in the bottom of the screen. The agency said it had an “active and award-winning presence on several social media platforms.”

Some of the videos are musical parodies about what can and cannot be brought on an aircraft, while others advertise services like TSA’s expedited screening program known as PreCheck. In one of the videos, a TSA spokeswoman with Nutella spread on her face is showing different containers of the chocolate-hazelnut spread to detail which one can be brought in carry-on luggage.

The post TSA halts employees from using TikTok for social media posts first appeared on Federal News Network.

“Law enforcement authorities, like everyone else, are required to use their real names on Facebook and we make this policy clear,” Facebook spokeswoman Sarah Pollack told The Associated Press in a statement Tuesday. “Operating fake accounts is not allowed, and we will act on any violating accounts.”

Pollack said the company has communicated its concerns and its policies on the use of fake accounts to DHS. She said the company will shut down fake accounts, including those belonging to undercover law enforcement, when they are reported.

The company’s statement followed the AP’s report Friday that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had authorized its officers to use fake social media accounts in a reversal of a previous ban on the practice.

Homeland Security explained the change to the AP in a statement Friday, stating that fake accounts would make it easier for agents reviewing visa, green card and citizenship applications to search for fraud or security threats. The department didn’t provide comment when asked Tuesday.

The plan would also be a violation of Twitter’s rules. Twitter said Friday that it’s still reviewing the new Homeland Security practice. It did not provide further comment.

The change in policy was preceded by other steps taken by the State Department, which began requiring applicants for U.S. visas to submit their social media usernames this past June, a vast expansion of the Trump administration’s enhanced screening of potential immigrants and visitors.

Such a review of social media would be conducted by officers in the agency’s Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate on cases flagged as requiring more investigation. The privacy assessment notes that officers can only review publicly available social media available to all users on the platform — they cannot “friend” or “follow” an individual — and must undergo annual training.

The officers are also not allowed to interact with users on the social media sites and can only passively review information, according to the DHS document.

While lots of social media activity can be viewed without an account, many platforms limit access without one.

Facebook said it has improved the ability to spot fake accounts through automation, blocking and removing millions of fake accounts daily.

Twitter and Facebook both recently shut down numerous accounts believed to be operated by the Chinese government using their platforms under false identities for information operations.

___

Follow Tami Abdollah on Twitter at https://twitter.com/latams

The post US plans for fake social media run afoul of Facebook rules first appeared on Federal News Network.

The post by VDARE featured links that directly attacked immigration judges with racially tinged slurs and a specific anti-Semitic reference about Jews and power, according to a letter sent Thursday by judges’ union president Ashley Tabbador to James McHenry, the director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review at the Justice Department.

It was distributed to all 440 immigration judges across the country earlier this week, along with other stories from The Washington Post and Connecticut Public Radio. The inclusion of the post was first reported by BuzzFeed.

Assistant Press Secretary Kathryn Mattingly said the daily morning news briefings are compiled by a contractor and the blog post should not have been included.

“The Department of Justice condemns Anti-Semitism in the strongest terms,” she said.

VDARE is an anti-immigration website founded and edited by Peter Brimelow. He also operates a Connecticut-based nonprofit, VDARE Foundation, that raised nearly $4.8 million between 2007 and 2015, according to IRS filings.

Brimelow has denied his website is white nationalist but has acknowledged it publishes works by writers who fit that description “in the sense that they aim to defend the interests of American whites.” Brimelow also has spoken at conferences hosted by white nationalist groups, including Richard Spencer’s National Policy Institute and Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance online magazine.

Tabbador wrote that National Association of Immigration Judges fully supports the right to free speech. “However, the publication and dissemination of a white supremacist, Anti-Semitic website … is antithetical to the goals and ideals of the Department of Justice.”

She asked that the post be withdrawn and an apology issued.

Paul Shearon, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, released a statement saying, “It is shocking and outrageous that a vile, racist attack against distinguished jurists was linked and distributed from an official U.S. government publication.” The federation is the parent union of the judges’ union led by Tabbador.

The issue arose as the Justice Department, which is in charge of immigration judges, is challenging their right to be represented by a labor union. It is a move the judges said was aimed at silencing criticism.

A petition recently filed with the Federal Labor Relations Authority contended the union shouldn’t be allowed because the judges are management officials who help decide or shape the agency’s policies, a Justice spokesman said.

In recent months, the immigration judges’ union has spoken out against new performance quotas and rules for managing court dockets. The National Association of Immigration Judges has also called for the immigration courts to become independent of the Justice Department, where the judges are currently employees.

The Justice Department held a summit last month focused on how to combat anti-Semitism. In his keynote remarks, Attorney General William Barr said combating anti-Semitism was “an important priority” for the Justice Department and condemned what he called an “intolerable” rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes.

___

Balsamo reported from Los Angeles. Associated Press Writer Michael Kunzelman contributed to this report from College Park, Maryland.

The post Union criticizes Justice Dept. sending anti-Semitic post to immigration judges first appeared on Federal News Network.

Trump selected Scalia Thursday to be his new labor secretary. If formally nominated and confirmed, he’ll join an administration that has moved aggressively to reverse regulations and work under a president who had repeatedly lauded Scalia’s late father, Justice Antonin Scalia .

The president announced the news on Twitter less than a week after his previous secretary, Alexander Acosta, said he would resign amid renewed criticism of how, as a federal prosecutor, he handled a 2008 secret plea deal with wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein. The financier was indicted this month on charges of sexually abusing underage girls and pleaded not guilty.

Friday was Acosta’s last day on the job. His deputy, Patrick Pizzella, will serve as acting secretary until Scalia is confirmed.

“Gene has led a life of great success in the legal and labor field and is highly respected not only as a lawyer, but as a lawyer with great experience” working “with labor and everyone else,” Trump wrote.

Scalia, 55, served for a year as the Labor Department’s top lawyer, its solicitor, during the George W. Bush administration. But most of his career has been spent as a partner in the Washington office of the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher firm, where he has run up a string of victories in court cases on behalf of business interests challenging labor and financial regulations. “Suing the Government? Call Scalia!” was the headline on a 2012 profile by Bloomberg.

His most prominent labor case helped undo an Obama-era rule to put stricter requirements on professionals who advise retirement savers on investments. He also criticized a Clinton-era rule to protect workers from repetitive stress injuries that was ultimately repealed early in the Bush administration. Scalia defended Boeing from a labor union lawsuit and fought on behalf of Wal-Mart against a Maryland law aimed at improving workers’ health care.

Scalia represented the Chamber of Commerce opposing rules requiring mutual fund companies to put independent overseers on their boards of directors, and insurance companies challenging the SEC’s authority to regulate certain annuities with values tied to stocks. Annuities are a sort of hybrid of insurance and investments.

In 2016, he successfully argued for removal of a designation given to insurance giant MetLife by federal regulators that would have brought stricter government oversight. The process of regulators selecting certain large financial companies as “systemically important financial institutions” deemed “too big to fail” was mandated under the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act that overhauled regulation of Wall Street and the banking industry in the wake of the financial crisis.

Scalia’s record drew unqualified praise from the chamber. “He is whip smart and knows the Department’s mission and operations well from prior service as solicitor,” said Glenn Spencer, a senior vice president.

The American Securities Association, a trade association representing investment banks, financial advisers, and wealth managers called Scalia a “fantastic pick.”

Labor and consumer advocates were pessimistic that Scalia would serve their clients’ interest.

“It’s difficult to see how the lawyer who aggressively represented clients against one of the most important retiree protections rules of the Department of Labor in many, many decades is somehow going to flip 180 degrees and become somebody who effectively protects worker and retiree interests,” said Dennis Kelleher, president of Better Markets, a financial industry and government watchdog.

Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, urged the Senate to reject Scalia. “The last thing working people need is another Secretary of Labor who sides with corporate CEOs instead of hard-working Americans and makes it harder to join together in unions,” Henry said on Twitter.

If Trump was attracted to Scalia’s record, he also has made no secret of his fondness for the Scalia family.

Eugene Scalia accompanied his mother to Trump’s first speech to a joint session of Congress in February 2017, where they sat in a box for the president’s guests. She received a standing ovation when Trump introduced her. Maureen Scalia also was on hand at the White House when Trump announced both of his Supreme Court nominees, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

During the presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly praised the justice, who died in February 2016, and said, “I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of Justice Scalia.” Last year, Trump posthumously awarded the justice a Presidential Medal of Freedom, and Maureen Scalia was again at the White House to receive it. He remarked how Maureen Scalia had become a great friend to the Trump family and himself.

When Bush nominated Eugene Scalia as the Labor Department solicitor, unions howled in protest and Senate Democrats refused to hold a confirmation vote. Bush gave him a temporary, recess appointment to the job.

Even with strong Democratic opposition again, he has a clear path to confirmation in a Senate controlled by Republicans and stripped of the procedural requirement that nominees need 60 votes to proceed.

He would be reunited in Trump’s Cabinet with two former bosses. Elaine Chao, now the transportation secretary, was head of the Labor Department when Scalia worked there. For a time he was special assistant to Attorney General William Barr, during Barr’s first stint in charge of the Justice Department in the early 1990s.

___

Associated Press writer Marcy Gordon contributed to this report.

The post Labor nominee Scalia has long record of opposing regulations first appeared on Federal News Network.

President Donald Trump said he won’t fire White House counselor Kellyanne Conway after a federal watchdog agency recommended her removal for repeatedly violating a law that limits political activity by government workers.

Trump told “Fox & Friends” that he was briefed on the Office of Special Counsel investigation Thursday and said “it looks to me like they’re trying to take away her right of free speech and that’s just not fair.”

OSC, which is unrelated to special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, said in a letter to Trump that Conway has been a “repeat offender” of the Hatch Act by disparaging Democratic presidential candidates while speaking in her official capacity during television interviews and on social media.

Trump says of Conway, “she’s got to have a right of responding to questions.”

Published June 13

WASHINGTON (AP) — Taking unprecedented action, a federal watchdog agency recommended Thursday that President Donald Trump fire one of his most ardent defenders, counselor Kellyanne Conway , for repeatedly violating a law that limits political activity by government workers.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which is unrelated to special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, said in a letter to Trump that Conway has been a “repeat offender” of the Hatch Act by disparaging Democratic presidential candidates while speaking in her official capacity during television interviews and on social media.

Federal law prohibits employees of the executive branch from using their official authority or influence to affect the result of an election. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence are exempt from the Hatch Act, but there are no exceptions for White House employees.

The agency does not have the authority to fire Conway, who was appointed by Trump, so it would be up to the president to follow its recommendation and dismiss one of his most unwavering defenders. Conway is known for her fiery television appearances in support of the president and his policies. She helped him win election in 2016 as his campaign manager.

The recommendation to fire Conway is the first time the watchdog office has recommended the removal of a White House official over Hatch Act violations.

Special Counsel Henry Kerner’s letter to Trump states: “Ms. Conway’s violations, if left unpunished, send a message to all federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act’s restrictions. Her actions erode the principal foundation of our democratic system — the rule of law.”

Conway told reporters who encountered her in the White House press office, “I have no reaction.”

White House spokesman Steven Groves called the agency’s decision “deeply flawed” and said it violated Conway’s constitutional rights to free speech and due process.

“Its decisions seem to be influenced by media pressure and liberal organizations — and perhaps OSC should be mindful of its own mandate to act in a fair, impartial, non-political manner, and not misinterpret or weaponize the Hatch Act,” Groves said in a statement.

A summary of the investigation into Conway stated that beginning in February, Conway engaged in a pattern of partisan attacks on Democratic presidential candidates. She called Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey “sexist” and a “tinny” motivational speaker. In another interview, she accused Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts of “lying” about her ethnicity and “appropriating somebody else’s heritage.” And she attacked former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas for not thinking the women running “are good enough to be president.” It also cited her description of former Vice President Joe Biden as lacking “vision.”

The summary also noted that she used her Twitter account to conduct political activity. For example, she retweeted a March 31 message that referred to Biden as “Creepy Uncle Joe” and “took it upon herself to outline other faults she found in Mr. Biden’s candidacy,” the report said.

The Office of Special Counsel also noted that, during a May 29 media interview, Conway minimized the significance of the law as applied to her.

When asked during the interview about the Hatch Act, Conway replied: “If you’re trying to silence me through the Hatch Act, it’s not going to work,” and “Let me know when the jail sentence starts.”

Kerner told Trump in his letter that career staff at his agency have long conducted thorough and impartial investigations of alleged Hatch Act violations by senior officials in administrations from both parties.

“Never has OSC had to issue multiple reports to the President concerning Hatch Act violations by the same individual,” Kerner wrote. “Ms. Conway’s actions and statements stand in stark contrast to the culture of compliance promised by your White House Counsel and undermine your efforts to create and enforce such a culture.”

Kerner said he therefore would “respectfully request” that Conway be held to the same standards as other federal employees and that “you find removal from federal service to be the appropriate disciplinary action.”

In reaction to the report, Rep. Elijah Cummings, the Democratic chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, announced he would hold a hearing on June 26 to hear from the Office of Special Counsel about its findings. Conway will also be invited to testify.

“Allowing Ms. Conway to continue her position of trust at the White House would demonstrate that the president is not interested in following the law_or requiring his closest aides to do so,” Cummings said.

The White House said it takes seriously the principles in the Hatch Act. It released a letter from Pat Cipollone, legal counsel to the president, who had called for the Office of Special Counsel to retract its report in a letter dated Tuesday. Cipollone argued that Conway’s media appearances don’t violate the Hatch Act.

“It cannot supply a basis for prohibiting an adviser to the President from commenting on a competing policy proposal or the individual who offers it simply because that individual is also running for President,” Cipollone said.

In March 2018, the Office of Special Counsel found that Conway violated the law during two television interviews in which she advocated for and against candidates in the 2017 Alabama special election for U.S. Senate .

The Office of Special Counsel is an independent agency that protects federal employees from prohibited personnel practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing.

Career government officials found to have violated the Hatch Act can be fired, suspended or demoted, and fined up to $1,000. The 1939 law allows government officials to personally donate money to political committees or engage in a variety of partisan activities, so long as they do so during their personal time and don’t use government resources.

___

Reach Kevin Freking at http://www.twitter.com/APkfreking and Darlene Superville at http://twitter.com/dsupervilleap

The post Updated: Trump says he won’t fire Conway for Hatch Act violations first appeared on Federal News Network.

In public, Trump renewed his dire warnings of rapists and others at the border. But when pressed in private by Democrats asking why he wouldn’t end the shutdown, he responded at one point, “I would look foolish if I did that.” A White House official, one of two people who described that exchange only on condition of anonymity, said the president had been trying to explain that it would be foolish not to pay for border security.

In one big shift, the new Congress will convene Thursday with Democrats taking majority control of the House, and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said they’d quickly pass legislation to re-open the government — without funds for the border wall.

“Nothing for the wall,” Pelosi said in an interview with NBC’s “Today” show set to air Thursday. “We can go through the back and forth. No. How many more times can we say no?”

But the White House has rejected the Democratic package, and Republicans who control the Senate are hesitant to take it up without Trump on board. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called it a “total nonstarter.” Trump said ahead of his White House session with the congressional leaders that the partial shutdown will last “as long as it takes” to get the funding he wants.

“Could be a long time or could be quickly,” Trump said during lengthy public comments at a Cabinet meeting, his first public appearance of the new year. Meanwhile, the shutdown dragged through a second week, closing some parks and leaving hundreds of thousands of federal employees without pay.

Democrats said they asked Trump directly during Wednesday’s private meeting held in the Situation Room why he wouldn’t consider their package of bills. One measure would open most of the shuttered government departments at funding levels already agreed to by all sides. The other would provide temporary funding for Homeland Security, through Feb. 8, allowing talks to continue over border security.

“I said, Mr. President, Give me one good reason why you should continue your shutdown,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said afterward. “He could not give a good answer.”

Trump’s response about looking foolish was confirmed by a White House official and another person familiar with the exchange, neither of whom was authorized to describe the exchange by name. Trump had campaigned saying Mexico would pay for the wall, but Mexico has refused.

At another point Wednesday, Trump told Pelosi that, as a “good Catholic” she should support the wall because Vatican City has a wall, according to a congressional aide. Trump has mentioned the Vatican’s centuries-old fortifications before, including at the earlier Cabinet meeting. But Democrats have said they don’t want medieval barriers, and Pelosi has called Trump’s proposed wall along the U.S.-Mexico border immoral.

“I remain ready and willing to work with Democrats,” Trump tweeted after the meeting. “Let’s get it done!”

House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said that there’s no need to prolong the shutdown and that he was disappointed the talks did not produce a resolution. He complained that Democrats interrupted Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen as she was trying to describe a dreadful situation at the border.

Nielsen, participating in the meeting by teleconference, had data about unaccompanied minors crossing the border and a spike in illegal crossings, and she tried to make the case to the group that current funding levels won’t suffice, according to the White House.

“We were hopeful that we could get more of a negotiation,” said McCarthy.

He said the leaders plan to return to the White House Friday to continue negotiations. White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said on Fox that Pelosi will be “more able to negotiate” once she is elected speaker, as expected Thursday.

The two sides have traded offers, but their talks broke down ahead of the holidays. On Wednesday, Trump also rejected his own administration’s offer to accept $2.5 billion for the wall. That proposal was made when Vice President Mike Pence and other top officials met at the start of the shutdown with Schumer, who left saying they remained far apart. On Wednesday Trump repeatedly pushed for the $5.6 billion he has demanded.

Making his case ahead of the private afternoon session, Trump said the current border is “like a sieve” and noted the tear gas “flying” overnight to deter arrivals.

“If they knew they couldn’t come through, they wouldn’t even start,” he said at the meeting, joined by Cabinet secretaries and top advisers, including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.

With no negotiations over the holidays, Trump complained he had been “lonely ” at the White House, having skipped his getaway to Mar-a-Lago in Florida. He claimed his only companions were the “machine gunners,” referring to security personnel, and “they don’t wave, they don’t smile.” He also criticized Pelosi for visiting Hawaii.

At the Capitol on Wednesday, Pelosi said she hoped Republicans and the White House “are hearing what we have offered” to end the shutdown.

The partial government shutdown began on Dec. 22. Funding for the wall has been the sticking point in passing essential spending bills for several government departments.

Pelosi said Tuesday that Democrats would take action to “end the Trump Shutdown” by passing the legislation Thursday to reopen government.

“Senate Republicans have already supported this legislation, and if they reject it now, they will be fully complicit in chaos and destruction of the President’s third shutdown of his term,” she said in a letter to colleagues on Tuesday. “”We are giving the Republicans the opportunity to take yes for an answer,” she wrote in a letter to colleagues.

Administration officials said Trump was in no rush for a resolution to the impasse, believing he has public opinion and his base of supporters on his side. Trump himself contended it’s the Democrats who see the shutdown fight as “an election point.”

The Democratic package to end the shutdown would include one bill to temporarily fund the Department of Homeland Security at current levels — with $1.3 billion for border security, far less than Trump has said he wants for the wall — through Feb. 8 as talks would continue.

It would also include a separate measure to fund the departments of Agriculture, Interior, Housing and Urban Development and others closed by the partial shutdown. That measure would provide money through the remainder of the fiscal year, to Sept. 30.

___

Associated Press writers Laurie Kellman, Kevin Freking and Jill Colvin contributed to this report.

The post No deal to end shutdown; Trump says ‘could be a long time’ first appeared on Federal News Network.