Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenMedicare for All won’t deliver what Democrats promise The Hill’s Morning Report – Trump touts handshake with Kim, tariff freeze with Xi Democratic debates kick off Iowa summer sprint MORE (D-Mass.) and Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalTop lobbying groups dive into ‘Medicare for All’ debate Progressives, centrists in open warfare after House caves on Trump border bill House Democrats cave, will take up Senate border bill MORE (D-Wash.) are questioning the private sector’s influence over the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) decisionmaking when it comes to network security.

Warren and Jayapal asked FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Republican, about an advisory committee that is dominated by members affiliated with industry groups or companies in a letter released Monday.

“Having the FCC’s policy-making process rely on input from individuals employed by, or affiliated with, the corporations that it is tasked with overseeing is the very definition of regulatory capture,” the progressive lawmakers wrote. “The FCC should be working on behalf of American consumers, not giant telecommunications companies.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The letter, dated last Thursday, cites reporting by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), a nonpartisan watchdog group, that alleges that private interests have come to dominate the FCC’s Communications Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council (CSRIC).

The CSRIC is made up of appointees chosen by the FCC chairman to advise the agency on cybersecurity decisions related to the nation’s communications infrastructure.

POGO charted how recent iterations of the panel have been increasingly dominated by the private sector. The current makeup of CSRIC’s 22 members consists of 15 seats held by people affiliated with private companies or industry groups, six held by government officials and just one occupied by a representative from a civil society group.

In their letter, Warren and Jayapal asked Pai to explain how the makeup of the board is consistent with its charter and the law, both of which require it to represent the public interest.

“In order to effectively serve the American public, it is imperative that CSRIC’s membership be comprised of individuals with a diverse range of backgrounds and viewpoints, and include equal representation from various government agencies, academic experts, and consumer and community organizations, in accordance with its charter,” they wrote.

A spokeswoman for the FCC declined to comment.

Click Here: fjallraven kanken backpack

The head of the House Oversight and Reform Committee is expanding its investigation into whether White House officials used personal email accounts to conduct official business, while also blasting the Trump administration for failing to provide a single requested record so far.

Committee Chairman Elijah CummingsElijah Eugene CummingsTrump digs in on citizenship question after Supreme Court setback Oversight Democrats seek answers on potential HHS/Gilead deal Cummings on Conway Hatch Act violations: ‘This is about right and wrong’ MORE (D-Md.) in a letter on Monday asked the White House to turn over copies of all emails and other communications in which administration officials may have violated federal law as well as the White House’s records policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I am writing to inform you that, due to your complete refusal to produce a single document in response to the Committee’s investigation of the use of personal email and messaging accounts by White House officials, the Committee is now expanding its request to seek copies of all communications sent or received in violation of federal law and the White House’s own records policy,” the letter reads.

The expansion comes amid what Cummings described as blatant stonewalling by the administration as the committee seeks to conduct its oversight probe.

In December, Cummings asked for records on President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe billionaire exemption Former Bolton aide pushes back on report of nuclear freeze with North Korea US breaks record for longest economic expansion MORE‘s top advisers, including Ivanka TrumpIvana (Ivanka) Marie Trump#UnwantedIvanka trends after Ivanka Trump’s G-20 appearance Ocasio-Cortez takes aim at GOP over ‘classism’ Ocasio-Cortez knocks Trump for bringing Ivanka to G-20 summit MORE and Jared KushnerJared Corey KushnerOcasio-Cortez knocks Trump for bringing Ivanka to G-20 summit ‘I alone can fix it,’ Trump said, but has he? Trump, Mueller, the issue of ‘guilt’ and a do-nothing Congress MORE as well as any other non-career officials.

Now Cummings says he wants that previously requested information as well as “all presidential records sent or received by non-career officials at the White House using non-official electronic messaging accounts,” all documents related to allegations or evidence of misuse and all communications in which White House employees discussed the possibility of non-career officials sending messages that could’ve included classified information from their personal email accounts.

Under the Presidential Records Act, White House employees are not allowed to create or send a record “using a non-official electronic message account.” If they do, they must forward complete copies of such communications to their official account.

A GOP spokesperson for Oversight described Cummings’ latest letter as “yet another example of Democrats’ obsession with finding some rationale to impeach the President.”

“The Presidential Records Act was not intended to create a fishing license for Chairman Cummings to pry into the private communications of the first family,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

Cummings noted that in the time since he sent his initial requests, the committee has received further evidence of such violations, including from former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerTop Republican considered Mueller subpoena to box in Democrats Kamala Harris says her Justice Dept would have ‘no choice’ but to prosecute Trump for obstruction Dem committees win new powers to investigate Trump MORE‘s investigation.

Trump’s former adviser Stephen Bannon told Mueller that he “regularly used his personal Blackberry and personal email for work-related combinations (including those with [Erik] Prince), and he took no steps to preserve them,” according to the report.

The chairman noted that some of these information requests were made by the panel’s former Republican chairmen, including former Reps. Jason ChaffetzJason ChaffetzFormer chairman appears at House Oversight contempt debate Republicans spend more than million at Trump properties House Dems seek to make officials feel the pain MORE (Utah) and Trey GowdyHarold (Trey) Watson GowdyPelosi says it’s up to GOP to address sexual assault allegation against Trump Our sad reality: Donald Trump is no Eisenhower GOP takes aim at Comey, Brennan MORE (S.C.). 

And while he notes White House lawyers have provided brief replies, Cummings called their responses “deficient.”

“Unfortunately, over the past six months since I sent my letter, you have not produced a single document, you have not provided any of the requested briefings, and you have not offered any timeline by which these requests will be fulfilled,” Cummings wrote in a statement.

“The White House’s complete obstruction of the Committee’s investigation for the past six months is an affront to our constitutional system of government,” his statement concludes.

Click Here: cheap kanken backpack

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is considering two measures that end the conflict over holding a standalone climate debate for 2020 presidential hopefuls, two DNC officials confirmed to The Hill on Monday.

Members of the DNC’s executive committee unanimously voted Saturday to allow two measures related to holding a climate debate to be considered further and potentially voted on as early as August.

The two measures, forwarded to the DNC’s resolution committee, call for either the establishment of an official climate change-focused debate, or a more intimate forum on the subject.

Click Here: Sports Water Bottles

ADVERTISEMENT

A vote on the topic of a climate debate is anticipated as early as August 22, when DNC officials are slated to meet in San Francisco. However, a DNC official cautioned that the shape of the resolutions are likely to change by then, with the possibility of additional climate focused resolutions or hybrid options brought to the table. 

“They are voting on the topic in August in some shape or form. They may be amended, there may be yet a third resolution written that tries to bring them into harmony,” said Christine Pelosi, a member of the executive committee and the resolution committee.

“I don’t see these two options on a collision course with one another. I think there is a solution we can call a win-win.”

The resolutions comes as the DNC has come under mounting pressure to hold a separate debate on the topic of climate.

The DNC held its first presidential primary debate last week in Miami, where candidates discussed a variety of pressing issues. Despite nearly ten minutes of questioning being devoted to climate action issues on each of the two debate nights, environmental advocates and others criticized the debates for not allowing substantive responses on the issue, which multiple candidates have labeled the top threat facing the U.S.

Also last week, members of the youth climate action group The Sunrise Movement rallied outside the DNC’s Washington, D.C., headquarters demanding a climate debate.

Pelosi was one of three DNC members to introduce the resolution Saturday that called for a standalone climate debate.

“There are a number of us who want to have a standalone debate on the issue of climate. It’s more than an issue. We need a climate crisis response blueprint,” she said.

“In order to do that, we really want to take the time that it takes to put everyone on stage going through these issues, so when it’s time to do the platform next summer, these issues will have been hashed out by and between the candidates.”

Track Robertson, the South Carolina Democratic Party Chair, introduced the second resolution that opted instead for a forum where candidates could talk with each other about climate solutions, instead of at each other in a debate format.

DNC leadership has said they don’t want a debate on any one singular issue. DNC Chairman Tom PerezThomas Edward PerezClinton’s top five vice presidential picks Government social programs: Triumph of hope over evidence Labor’s ‘wasteful spending and mismanagement” at Workers’ Comp MORE has also championed the idea of instead using forums.

A DNC official said the forum would be akin to the Planned Parenthood forum held held in South Carolina last month.

“They both talk about the importance of climate change, they echo the difference between Republicans and Democrats on the issue,” the official said of the resolutions.

The official said executive committee members discussed how forums “give them the opportunity to give longer answers and more policy on the issue.”

But Pelosi said others in the DNC are against the idea of holding just a climate forum, believing candidates in the large Democratic field must vet their own climate action plans. She ultimately believes it will help the party craft its platform on the issue going into 2020.

“I do not support the idea of only having a climate forum because, to be quite honest, when we went back and forth over the debate of debates (at the executive committee meeting), and we starting talking about the planet being in peril, we spent more time talking climate at our debate about a climate debate than the presidential candidates did at the actual debate,” Pelosi said.

Environmental activists and others cheered Monday’s news of a potential vote on the two resolutions.

Sunrise Movement spokesman Stephen O’Hanlon said the resolutions appeared to show that “Tom Perez and the Democratic Leadership are feeling the heat.”

Washington Gov. Jay InsleeJay Robert InsleeFront-runner Biden faces skepticism in Iowa 2020 Democrats defend Harris over conspiracy theories about race, citizenship Inslee touts fundraising bump after Democratic debate MORE, who is running his 2020 campaign primarily on a climate action platform, credited the resolutions to grassroots progressives.

“Thanks to the progressive grassroots, climate activists, and Democrats across the country, we are one step closer to giving climate change the attention it requires in this race,” Inslee said in a statement.

Still, he said an August vote is not soon enough.

“There is no reason for the DNC to drag its feet on this. The debates in Miami utterly failed to address the seriousness of this existential threat. Chairman Perez should not wait until August; he should take action now to lift the gag rule or allow a climate debate. We need a full-fledged, televised climate debate to discuss plans in detail and to send a clear message that the Democratic Party is ready to lead on the climate crisis,” Inslee said.

Various environmental groups on Monday sued the federal government over allowing the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, arguing the project violates environmental law.

The Sierra Club, Northern Plains Resource Council, Bold Alliance and other groups filed a suit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, saying that it violated the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued a nationwide permit to allow the construction of the TransCanada Corp. gas pipeline.

ADVERTISEMENT

The suit argues specifically that the federal government’s permit to allow the construction of the pipeline between Canada and the U.S. was done “without assessing its significant direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects and by using the Permit to approve most of Keystone XL’s water crossings without analyzing its project-specific impacts.”

“Incredibly, the EA [environmental assessment] does not evaluate the risks or impacts of oil spills into waterways at all,” the suit reads.

A federal court ruled last winter that the U.S. State Department violated environmental laws by failing to supplement its 2014 environmental impact statement in light of a new pipeline route through Nebraska.

Another ruling placed a stay on construction from going forward. But the Trump administration in late March rescinded that 2017 Keystone permit, issuing a new one in its place.

The administration argued the new permit, which aimed to circumvent the environmental impact statement issues, nullified the construction moratorium. 

A White House spokesperson told The Hill at the time that the new permit “dispels any uncertainty.”

“Specifically, this permit reinforces, as should have been clear all along, that the Presidential Permit is indeed an exercise of Presidential authority – that is not subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act,” the spokesperson added. The Trump administration moved to remove the stay on construction and the 9th Circuit later agreed, dismissing in early June the previous suit as moot.

The same environmental groups on Monday sent separate notices of intent to sue to the Army Corps, Trump administration and TransCanada Energy over violations to the  Endangered Species Act through intended pipeline construction.

Click Here: bape jacket cheap

The groups argued the construction would allow for the unlawful killing and destruction of habitat of listed endangered species.

“The conservation groups are prepared to demonstrate that construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, including its substantial transmission line infrastructure, will proximately cause the unauthorized take of listed species, including the whooping crane, American burying beetle, pallid sturgeon, interior least tern, and piping plover,” the notice read.

The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.

A federal judge on Monday rejected a request by Rep. Duncan HunterDuncan Duane HunterDuncan Hunter’s lawyers ask court to exclude evidence of alleged affairs Former staffer accuses Duncan Hunter of groping her at 2014 party Federal prosecutors allege Hunter repeatedly misused campaign funds during affairs MORE‘s lawyers to block evidence that allegedly shows the California Republican spent campaign money on personal matters that included extramarital affairs, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Whelan, a Clinton appointee, told Hunter’s attorneys that they could try to reach an agreement with prosecutors on how best to characterize the nature of the relationships ahead of the September trial, the Associated Press reported.

ADVERTISEMENT

Attorneys for Hunter, who was indicted last year for alleged campaign finance violations, argued last week that the new allegations linking campaign spending to extramarital affairs were politically motivated and an attempt to “publicly embarrass Mr. Hunter with evidence that reflects poorly on his character,” according to a court document published by USA Today. “The Court should deny the Motion and prevent the Government from distracting the jury with this salacious and prejudicial information.”

Federal prosecutors filed the 12-page motion last week, accusing Hunter of repeatedly using campaign funds to cover expenses for affairs with five different women, all of whom “were involved in politics in some manner,” including lobbyists and Capitol Hill staffers.

“Evidence of the intimate, entirely personal quality of Hunter’s specific encounters with these women is essential to demonstrate that his spending to facilitate those encounters was improper,” prosecutors wrote. “At trial, the evidence will demonstrate that Hunter improperly used campaign funds to pursue these romances wholly unrelated to either his congressional campaigns or his official duties as a member of Congress.”

Hunter and his wife, Margaret Hunter, were first indicted in August 2018 after being charged on multiple counts, including misusing at least $250,000 in campaign funds for personal expenses. Both initially pleaded not guilty, but Margaret Hunter later reversed her initial plea to conspiring to misuse campaign funds last month. An attorney for Duncan Hunter has said his wife’s guilty plea will not have an impact on his case.

Hunter, who did not speak at Monday’s courtroom hearing, also allegedly falsified campaign records filed to the Federal Election Commission to cover up purchases by mischaracterizing numerous expenses as “campaign travel,” according to his indictment.

He was stripped of his congressional committee assignments following the indictment.

Jacqueline Thomsen contributed.

Updated at 4:01 p.m.

A Pentagon white paper says the U.S. is underestimating the scope of Russia’s aggression.

The document was shared with Politico, which reported on it Sunday.

Prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff by the Pentagon and independent strategists, the paper details Russian efforts to undermine democracies. The study points to Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to sway public opinion across Europe, Central Asia, Africa and Latin America.

ADVERTISEMENT

It also highlights the danger of alignment between Russia and China, both of which fear the United States’ international alliances and share an affinity for “authoritarian stability.”

The study recommends the State Department spearhead “influence operations,” including sowing divisions between Moscow and Beijing.

The study does not offer any direct criticism of President TrumpDonald John TrumpOcasio-Cortez knocks Trump for bringing Ivanka to G20 summit Klobuchar on Trump’s North Korea visit: Diplomacy is not like ‘bringing a hot dish over the fence to the dictator next door’ After fractious Democratic debate, Perez tries to draw contrast to Trump MORE, but does come amid weakening U.S. global alliances.

The “Strategic Multilayer Assessment” lays out national security threats posed by Russia.

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

“In this environment, economic competition, influence campaigns, paramilitary actions, cyber intrusions, and political warfare will likely become more prevalent,” Navy Rear Adm. Jeffrey Czerewko, the Joint Chiefs’ deputy director for global operations, writes in the preface to the report.

“Such confrontations increase the risk of misperception and miscalculation, between powers with significant military strength, which may then increase the risk of armed conflict.”

Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisDemocrats and Trump are all in on immigration for the 2020 election Trump: Harris ‘given too much credit’ for attack on Biden The Memo: Debates reshape Democratic race MORE (D-Calif.) dominated buzz surrounding the first Democratic presidential debate Thursday night after battling rivals on stage, but as the debate played out, a series of Twitter bots worked to amplify a far-right conspiracy about her online.

During the debate in Miami, apparent bots online amplified conspiracy theories on social media falsely claiming that the California Democrat, who is of Indian and Jamaican descent, is not black and is not a U.S. citizen.

“Kamala Harris is *not* an American Black. She is half Indian and half Jamaican.  I’m so sick of people robbing American Blacks (like myself) of our history. It’s disgusting. Now using it for debate time at #DemDebate2? These are my people not her people. Freaking disgusting,” Ali Alexander, a Trump-world personality, tweeted. 

The tweet was retweeted by Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpDemocrats and Trump are all in on immigration for the 2020 election Trump to allow US companies to sell products to Huawei Trump says he brought up Khashoggi murder with Saudi crown prince MORE Jr., who ultimately removed the message from his page. However, Alexander’s tweet was soon copied word for word by a network of bot accounts researcher Josh Russell had previously identified.

ADVERTISEMENT

Social media researcher Caroline Orr noted that a number of “suspect accounts” highlighted similar claims after Harris’s debate appearance.

“A lot of suspect accounts are pushing the ‘Kamala Harris is not Black’ narrative tonight. It’s everywhere and it has all the signs of being a coordinated/artificial operation,” she tweeted after the debate. 

The Harris campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill about the Thursday night tweets.

Former President Obama was subjected to racist conspiracy theories throughout his White House tenure that he was born in Kenya, instead of Hawaii. The White House released his long-form birth certificate in 2011 in an effort to combat the conspiracy theories.

“Seeing the tweets declaring that Kamala isn’t black enough because her parents are from Jamaica and India, I had an immediate flashback to the 2008 campaign,” Shauna Daly, a former Obama campaign staffer who led the fight against birtherism claims against him on his campaign, told BuzzFeed News.

Harris has herself acknowledged such conspiracies targeting her in the past, saying in a February radio interview, “This is the same thing they did to Barack, this is not new to us.”

Former Director of National Intelligence James ClapperJames Robert ClapperClapper disputes Trump claim that Obama wanted to meet with Kim Geraldo Rivera: Comey, Clapper, Brennan should be ‘quaking’ in their boots over Barr investigation Trump declassification move unnerves Democrats MORE on Sunday disputed President TrumpDonald John TrumpOcasio-Cortez knocks Trump for bringing Ivanka to G20 summit Klobuchar on Trump’s North Korea visit: Diplomacy is not like ‘bringing a hot dish over the fence to the dictator next door’ After fractious Democratic debate, Perez tries to draw contrast to Trump MORE’s claim that North Korean leader Kim Jong UnKim Jong UnKlobuchar on Trump’s North Korea visit: Diplomacy is not like ‘bringing a hot dish over the fence to the dictator next door’ Clapper disputes Trump claim that Obama wanted to meet with Kim Castro says Trump’s actions on North Korea ‘all for show’ MORE refused a meeting with Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaClapper disputes Trump claim that Obama wanted to meet with Kim Democratic debates didn’t knock out frontrunners — but Kamala Harris got a big boost Former Obama aide says Trump lied about past attempts to meet with Kim MORE when he was president.

Click Here: cheap kanken backpack

A puzzled look came over Clapper’s face during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” when he saw a clip of Trump claiming that “President Obama wanted to meet, and Chairman Kim would not meet him.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Obama administration was begging for a meeting. They were begging for meetings constantly, and Chairman Kim would not meet with him,” Trump added during a news conference earlier Sunday with South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

Clapper flatly denied that claim.

“In all the deliberations that I participated in on North Korea during the Obama administration, I can recall no instance whatever where President Obama ever indicated any interest whatsoever in meeting with Chairman Kim,” Clapper said. “That’s news to me.”

Trump’s claim was also disputed earlier in the day by Obama’s deputy national security adviser.

“Trump is lying. I was there for all 8 years. Obama never sought a meeting with Kim Jong Un. Foreign policy isn’t reality television it’s reality,” Ben Rhodes tweeted.

Clapper on CNN, however, acknowledged that it was historic for Trump to become the first U.S. president to set foot on North Korean soil during a visit on Sunday to the Demilitarized Zone.

“I think it’s a great historic moment, almost to the day of the 27th of July, marks the 66th anniversary of the beginning of the armistice,” he said.

But Clapper said he did not think Trump’s visit is a breakthrough moment in negotiations between the U.S. and North Korea on arms control.

“I personally don’t believe the North Koreans have long term any intent to denuclearize,” he said. “Why should they? It’s their ticket to survival, and they’re just not going to do that.”