Climate change will not be on the agenda at next year’s Group of Seven (G-7) summit hosted by the United States, acting White House chief of staff Mick MulvaneyJohn (Mick) Michael MulvaneyTrump accuses Biden of ‘quid pro quo’ hours after Mulvaney remarks Testimony from GOP diplomat complicates Trump defense Florida mayor says White House hasn’t contacted him about holding G-7 in city MORE said Thursday.

Mulvaney announced that Trump National Doral near Miami would host the gathering of world leaders from June 10-12, 2020.

“Climate change will not be on the agenda,” Mulvaney said when asked whether the topic would be on the docket for the summit.

ADVERTISEMENT

Doral is located just outside Miami, a city which is expected to face acute consequences from the warming planet. Rising sea levels have led to increased flooding there, and consistently hotter temperatures will mean that the June summit will likely take place in scorching conditions.

The issue of climate change has divided Trump and the other G-7 leaders. He has characterized it as a hoax and cast doubt on government reports warning about the severe effects of a warming planet.

Click Here: kenzo online españa

Climate change was a central focus of this year’s G-7 in Biarritz, France. Trump was absent from a session on climate, biodiversity and oceans attended by the heads of government of the other six nations that make up the G-7.

He insisted later at the summit that he’s an “environmentalist,” but that he did not want to endanger the U.S. economy over environmental concerns.

Trump also left the 2018 G-7 summit in Canada early and missed a session on climate change and clean energy as a result.

The suicide rate among those between ages 10 to 24 jumped between 2007 and 2017, according to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Thursday.

The 56-percent jump in that decade contrasted with a more stable suicide rate among the age group previously. In 2007, there were 6.8 suicides per 100,000 people among ages 10 to 24, while in 2017 there were 10.6 suicides, according to the CDC.

ADVERTISEMENT

Suicide is the second leading cause of death among people in that age range, behind accidents, according to The Washington Post. The suicide rate was higher than the homicide rate in that age group starting in 2011.

When broken down by age groups, the suicide rate for those aged 10 to 14 almost tripled between 2007 and 2017. For teenagers 15 to 19, the rate surged 76 percent in that decade.

For 20- to 24-year-olds, the rate of suicides has been increasing from 2000 to 2017, at a rate of 36 percent.

The Post noted researchers do not know the reason for the spike in the suicide rate among teens and young people, though they saw it as cause for alarm.

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

“Just looking at these numbers, it’s hard not to find them completely disturbing. It should be a call to action,” Lisa Horowitz, a pediatric psychologist at the National Institute of Mental Health, told the Post. 

President TrumpDonald John TrumpDemocratic senator rips Trump’s ‘let them fight’ remarks: ‘Enough is enough’ Warren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Trump touts Turkey cease-fire: ‘Sometimes you have to let them fight’ MORE on Thursday showered Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan with praise after the two sides announced a temporary cease-fire in northern Syria, with Turkey temporarily halting its military offensive.

The president declared the deal an “amazing outcome” even as many questions remain about the terms and Ankara’s commitment to a cease-fire. Trump repeatedly credited Erdoğan, hailing the strong-arm president as a “hell of a leader.”

“I just want to thank and congratulate President Erdoğan. He’s a friend of mine, and I’m glad we didn’t have a problem because, frankly, he’s a hell of a leader, and he’s a tough man,” Trump told reporters while traveling in Texas.

“He’s a strong man, and he did the right thing and I really appreciate it, and I will appreciate it in the future.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump said he expects Erdoğan to visit the White House next month for a previously announced visit.

“What he did was very smart, and it was great for the people of Turkey,” Trump said. “And they’re lucky that it was him that was making the decision.”

Click Here: Cheap FIJI Rugby Jersey

The president’s optimistic remarks came shortly after Vice President Pence announced in Ankara that the U.S. had reached a deal with Turkey to end the bloodshed in northern Syria.

Turkey will suspend its operations for 120 hours to allow Kurdish fighters to withdraw from a designated safe zone along the Turkish and Syrian border, Pence said. In return, the U.S. would lift sanctions imposed this week on Turkish officials.

Trump called it an “amazing outcome” and a “great day for civilization.”

But Ankara has reneged on a similar deal in the past, and Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said shortly after the announcement that it did not amount to a cease-fire.

“We will pause the operation for 120 hours in order for the terrorists to leave,” he said. “We will only stop the operation if our conditions are met.”

The deal was necessitated by Trump’s decision earlier this month to pull U.S. forces out of northern Syria. Within days, Turkey had advanced into the area and began attacking Kurdish fighters, leading to violence and uncertainty in the region.

The U.S. military relied on the Syrian Democratic Forces, which is led by the Kurds, as the local ground force fighting ISIS. But Ankara considers the Syrian Kurds terrorists who are an extension of a Kurdish insurgency within Turkey.

Welcome to Hillicon Valley, The Hill’s newsletter detailing all you need to know about the tech and cyber news from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley. If you don’t already, be sure to sign up for our newsletter with this LINK.

Click Here: Cheap FIJI Rugby Jersey

Welcome! Follow the cyber team, Maggie Miller (@magmill95), and the tech team, Emily Birnbaum (@birnbaum_e) and Chris Mills Rodrigo (@chrisismills)

 

ZUCKERBERG PUSHES BACK: Facebook founder and CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergWarren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Martin Luther King Jr.’s daughter knocks Zuckerberg for invoking her father while defending Facebook Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg defends handling of misinformation in political ads | Biden camp hits Zuckerberg over remarks | Dem bill would jail tech execs for lying about privacy | Consumer safety agency accidentally disclosed personal data MORE on Thursday defended his company’s controversial decision of allowing politicians to post political ads with misleading or false claims on its platform, saying it’s “something we have to live with.”

“People worry, and I worry deeply, too, about an erosion of truth,” Zuckerberg told The Washington Post ahead of a speech at Georgetown University. “At the same time, I don’t think people want to live in a world where you can only say things that tech companies decide are 100 percent true. And I think that those tensions are something we have to live with.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In general, in a democracy, I think that people should be able to hear for themselves what politicians are saying,” Zuckerberg continued. “Often, the people who call the most for us to remove content are often the first to complain when its their content that falls on the wrong side of a policy.”

In the 35-minute speech at Georgetown Thursday afternoon, Zuckerberg elaborated on that defense, saying that having tech company’s moderate content could be dangerous.

“Political ads on Facebook are more transparent than anywhere else,” Zuckerberg said. “We don’t factcheck political ads… because we believe people should be able to see for themselves what politicians are saying.

“I know many people disagree, but in general I don’t think it’s right for a private company to censor politicians or the news in a democracy. And we are not an outlier here.”

Read more here.

 

& ON THAT CHINA BUSINESS…: Mark Zuckerberg hit China’s model for the internet in a speech Thursday, saying that Facebook could not operate there without compromising its values.

“I wanted our services in China because I believe in connecting the whole world, and I thought maybe we could help creating a more open society,” Zuckerberg during a speech at Georgetown University.

“I worked hard on this for a long time, but we could never come to agreement on what it would take for us to operate there and they never let us in.”

Zuckerberg spent a large portion of Thursday’s appearance defending Facebook as a vehicle for freedom of expression and expanding free speech.

He contrasted that view with China’s model, which he said has been stifling mentions of protests on Chinese apps. 

He specifically mentioned TikTok, a video sharing platform whose parent company ByteDance reportedly released guidelines recently effectively banning criticism of the Chinese government.

“Until recently, the internet in almost every country outside China has been defined by American platforms with strong free expression values,” he said. “But there’s no guarantee that these values will win out. A decade ago, almost all of the major internet platforms were American. Today, six of the top ten are Chinese.”

Read more here.

 

BIDEN GOES AFTER ZUCK: Former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenWarren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Trump accuses Biden of ‘quid pro quo’ hours after Mulvaney remarks Testimony from GOP diplomat complicates Trump defense MORE‘s presidential campaign on Thursday hit Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over a speech where the executive defended his company’s decision not to take down political advertisements with inaccuracies.

“Facebook has chosen to sell Americans’ personal data to politicians looking to target them with disproven lies and conspiracy theories, crowding out the voices of working Americans,” Bill Russo, the Biden campaign’s deputy communications director, said in a statement.

“Zuckerberg attempted to use the Constitution as a shield for his company’s bottom line, and his choice to cloak Facebook’s policy in a feigned concern for free expression demonstrates how unprepared his company is for this unique moment in our history and how little it has learned over the past few years.”

Biden’s campaign lashed out after Zuckerberg delivered a speech at Georgetown University where he argued that it is not Facebook’s role to moderate political content.

Read more here.

 

LOCK ‘EM UP: Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenHillicon Valley: Zuckerberg defends handling of misinformation in political ads | Biden camp hits Zuckerberg over remarks | Dem bill would jail tech execs for lying about privacy | Consumer safety agency accidentally disclosed personal data Democratic senator introduces bill to jail tech executives for lying about privacy violations Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — House passes resolution rebuking Trump over Syria | Sparks fly at White House meeting on Syria | Dems say Trump called Pelosi a ‘third-rate politician’ | Trump, Graham trade jabs MORE (D-Ore.), one of the toughest tech critics in Congress, on Thursday introduced his long-awaited bill that would jail tech executives for lying to the government about privacy violations. 

Wyden’s bill, the Mind Your Own Business Act, would also offer users unprecedented control over how their data is used and shared, enabling them to tell websites when they don’t want their online activity to be tracked across the internet. 

And the legislation, which Wyden started floating with a discussion draft last year, threatens steep fines and prison terms of up to 20 years for executives at companies that “misuse” data.

The statement about the bill mentioned Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg as an example of a tech executive who could face jail time if found to be lying to the government.

“Mark Zuckerberg won’t take Americans’ privacy seriously unless he feels personal consequences,” Wyden said in a statement. “Under my bill, he’d face jail time for lying to the government.” 

Multiple lawmakers have raised concerns that Zuckerberg misled Congress during last year’s series of contentious hearings in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, though Facebook has disputed that. 

Read more here.

 

IT WAS AN ACCIDENT: The Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday issued a report that found the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) failed to properly handle the data of thousands of consumers, leading to an accidental data breach earlier this year. 

The report recommended that the CPSC, which is in charge of ensuring that consumer products do not harm Americans, take steps to improve its handling of personal data after the CPSC clearinghouse made “improper disclosures” between December 2017 and March 2019 to 29 entities. 

These disclosures contained the personal data of around 30,000 consumers, including street addresses, age and gender, along with information on 10,900 manufacturers. 

Most of the disclosed data was sent to Consumer Reports and to a researcher at Texas A&M University as part of a response to information requests from these entities. The personal information included was not redacted as required by Section 6(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act. 

The committee, led by Chairman Roger WickerRoger Frederick WickerHillicon Valley: Zuckerberg defends handling of misinformation in political ads | Biden camp hits Zuckerberg over remarks | Dem bill would jail tech execs for lying about privacy | Consumer safety agency accidentally disclosed personal data Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes MORE (R-Miss.), was informed of the disclosures in April and subsequently sent letters to the agency and interviewed employees about the breach, concluding that “the series of improper disclosures is likely attributable to incompetence and mismanagement rather than deliberate, bad-faith efforts by senior managers or commissioners.”

The committee recommended that the CPSC implement formal training for all new employees on how to handle personal consumer data, review information technology used to process data requests and implement policies to ensure that CPSC management reviews all sensitive data requests. 

Wicker wrote in a letter to acting CPSC Director Robert Adler on Wednesday that while the data disclosures were “concerning,” the committee concluded they did not occur due to deliberate steps, but were entirely accidental. 

Read more here. 

 

SMALL BIZ HEARING AHEAD: The House Small Business Committee Chairwoman Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) on Thursday formally invited some of the largest tech companies in the country to testify at an upcoming hearing about whether their practices harm small businesses. 

Velázquez invited Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple to testify at a hearing in November, underlining that the committee is looking for a response by Oct. 31.

“It is no secret that big tech platforms have grown exponentially in the digital era, altering the ways American consumers buy products and shifting many traditional business models,” Velázquez said in a statement.

“Given this, I believe it is appropriate and necessary to bring big tech companies and small businesses to the table to discuss how the rise in online retail and digital platforms is shaping the playing field for America’s small firms,” she said. “I look forward to the hearing and hope to confirm the presence of Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Apple in the coming weeks.”

Amazon and Facebook both confirmed they have received the invitation. Google and Apple did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment. 

Read more on the hearing here.

 

DIVIDED WE STAND: Democratic divisions over how to tackle Big Tech were on display at the latest primary debate as presidential contenders sparred over whether to break up Silicon Valley’s giants, how social media should handle President TrumpDonald John TrumpDemocratic senator rips Trump’s ‘let them fight’ remarks: ‘Enough is enough’ Warren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Trump touts Turkey cease-fire: ‘Sometimes you have to let them fight’ MORE‘s tweets and whether the government is doing enough to prevent interference in U.S. elections using social media.

While Democrats uniformly vowed to challenge the tech industry and its practices, the debate highlighted candidates’ differences on the issue, as each of the hopefuls offered distinct proposals for reining in companies’ market power, protecting privacy and safeguarding elections.

The roughly 10 minutes likely marked the longest-ever discussion about tech’s market power and privacy practices during a presidential debate, experts told The Hill, signaling the importance of the issue in 2020.

The candidates seemed to agree only that the government should somehow confront the world’s largest tech companies, but they were divided on how.

“I think that conversation has transformed,” Tim Wu, a leading tech antitrust expert and professor at Columbia University Law School, told The Hill. “[The American electorate] has always turned on our biggest companies and begun to question if they become too powerful. It’s natural, it’s healthy, to start to ask those questions of the former darlings of the Democratic Party.”

The tech conversation kicked off with a question from the moderators about whether the candidates supported Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Martin Luther King Jr.’s daughter knocks Zuckerberg for invoking her father while defending Facebook Overnight Health Care — Presented by National Taxpayers Union — House Dems advance drug pricing bill | Cases of vaping-related lung illnesses near 1,500 | Juul suspends sales of most e-cigarette flavors MORE‘s (D-Mass.) proposal to “break up Big Tech” — one of the first plans she offered after launching her bid this year.

Warren has set the tone for the Democratic debate on technology issues since she announced her proposal back in March, a plan that sent shockwaves through Silicon Valley and put the industry on high alert. But for months, candidates have hedged and side-stepped about where they come down on the issue, sporadically offering smaller-scale proposals to rein in Big Tech. 

None of the other candidates explicitly endorsed Warren’s approach, which would impose tougher antitrust rules and require companies including Google and Facebook to spin off elements of their businesses. 

Read more here. 

  

A LIGHTER CLICK: Comments that are very real and not fake. 

 

AN OP-ED TO CHEW ON: Social media shouldn’t be a ‘sanctuary city’ for child pornographers

 

NOTABLE LINKS FROM AROUND THE WEB:  

Cyber group that hacked DNC in 2016 is back in action targeting European foreign ministries (ZDNet)

How a massive Facebook scam siphoned millions of dollars from unsuspecting boomers (Buzzfeed) 

Video giant Twitch pushes Trump rallies and mass violence into the live-stream age. (The Washington Post) 

Across platforms, politicians face scrutiny about everything but their speech. (Adweek)

Happy Thursday and welcome back to On The Money. I’m Sylvan Lane, and here’s your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line.

See something I missed? Let me know at slane@thehill.com or tweet me @SylvanLane. And if you like your newsletter, you can subscribe to it here: http://bit.ly/1NxxW2N.

Write us with tips, suggestions and news: slane@thehill.com, njagoda@thehill.com and nelis@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @SylvanLane, @NJagoda and @NivElis.

 

THE BIG DEAL–Senate fails to override Trump veto over emergency declaration: The Senate on Thursday failed to override President Trump’s veto of a resolution that would have ended the emergency declaration intended to help build the border wall. 

Senators voted 53-36, falling short of the two-thirds needed to successfully override Trump’s veto.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ten Republican senators voted to override Trump’s veto: Sens. Roy BluntRoy Dean BluntOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Senate fails to override Trump veto over emergency declaration MORE (Mo.), Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsOvernight Energy: Perry to step down as Energy secretary | Future of big-game hunting council up in the air | Dems lose vote against EPA power plant rule Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes MORE (Maine), Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Senate fails to override Trump veto over emergency declaration MORE (Utah), Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Senate fails to override Trump veto over emergency declaration MORE (Alaska), Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Top Foreign Relations senators introduce Turkey sanctions bill MORE (Ky.), Rob PortmanRobert (Rob) Jones PortmanOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Senate fails to override Trump veto over emergency declaration MORE (Ohio), Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyPelosi, Schumer hit ‘flailing’ Trump over ‘sham ceasefire’ deal Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes MORE (Utah), Marco RubioMarco Antonio RubioOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes Senators vow to press Turkey sanctions bills despite Pence cease-fire announcement MORE (Fla.), Pat ToomeyPatrick (Pat) Joseph ToomeyNSA improperly collected US phone records in October, new documents show Overnight Defense: Pick for South Korean envoy splits with Trump on nuclear threat | McCain blasts move to suspend Korean military exercises | White House defends Trump salute of North Korean general WH backpedals on Trump’s ‘due process’ remark on guns MORE (Pa.) and Roger WickerRoger Frederick WickerHillicon Valley: Zuckerberg defends handling of misinformation in political ads | Biden camp hits Zuckerberg over remarks | Dem bill would jail tech execs for lying about privacy | Consumer safety agency accidentally disclosed personal data Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes MORE (Miss.).

• The vote came less than a day after Trump vetoed the resolution, which initially passed the House and Senate last month. 

• It’s the second time Congress has failed to override Trump’s veto of a resolution nixing his emergency declaration. 

• The House tried, unsuccessfully, in March to override Trump’s initial veto. 

 

LEADING THE DAY

Senators vow to press Turkey sanctions bills despite cease-fire: Senators are vowing to move forward with sanctions legislation against Turkey despite Vice President Pence’s announcement that Ankara has agreed to a ceasefire in Syria.

Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamPelosi, Schumer hit ‘flailing’ Trump over ‘sham ceasefire’ deal Pompeo to meet Netanyahu as US alliances questioned Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe MORE (R-S.C.) and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim RischJames (Jim) Elroy RischOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes House Foreign Affairs leaders introduce Turkey sanctions bill MORE (R-Idaho), who have each released separate sanctions bills, both said they would continue working on their bills despite the cease-fire.

“There are other issues obviously than just a ceasefire that need to be addressed,” said Risch, saying other issues include security of ISIS prisoners and safety of the Kurds. “This bill will encourage those parties to embrace not only a ceasefire, but an overall settlement in the dispute there.”

The Hill’s Rebecca Kheel has more here.

 

The background: 

• Graham’s bill, introduced with Sen. Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenPelosi, Schumer hit ‘flailing’ Trump over ‘sham ceasefire’ deal On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes House Foreign Affairs leaders introduce Turkey sanctions bill MORE (D-Md.), would target Turkey’s energy sector and military as well as assets of top Turkish officials within U.S. jurisdiction and limit their ability to travel to the United States. 

• It would also require a strategy to prevent an ISIS resurgence and prohibit arms sales to Turkey.

• Risch’s bill, introduced with his committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Bob MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezPaul blocks Senate vote on House-passed Syria resolution House to vote on resolution condemning Trump’s Syria pullback Rand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter MORE (N.J.), would require a comprehensive counter-ISIS strategy, mandate a report on potential Turkish war crimes, restrict arms sales to Turkey, sanction senior Turkish officials and require a report on Turkey’s participation in NATO, among other things.

 

McConnell tees up government funding votes amid stalemate: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Pence says Turkey agrees to ceasefire | Senators vow to move forward with Turkey sanctions | Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe On The Money: Senate fails to override Trump veto over border emergency | Trump resort to host G-7 next year | Senators to push Turkey sanctions despite ceasefire | McConnell tees up funding votes McConnell tees up government funding votes amid stalemate MORE (R-Ky.) is turning the Senate toward trying to pass a set of long-stalled appropriations bills. 

“Congress has fallen badly behind schedule on appropriations. It’s been a month since my Democratic colleagues filibustered government funding here on the floor, blocking defense funding and a pay raise for service members. We need to get moving,” McConnell said from the Senate floor. 

McConnell said the Senate will try to take up two packages of spending bills next week: 

• The first, an olive branch to Democrats, will include domestic priorities.

• The second package will include a mammoth defense bill, which is considered a top priority for Republicans. 

McConnell’s announcement comes as top appropriators, tasked with funding the government, have been meeting to try to break the stalemate that led to a short-term continuing resolution (CR). 

The Hill’s Jordain Carney tells us how it could play out.

 

Trump Doral resort to host G-7 next year: The United States will host the 2020 Group of Seven (G-7) summit at Trump National Doral, a resort property near Miami owned by President TrumpDonald John TrumpDemocratic senator rips Trump’s ‘let them fight’ remarks: ‘Enough is enough’ Warren warns Facebook may help reelect Trump ‘and profit off of it’ Trump touts Turkey cease-fire: ‘Sometimes you have to let them fight’ MORE‘s family.

The summit will take place June 10-12, acting White House chief of staff Mick MulvaneyJohn (Mick) Michael MulvaneyTrump accuses Biden of ‘quid pro quo’ hours after Mulvaney remarks Testimony from GOP diplomat complicates Trump defense Florida mayor says White House hasn’t contacted him about holding G-7 in city MORE told reporters Thursday at the White House. The decision is certain to spark challenges from Democrats and ethics watchdog groups who will argue that the president is seeking to enrich his family’s brand by bringing world leaders to a Trump property.

“We thought of the 12 places that we looked at… this was by far and away the best choice,” Mulvaney said.

He added that White House staff looked at a dozen potential host sites. The list was eventually narrowed to two options in Utah, one in Hawaii and one in Florida, Mulvaney said.

Trump was the one who suggested the Doral property be added to the list of sites under consideration, said Mulvaney, who cited the resort’s proximity to airports, landing zones, hospitals. Brett Samuels has more here.

 

GOOD TO KNOW

• Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiDemocratic senator rips Trump’s ‘let them fight’ remarks: ‘Enough is enough’ Trump touts Turkey cease-fire: ‘Sometimes you have to let them fight’ Mattis responds to Trump criticism: ‘I guess I’m the Meryl Streep of generals’ MORE (D-Calif.) said Thursday that Democrats are hopeful of sealing a deal with the Trump administration to pass the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) despite tensions between both sides about the ongoing impeachment inquiry.

• White House economic adviser Larry KudlowLawrence (Larry) Alan KudlowMORE on Thursday took a shot at members of the Federal Reserve board as part of the “deep state.”

• NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said Thursday that the league has suffered “substantial” financial losses in the wake of its China controversy.

• The House Small Business Committee Chairwoman Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) on Thursday formally invited some of the largest tech companies in the country to testify at an upcoming hearing about whether their practices harm small businesses. 

 

ODDS AND ENDS

• The Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday issued a report that found the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) failed to properly handle the data of thousands of consumers, leading to an accidental data breach earlier this year. 

• Democratic presidential contenders are sparring over whether to break up Silicon Valley’s giants, how social media companies should handle President Trump’s tweets and whether the government is doing enough to prevent interference in U.S. elections using social media.

Welcome to Hillicon Valley, The Hill’s newsletter detailing all you need to know about the tech and cyber news from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley. If you don’t already, be sure to sign up for our newsletter with this LINK.

Welcome! Follow the cyber team, Maggie Miller (@magmill95), and the tech team, Emily Birnbaum (@birnbaum_e) and Chris Mills Rodrigo (@chrisismills)

 

GIVE ME THAT GREEN LIGHT: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Wednesday voted along party lines to approve the $26 billion merger between T-Mobile and Sprint, the final move needed for the deal to secure the U.S. government’s full blessing. 

Two sources familiar confirmed to The Hill that the merger has been approved, with the three Republicans on the commission voting in favor and the two Democrats dissenting. 

ADVERTISEMENT

But the merger is still facing a significant obstacle as a group of 17 state attorneys general forge ahead in their lawsuit to block the deal. The multistate lawsuit, announced over the summer, claims that the combined telecom giant would ramp up prices for consumers and result in significant job losses. 

Democrats publicly oppose it: Both Democratic FCC commissioners, Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffrey Starks, said Wednesday that they voted against the deal, arguing that the merger will come at a steep price to consumers.

“In short, I believe that T-Mobile and Sprint have not proven that their merger will benefit the public interest,” Starks said in a statement. “I hope for the sake of consumers that I am wrong. I fear that we will one day look back at this decision and recognize it as a moment that forever changed the U.S. wireless industry, and not for the better.”

In an Atlantic op-ed on Wednesday morning, Rosenworcel announced her vote against the deal, saying she believes it will “end a golden age in wireless that helped bring to market lower prices and more innovative services.” 

When we’ll see the order: The FCC order has not yet been released publicly. According to a source familiar with the process, the commissioners still have time to finalize their statements and put together the final draft, meaning the order may not come out for another few weeks.

Read more on the merger here.

 

IS LIBRA SEASON OVER: Facebook’s ambitious plan to launch a global virtual currency is faltering under growing skepticism from business partners, politicians and financial regulators.

As the founders of Project Libra move toward a planned 2020 launch, crucial financial industry backers have bailed on the cryptocurrency system as Facebook faces rising threats from Washington.

Facebook’s critics across the political spectrum were elated after Mastercard, Visa, eBay, Stripe and PayPal all pulled out of the virtual currency project this month. The crushing departures occurred just days before the Libra Association formalized its structure in Geneva on Monday.

Several Trump administration officials and lawmakers have grown increasingly concerned with Facebook’s immense market power and global reach. The project has also raised alarms among financial regulators, who urged the company to tread carefully or risk a federal crackdown.

While Libra’s founders insist they will wait for Washington’s green light before launching, the company’s critics are pouncing to stop the project in its tracks.

Read more on the future of Libra here.

 

ZUCKERBERG ON FOX: Facebook CEO and founder Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Hillicon Valley: Warren turns up heat in battle with Facebook | Instagram unveils new data privacy feature | Advocacy group seeks funding to write about Big Tech Warren turns up heat over Facebook’s ad rules MORE will appear on Fox News on Friday for an interview amid calls from Democrats for his platform to pull ads created by the Trump campaign targeting former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE.

Fox News representatives confirmed in a press release Wednesday evening that the Facebook CEO would make his first appearance on the network, where he is expected to address criticism of Facebook’s policy allowing politicians to run ads on the platform that are found to be misleading.

More on Zuckerberg here.

 

SECTIONED OFF: Bipartisan lawmakers on the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday hit the Trump administration for including language from legal liability protections for internet companies in trade negotiations.

The protections from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which gives platforms legal immunity for content posted by third-party users while also giving them legal cover to take good-faith efforts to moderate their platforms, have been included in some way in both the U.S-Mexico-Canada trade agreement and pact with Japan signed earlier this month.

“I want to talk a bit about injecting 230 into trade agreements,” Rep. Jan SchakowskyJanice (Jan) Danoff SchakowskyHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Congress must get pharma out of NAFTA 2.0 Reddit, Google to testify before House panel on tech’s legal protections MORE (D-Ill.) said during the hearing. “It seems to me that we’ve already seen that now in the Japan trade agreement and there is a real push to include that now in the [USMCA]. There is no place for that.”

Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said he was “disappointed” U.S. trade representative (USTR) Robert LighthizerRobert (Bob) Emmet LighthizerOn The Money: Economy adds 164K jobs in July | Trump signs two-year budget deal, but border showdown looms | US, EU strike deal on beef exports Chinese, US negotiators fine-tuning details of trade agreement: report The Trump economy keeps roaring ahead MORE refused to participate in Wednesday’s hearing.

Read more on the hearing here.

 

TAKING DOWN ONLINE EXTREMISM: Dozens of Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday pressed the State Department to designate three white supremacist groups as foreign terrorist organizations, arguing that reclassification could help the U.S. seriously confront the escalating crisis of white extremist violence.

In a letter led by Rep. Max RoseMax RoseBottom Line The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by USAA — Ex-Ukraine ambassador testifies Trump pushed for her ouster Dem lawmaker rips O’Rourke: ‘I don’t think losing is cool’ MORE (N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee’s counterterrorism subpanel, the 39 lawmakers asked the State Department why they have not placed Ukraine’s Azov Batalion, Finland’s Nordic Resistance movement or the United Kingdom’s National Action on the U.S. list of “foreign terrorist organizations” (FTOs). 

“Today, if an American citizen swears allegiance to the Islamic State (or another Foreign Terrorist Organization on the list) and spreads their message of terror, there are several resources available to the federal government to counter the threat,” their letter reads.

“However, if that same American citizen swears allegiance to a violent white supremacist extremist group based overseas and spreads their message of terror, the Federal government does not have access to the same tools,” it continues.

 

Removing neo-Nazis online: In a phone interview with The Hill, Rose said that designating more neo-Nazi groups as FTOs could help social media companies commit to driving them off the platform with the endorsement of the government.

“Right now, if you look at the way in which [the social media companies] measure their ability to remove terrorist content from their platforms, they are looking at the FTO list,” Rose said. “So for us to put this on that list, I think takes a bold step forward in expanding what is expected of them.” 

Shootings in Poway, Calif., and El Paso, Texas, over the past several months have also been perpetrated by extremists with anti-immigrant views, which they cultivated online. 

Rose called the letter a “first step” to dedicating the full breadth of government and private sector resources toward combatting the rise of white extremism. 

Read more on the effort here.

 

DRONING ON: Sen. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeA decade of policymaking failures is to blame for new Syria crisis Zuckerberg defends meetings with conservative politicians, pundits GOP requests update on criminal referrals prompted by 2018 Kavanaugh probe MORE (R-Utah) on Wednesday introduced a bill to transfer authority over low-flying drones from the federal government to states, cities and Native American tribes.

The Drone Integration and Zoning Act would create a framework for drones up to 200 feet above the ground where local authorities determine what drones do in airspace over state- or local-owned land and property owners do the same over their own land.

“The FAA cannot feasibly or efficiently oversee millions of drones in every locality throughout the country,” Lee said in a statement.

Read more here.

 

DEMS GO DEEP ON TECH AT DEBATE: The top Democratic presidential candidates on Tuesday night wrangled over their differing views on how to take on the unprecedented power of Big Tech, marking the first time the contenders have been asked to discuss the issue on the debate stage. 

Most of the candidates drew a contrast between their own views and those of Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (D-Mass.), a top-tier hopeful who has called for breaking up top tech companies including Facebook, Google and Amazon. 

Walking a fine line: While other candidates, including former Rep. Beto O’RourkeBeto O’RourkeWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats wrangle over whether to break up Big Tech in debate first MORE (D-Texas), Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Minn.) and tech entrepreneur Andrew YangAndrew YangWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE, agreed the government should take on the large tech firms, they said they don’t believe “breaking up” the companies will properly address issues including how they protect user data and consolidate market power.

Warren’s defense: Warren defended her “break up Big Tech” plan, which was one of the first she offered after announcing her presidential candidacy and which quickly become one of her signature issues. She presented breaking up tech companies as one of the most powerful tools the government has for taking them on.

“I’m not willing to give up and let a handful of monopolists dominate our economy and our democracy,” Warren said. “It’s time to fight back.” 

Read more on the Big Tech debate here.

 

HARRIS GOES AFTER WARREN AFTER TWITTER STANCE: Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Calif.) on Tuesday night went after fellow 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) over her failure to get behind Harris’s effort to pressure Twitter into deleting President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE‘s account.

Over the past several weeks, Harris has launched a public campaign urging Twitter to delete Trump’s controversial account, which the president regularly uses to lambast his critics and promote misinformation. Last week, Warren, one of the top tech antagonists in the Democratic presidential race, declined to back Harris’s call. 

“I was surprised to hear that you did not agree with me that on this subject around what should be the rules on corporate responsibility,” Harris said directly to Warren at the Democratic primary debate in Ohio. “When I called on Twitter to suspend Donald trump’s account … you did not agree.”

“I would urge you to join me,” Harris added. 

Warren retorted she doesn’t agree with Harris’s approach to taking on Big Tech. “I don’t want to push Donald Trump off Twitter,” Warren said. “I want to push him out of the White House.” 

Read more here. 

 

Meanwhile on Twitter: Twitter is detailing its policies for world leaders as Democrats press the social media giant to take a tougher stance on President Trump’s tweets.

In a statement Tuesday, Twitter said that tweets from leaders “are not above our policies entirely.”

“When it comes to the actions of world leaders on Twitter, we recognize that this is largely new ground and unprecedented. We understand the desire for our decisions to be ‘yes/no’ binaries, but it’s not that simple,” the company said. “The actions we take and policies we develop will set precedent around online speech and we owe it to the people we serve to be deliberate and considered in what we do.”

Read more on Twitter’s rules here. 

 

ELECTION SECURITY AT THE DEBATE: Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang on Tuesday night said that the U.S. has “tampered with other elections” in calling for action to be taken to deter Russia from interfering in the 2020 election.

“We have to let Russia know, look, we get it, we’ve tampered with other elections, you’ve tampered with our elections, and now it has to stop, and if it does not stop we will take this as an act of hostility against the American people,” Yang said during the Democratic primary debate.

Yang described Russian hacking efforts ahead of the 2016 U.S. elections as “an illustration of the 21st century threats” such as cybersecurity and climate change, vowing to help “pull us forward” in addressing these issues.

Democratic candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), one the main Senate Democrats to push for action on election security over the past several months, pushed back strongly against Yang’s assertion that the U.S. and Russia were equal in terms of election interference against other nations.

“I don’t see a moral equivalency between our country and Russia,” Klobuchar said, adding that Russian interference in 2016 was “much more serious” than “meddling,” and that Russia’s actions constituted an “invasion” of U.S. elections.

Read more here.

 

AN EYE FOR AN EYE: The U.S. hit Iran with a secret cyberattack after a September strike on two Saudi oil facilities that Washington and Riyadh both blame on Tehran, according to Reuters.

Two U.S. officials told the news service that the operation, which took place late last month, targeted Tehran’s ability to spread “propaganda.” One of the officials said the attack hit physical hardware, but declined to provide further information. 

“They must have dreamt it,” Iranian Minister of Communications and Information Technology Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi responded, according to Iran’s Fars news agency.

The U.S., Saudi Arabia, Britain, France and Germany have all publicly blamed the Sept. 14 strike against Saudi oil facilities on Iran, which denied any involvement in the attack. The Iran-aligned Houthi rebel group in Yemen claimed responsibility.

The Pentagon responded to the attack by sending thousands of additional troops and equipment to Saudi Arabia to help reinforce its defenses. 

Neither the White House nor the National Security Council immediately responded to requests for comment from The Hill regarding the cyberattack. 

Read more here. 

 

SUBPOENA AVERTED (FOR NOW): House lawmakers tasked with investigating the country’s largest tech companies on Tuesday said they have received an initial round of documents from Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Google’s parent company Alphabet to aid their probe.

The announcement came on Oct. 15, the deadline lawmakers had set to receive the slew of documents they requested from the companies last month.

“We have received initial submissions from Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Facebook as part of our investigation,” the lawmakers – including the top Democrat and Republican on the House Judiciary Committee – said in the statement.

The statement came from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerBarr to speak at Notre Dame law school on Friday The 13 House Democrats who back Kavanaugh’s impeachment Ignore the hype — this is not an impeachment inquiry MORE (D-N.Y.) and ranking member Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies US, UK sign agreement allowing British authorities to quickly obtain data from tech giants Joe Lieberman’s son running for Senate in Georgia MORE (R-Ga.) as well as the leaders of the panel’s antitrust subcommittee, Reps. David CicillineDavid Nicola CicillineHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Celebrating the LGBTQ contribution to progress in business The Memo: Trump’s rage may backfire on impeachment MORE (D-R.I.) and Jim SensenbrennerFrank (Jim) James SensenbrennerHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Here are the lawmakers who aren’t seeking reelection in 2020 Republicans pour cold water on Trump’s term limit idea MORE (R-Wis.).

“The committee will review all of the information received from the companies in order to help inform next steps,” they said. “We will hold additional hearings, discussions and roundtables as our investigation continues.”

The House Judiciary Committee also requested documents from more than 80 other companies as part of its probe into the digital marketplace, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Hill. The committee has also asked for those documents by this week.

Read more here.

 

A LIGHTER CLICK: Every single night.

 

AN OP-ED TO CHEW ON: Exporting US internet laws will help startups thrive.

 

NOTABLE LINKS FROM AROUND THE WEB:

How a Facebook ad scam made billions (BuzzFeed News)

Accused Capital One hacker had as much as 30 terabytes of data, feds say (CyberScoop)

Fully automated ship being built to trace the voyage of the Mayflower (BBC News)

Zuckerberg meets with Rep. Maxine Waters ahead of hearing. (The Information)

Energy Secretary Rick PerryJames (Rick) Richard PerryState Dept. official told to ‘lay low’ after voicing concerns about Giuliani: Dem lawmaker White House, Pentagon, Giuliani reject House subpoenas The Memo: Drip, drip of revelations damages Trump MORE was tight-lipped Wednesday about whether he’d cooperate with a House subpoena regarding his role in President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE‘s phone call with Ukraine. The call has since led to an impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: New Zealand rugby store

On Fox Business on Wednesday morning, Perry said, “The House has sent a subpoena over for the records that we have, and our general counsel and the White House counsel are going through the process right now.”

“I’m going to follow the lead of my counsel on that,” Perry added.

Then, later in the morning, Perry refused to answer an impeachment-related question on a press call. 

Perry’s response isn’t all that surprising, as the White House has repeatedly said it will not cooperate with the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. 

Politico reports that Perry became of interest to the House when the whistleblower report stated that Perry was the head of the U.S. delegation to Ukraine for President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inauguration.

Perry, the former governor of Texas, is set to resign from his position by the end of November, according to the news source.

The House Administration Committee voted 6-1 on Tuesday to push forward legislation intended to limit foreign interference in elections, moving the bill to the House floor for a vote against strong Republican objections.

The panel marked up and approved the SHIELD Act, which takes aim at foreign election interference by requiring U.S. campaigns to report “illicit offers” of election assistance from foreign governments or individuals to both the FBI and the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

ADVERTISEMENT

The legislation also takes steps to ensure that political advertisements on social media are subject to the same stricter rules as ads on television or radio.

The bill classifies the “offering of non-public campaign material to foreign governments and those linked with foreign governments and their agents as an illegal solicitation of support,” while also closing gaps that allow foreign investment in aspects of U.S. elections. 

The SHIELD Act marks the latest effort by House Democrats to push through legislation designed to increase election security, and follows two other bills that have been stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Committee Chairwoman Zoe LofgrenZoe Ellen LofgrenHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference House to vote this month on legislation to combat foreign interference in elections Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg to testify on Libra | Extremists find home on Telegram app | Warren blasts Facebook for not removing anti-Biden ad | California outlaws facial recognition in police body cameras | China rips US tech sanctions MORE (D-Calif.), the SHIELD Act’s primary sponsor, said, “We should all be able to agree that we need to protect our democracy, and with a sense of urgency. This is not a partisan opinion. Nothing less than our national security is at stake.”

The SHIELD Act is expected to move quickly to the House floor for a vote, with House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerOvernight Health Care — Presented by National Taxpayers Union — Buttigieg targets Warren, Sanders on health care ahead of debate | Judge overturns ObamaCare transgender protections | Poll sees support drop for ‘Medicare for All’ Hillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Overnight Health Care — Presented by Coalition Against Surprise Medical Billing — Judge blocks Trump ‘public charge’ rule | Appeals court skeptical of Trump arguments for Medicaid work requirements | CDC offers guidance for treating vaping-related cases MORE (D-Md.) noting in a “letter to colleagues” last week that the chamber would likely vote on the bill during the week of Oct. 21.

Rep. Rodney DavisRodney Lee DavisGOP lawmaker: We’re past point of doing separate infrastructure bill The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by National Association of Manufacturers – Trump, Congress draw battle lines on impeachment Lawmakers beat Capitol Police in Congressional Football Game MORE (Ill.), the top Republican on the committee, strongly pushed back against the bill, introducing 10 amendments, almost all of which were voted down by the majority of Democrats on the committee. Davis noted he was “trying to prove a point of how bad your bill is” to the Democrats on the committee.

Davis criticized the “partisanship” involved in putting the SHIELD Act together, adding that there are “legitimate election security concerns” that the bill is meant to address and questioning why Lofgren and other committee Democrats did not work to find a “bipartisan solution to our collective concerns.”

“Once again, the majority has chosen to continue this pattern we’ve seen all Congress where they rush legislation, without any hearings or public discussion of the issues, and insert poison pills into a bill that they know we will not support, all in an effort to prop up their unfounded impeachment efforts against the president,” Davis said.

Davis noted that he could not support the bill in its entirety, even as he was in favor of some aspects, due to concerns that it would violate First Amendment rights.

“I believe the SHIELD Act will have many unintended, but severe consequences on the American people and a chilling effect on free speech, a fundamental right we in Congress have a responsibility to defend,” Davis said.

Davis vowed to bring up his concerns with the SHIELD Act on the House floor when it is brought up for a vote, noting his belief that it is “unfixable in its current form.”

The approval of the SHIELD Act on Wednesday comes after the House Administration Committee approved the two previous Democrat-backed election security bills that were later passed by the House along party lines.

These bills were the For the People Act, a sweeping voting reform and security bill, and the SAFE Act, which zeros in on increasing the security of voting infrastructure.

Both have stalled in the Senate due to Republican concerns over elections being federalized, and due to concerns that language included did not address election security. 

Click Here: New Zealand rugby store

The Senate on Thursday will attempt to override President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE‘s veto of a resolution nixing his emergency declaration on the border wall.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellTrump-GOP tensions over Syria show signs of easing Trump again vetoes resolution blocking national emergency for border wall Trump invites congressional leaders to meeting on Turkey MORE (R-Ky.) set up a veto override vote for Thursday at 1:45 p.m., as he wrapped up the Senate’s work on Wednesday and set the schedule for Thursday.

The vote will come less than two days after Trump vetoed the resolution, which passed the House and Senate last month.

Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump, in his veto message to the Senate, said the national emergency has allowed the administration to “counter large-scale unlawful migration” and facilitated the construction of his long-promised border wall.

“In short, the situation on our southern border remains a national emergency, and our Armed Forces are still needed to help confront it,” he added.

Under the National Emergencies Act, a resolution ending the declaration needed only a simple majority to clear the Senate.

But Thursday’s veto override attempt is expected to fall short of the 67 votes needed.

The resolution to end Trump’s emergency declaration initially passed the Senate by 54-41, with 11 Republican senators voting with Democrats to nix the declaration.

Democrats are able to force a vote every six months on terminating the resolution.

Trump previously vetoed a resolution to end the emergency declaration in March. The House failed to override the veto.

Welcome to Hillicon Valley, The Hill’s newsletter detailing all you need to know about the tech and cyber news from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley. If you don’t already, be sure to sign up for our newsletter with this LINK.

Welcome! Follow the cyber team, Maggie Miller (@magmill95), and the tech team, Emily Birnbaum (@birnbaum_e) and Chris Mills Rodrigo (@chrisismills)

 

GIVE ME THAT GREEN LIGHT: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Wednesday voted along party lines to approve the $26 billion merger between T-Mobile and Sprint, the final move needed for the deal to secure the U.S. government’s full blessing. 

Two sources familiar confirmed to The Hill that the merger has been approved, with the three Republicans on the commission voting in favor and the two Democrats dissenting. 

ADVERTISEMENT

But the merger is still facing a significant obstacle as a group of 17 state attorneys general forge ahead in their lawsuit to block the deal. The multistate lawsuit, announced over the summer, claims that the combined telecom giant would ramp up prices for consumers and result in significant job losses. 

Democrats publicly oppose it: Both Democratic FCC commissioners, Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffrey Starks, said Wednesday that they voted against the deal, arguing that the merger will come at a steep price to consumers.

“In short, I believe that T-Mobile and Sprint have not proven that their merger will benefit the public interest,” Starks said in a statement. “I hope for the sake of consumers that I am wrong. I fear that we will one day look back at this decision and recognize it as a moment that forever changed the U.S. wireless industry, and not for the better.”

In an Atlantic op-ed on Wednesday morning, Rosenworcel announced her vote against the deal, saying she believes it will “end a golden age in wireless that helped bring to market lower prices and more innovative services.” 

When we’ll see the order: The FCC order has not yet been released publicly. According to a source familiar with the process, the commissioners still have time to finalize their statements and put together the final draft, meaning the order may not come out for another few weeks.

Read more on the merger here.

 

IS LIBRA SEASON OVER: Facebook’s ambitious plan to launch a global virtual currency is faltering under growing skepticism from business partners, politicians and financial regulators.

As the founders of Project Libra move toward a planned 2020 launch, crucial financial industry backers have bailed on the cryptocurrency system as Facebook faces rising threats from Washington.

Facebook’s critics across the political spectrum were elated after Mastercard, Visa, eBay, Stripe and PayPal all pulled out of the virtual currency project this month. The crushing departures occurred just days before the Libra Association formalized its structure in Geneva on Monday.

Several Trump administration officials and lawmakers have grown increasingly concerned with Facebook’s immense market power and global reach. The project has also raised alarms among financial regulators, who urged the company to tread carefully or risk a federal crackdown.

While Libra’s founders insist they will wait for Washington’s green light before launching, the company’s critics are pouncing to stop the project in its tracks.

Read more on the future of Libra here.

 

ZUCKERBERG ON FOX: Facebook CEO and founder Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Hillicon Valley: Warren turns up heat in battle with Facebook | Instagram unveils new data privacy feature | Advocacy group seeks funding to write about Big Tech Warren turns up heat over Facebook’s ad rules MORE will appear on Fox News on Friday for an interview amid calls from Democrats for his platform to pull ads created by the Trump campaign targeting former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE.

Fox News representatives confirmed in a press release Wednesday evening that the Facebook CEO would make his first appearance on the network, where he is expected to address criticism of Facebook’s policy allowing politicians to run ads on the platform that are found to be misleading.

More on Zuckerberg here.

 

SECTIONED OFF: Bipartisan lawmakers on the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday hit the Trump administration for including language from legal liability protections for internet companies in trade negotiations.

The protections from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which gives platforms legal immunity for content posted by third-party users while also giving them legal cover to take good-faith efforts to moderate their platforms, have been included in some way in both the U.S-Mexico-Canada trade agreement and pact with Japan signed earlier this month.

“I want to talk a bit about injecting 230 into trade agreements,” Rep. Jan SchakowskyJanice (Jan) Danoff SchakowskyHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Congress must get pharma out of NAFTA 2.0 Reddit, Google to testify before House panel on tech’s legal protections MORE (D-Ill.) said during the hearing. “It seems to me that we’ve already seen that now in the Japan trade agreement and there is a real push to include that now in the [USMCA]. There is no place for that.”

Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said he was “disappointed” U.S. trade representative (USTR) Robert LighthizerRobert (Bob) Emmet LighthizerOn The Money: Economy adds 164K jobs in July | Trump signs two-year budget deal, but border showdown looms | US, EU strike deal on beef exports Chinese, US negotiators fine-tuning details of trade agreement: report The Trump economy keeps roaring ahead MORE refused to participate in Wednesday’s hearing.

Read more on the hearing here.

 

TAKING DOWN ONLINE EXTREMISM: Dozens of Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday pressed the State Department to designate three white supremacist groups as foreign terrorist organizations, arguing that reclassification could help the U.S. seriously confront the escalating crisis of white extremist violence.

In a letter led by Rep. Max RoseMax RoseBottom Line The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by USAA — Ex-Ukraine ambassador testifies Trump pushed for her ouster Dem lawmaker rips O’Rourke: ‘I don’t think losing is cool’ MORE (N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee’s counterterrorism subpanel, the 39 lawmakers asked the State Department why they have not placed Ukraine’s Azov Batalion, Finland’s Nordic Resistance movement or the United Kingdom’s National Action on the U.S. list of “foreign terrorist organizations” (FTOs). 

“Today, if an American citizen swears allegiance to the Islamic State (or another Foreign Terrorist Organization on the list) and spreads their message of terror, there are several resources available to the federal government to counter the threat,” their letter reads.

“However, if that same American citizen swears allegiance to a violent white supremacist extremist group based overseas and spreads their message of terror, the Federal government does not have access to the same tools,” it continues.

 

Removing neo-Nazis online: In a phone interview with The Hill, Rose said that designating more neo-Nazi groups as FTOs could help social media companies commit to driving them off the platform with the endorsement of the government.

“Right now, if you look at the way in which [the social media companies] measure their ability to remove terrorist content from their platforms, they are looking at the FTO list,” Rose said. “So for us to put this on that list, I think takes a bold step forward in expanding what is expected of them.” 

Shootings in Poway, Calif., and El Paso, Texas, over the past several months have also been perpetrated by extremists with anti-immigrant views, which they cultivated online. 

Rose called the letter a “first step” to dedicating the full breadth of government and private sector resources toward combatting the rise of white extremism. 

Read more on the effort here.

 

DRONING ON: Sen. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeA decade of policymaking failures is to blame for new Syria crisis Zuckerberg defends meetings with conservative politicians, pundits GOP requests update on criminal referrals prompted by 2018 Kavanaugh probe MORE (R-Utah) on Wednesday introduced a bill to transfer authority over low-flying drones from the federal government to states, cities and Native American tribes.

The Drone Integration and Zoning Act would create a framework for drones up to 200 feet above the ground where local authorities determine what drones do in airspace over state- or local-owned land and property owners do the same over their own land.

“The FAA cannot feasibly or efficiently oversee millions of drones in every locality throughout the country,” Lee said in a statement.

Read more here.

 

DEMS GO DEEP ON TECH AT DEBATE: The top Democratic presidential candidates on Tuesday night wrangled over their differing views on how to take on the unprecedented power of Big Tech, marking the first time the contenders have been asked to discuss the issue on the debate stage. 

Most of the candidates drew a contrast between their own views and those of Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (D-Mass.), a top-tier hopeful who has called for breaking up top tech companies including Facebook, Google and Amazon. 

Walking a fine line: While other candidates, including former Rep. Beto O’RourkeBeto O’RourkeWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats wrangle over whether to break up Big Tech in debate first MORE (D-Texas), Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Minn.) and tech entrepreneur Andrew YangAndrew YangWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE, agreed the government should take on the large tech firms, they said they don’t believe “breaking up” the companies will properly address issues including how they protect user data and consolidate market power.

Warren’s defense: Warren defended her “break up Big Tech” plan, which was one of the first she offered after announcing her presidential candidacy and which quickly become one of her signature issues. She presented breaking up tech companies as one of the most powerful tools the government has for taking them on.

“I’m not willing to give up and let a handful of monopolists dominate our economy and our democracy,” Warren said. “It’s time to fight back.” 

Read more on the Big Tech debate here.

 

HARRIS GOES AFTER WARREN AFTER TWITTER STANCE: Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Calif.) on Tuesday night went after fellow 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) over her failure to get behind Harris’s effort to pressure Twitter into deleting President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE‘s account.

Over the past several weeks, Harris has launched a public campaign urging Twitter to delete Trump’s controversial account, which the president regularly uses to lambast his critics and promote misinformation. Last week, Warren, one of the top tech antagonists in the Democratic presidential race, declined to back Harris’s call. 

“I was surprised to hear that you did not agree with me that on this subject around what should be the rules on corporate responsibility,” Harris said directly to Warren at the Democratic primary debate in Ohio. “When I called on Twitter to suspend Donald trump’s account … you did not agree.”

“I would urge you to join me,” Harris added. 

Warren retorted she doesn’t agree with Harris’s approach to taking on Big Tech. “I don’t want to push Donald Trump off Twitter,” Warren said. “I want to push him out of the White House.” 

Read more here. 

 

Meanwhile on Twitter: Twitter is detailing its policies for world leaders as Democrats press the social media giant to take a tougher stance on President Trump’s tweets.

In a statement Tuesday, Twitter said that tweets from leaders “are not above our policies entirely.”

“When it comes to the actions of world leaders on Twitter, we recognize that this is largely new ground and unprecedented. We understand the desire for our decisions to be ‘yes/no’ binaries, but it’s not that simple,” the company said. “The actions we take and policies we develop will set precedent around online speech and we owe it to the people we serve to be deliberate and considered in what we do.”

Read more on Twitter’s rules here. 

 

ELECTION SECURITY AT THE DEBATE: Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang on Tuesday night said that the U.S. has “tampered with other elections” in calling for action to be taken to deter Russia from interfering in the 2020 election.

“We have to let Russia know, look, we get it, we’ve tampered with other elections, you’ve tampered with our elections, and now it has to stop, and if it does not stop we will take this as an act of hostility against the American people,” Yang said during the Democratic primary debate.

Yang described Russian hacking efforts ahead of the 2016 U.S. elections as “an illustration of the 21st century threats” such as cybersecurity and climate change, vowing to help “pull us forward” in addressing these issues.

Democratic candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), one the main Senate Democrats to push for action on election security over the past several months, pushed back strongly against Yang’s assertion that the U.S. and Russia were equal in terms of election interference against other nations.

“I don’t see a moral equivalency between our country and Russia,” Klobuchar said, adding that Russian interference in 2016 was “much more serious” than “meddling,” and that Russia’s actions constituted an “invasion” of U.S. elections.

Read more here.

 

AN EYE FOR AN EYE: The U.S. hit Iran with a secret cyberattack after a September strike on two Saudi oil facilities that Washington and Riyadh both blame on Tehran, according to Reuters.

Two U.S. officials told the news service that the operation, which took place late last month, targeted Tehran’s ability to spread “propaganda.” One of the officials said the attack hit physical hardware, but declined to provide further information. 

“They must have dreamt it,” Iranian Minister of Communications and Information Technology Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi responded, according to Iran’s Fars news agency.

The U.S., Saudi Arabia, Britain, France and Germany have all publicly blamed the Sept. 14 strike against Saudi oil facilities on Iran, which denied any involvement in the attack. The Iran-aligned Houthi rebel group in Yemen claimed responsibility.

The Pentagon responded to the attack by sending thousands of additional troops and equipment to Saudi Arabia to help reinforce its defenses. 

Neither the White House nor the National Security Council immediately responded to requests for comment from The Hill regarding the cyberattack. 

Read more here. 

 

SUBPOENA AVERTED (FOR NOW): House lawmakers tasked with investigating the country’s largest tech companies on Tuesday said they have received an initial round of documents from Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Google’s parent company Alphabet to aid their probe.

The announcement came on Oct. 15, the deadline lawmakers had set to receive the slew of documents they requested from the companies last month.

“We have received initial submissions from Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Facebook as part of our investigation,” the lawmakers – including the top Democrat and Republican on the House Judiciary Committee – said in the statement.

The statement came from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerBarr to speak at Notre Dame law school on Friday The 13 House Democrats who back Kavanaugh’s impeachment Ignore the hype — this is not an impeachment inquiry MORE (D-N.Y.) and ranking member Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies US, UK sign agreement allowing British authorities to quickly obtain data from tech giants Joe Lieberman’s son running for Senate in Georgia MORE (R-Ga.) as well as the leaders of the panel’s antitrust subcommittee, Reps. David CicillineDavid Nicola CicillineHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Celebrating the LGBTQ contribution to progress in business The Memo: Trump’s rage may backfire on impeachment MORE (D-R.I.) and Jim SensenbrennerFrank (Jim) James SensenbrennerHouse investigators receive initial documents from top tech companies Here are the lawmakers who aren’t seeking reelection in 2020 Republicans pour cold water on Trump’s term limit idea MORE (R-Wis.).

“The committee will review all of the information received from the companies in order to help inform next steps,” they said. “We will hold additional hearings, discussions and roundtables as our investigation continues.”

The House Judiciary Committee also requested documents from more than 80 other companies as part of its probe into the digital marketplace, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Hill. The committee has also asked for those documents by this week.

Read more here.

 

A LIGHTER CLICK: Every single night.

 

AN OP-ED TO CHEW ON: Exporting US internet laws will help startups thrive.

 

NOTABLE LINKS FROM AROUND THE WEB:

How a Facebook ad scam made billions (BuzzFeed News)

Accused Capital One hacker had as much as 30 terabytes of data, feds say (CyberScoop)

Fully automated ship being built to trace the voyage of the Mayflower (BBC News)

Zuckerberg meets with Rep. Maxine Waters ahead of hearing. (The Information)