Mediaboss Marketing

Homeland Security officials reject the idea that the agency is too focused on immigration. Officials noted that Mr. Trump signed an executive order on cybersecurity and has proposed adding money and staff to the agencys cybersecurity efforts.

The officials add that the president appointed Brock Long, an experienced emergency management official, to head FEMA. Mr. Long was confirmed, 95 to 4, by the Senate.

They also point out that John F. Kelly, the Homeland Security secretary, has taken a number of steps to protect air travel, including a temporary ban on portable electronics from some countries and implementing new screening measures to thwart attacks.

No one is going to tell you that immigration and border security arent priorities; they are the priorities that the president ran on, said Jonathan Hoffman, assistant secretary for public affairs at the department. But the focus on these issues isnt so much that we have neglected any part of the Department of Homeland Security.

But so far the Trump administration has focused on illegal immigration: building a wall along the border with Mexico, hiring thousands of new Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and deporting tens of thousands of people in the country illegally.

Illegal immigration was the centerpiece of Mr. Trumps presidential campaign, drawing large crowds as he promised to build a border wall and deport millions in the country illegally. But security experts said the country faces a number of continuing threats ranging from domestic terrorists to attacks from political extremists and cyberattacks against the nations election systems that demand the full attention of the Department of Homeland Security.

John Kelly and his staff have a wide portfolio, said Tom Ridge, who served as the first Homeland Security secretary, under President George W. Bush. I hope the White House realizes that they have an enormous job in protecting the border and the nations infrastructure from cyberattacks. They cant be used just to keep campaign promises.

The budget proposal Mr. Trump submitted to Congress prioritizes agencies and programs that target illegal immigration.

Under the plan, funding would increase just over 21 percent for Customs and Border Protection, the parent agency of the Border Patrol. Much of the increase would be used to build a border wall. But the agency would also be charged with hiring 5,000 new Border Patrol agents, even as the number of people crossing the border illegally has declined. Last month, 21,659 border crossers were caught, compared with 45,722 in June 2016, a 53 percent decrease.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcements budget would increase even more, nearly 30 percent. The new funding would pay for more deportation officers, detention centers and money to fly or bus unauthorized immigrants back to their home countries.

But other services and programs within Homeland Security would have their funding cut. The proposed budget includes cuts to the Coast Guard, elimination of the Transportation Security Administrations teams of uniformed armed officers that sweep public facilities and shutdowns of several of the departments national labs, including one in New York City that helps detect nuclear radiation. Several grant programs that pay for local police officers in airports or those that fight extremism would be cut or reprogrammed.

For example, Life After Hate, a group that works to deradicalize neo-Nazis and members of white supremacist groups, was slated to get $400,000 in the final days of the Obama administration. But Homeland Security canceled funding to the group in favor of groups and law enforcement agencies that target Muslim extremists.

Cutting grant programs that combat domestic extremism is a mistake when attacks by white supremacist and other hate groups are on the rise, said Erroll Southers, a former F.B.I. agent who is the director of a program at the University of Southern California that studies homegrown extremism.

You cant just focus on threats by ISIS or other groups, although its important, he said, referring to the Islamic State. But there are real threats here at home that have to be addressed.

Mr. Hoffman, the Homeland Security spokesman, said that the agencys critics were misguided and that their criticism did not reflect the day-to-day operation of the department.

We're not out there talking about cybersecurity, T.S.A., FEMA and other issues every day, but the focus is on it every day, he said. All the components and agencies are sufficiently funded to do their jobs.

Senator Kamala Harris, Democrat of California, a frequent critic of the department, said the White House bore a large share of the blame for what she considered the agencys overemphasis on targeting immigrants who were in the country illegally but posed little threat.

But she said Mr. Kelly should also be held accountable for the agencys immigration priorities. Ms. Harris was one of nearly a dozen Democratic senators who did not vote to confirm him.

During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Kelly came across as this person who would be a moderating voice in the Trump administration, someone who would speak truth to power, said Ms. Harris, a member of the Homeland Security Committee. But thats not what were seeing from him as secretary of Homeland Security. Under him, this agency has seemed eager to carry out the destructive immigration policies of this administration.

Leon E. Panetta, a former director of the C.I.A. and secretary of defense, said Mr. Kelly was simply following orders.

John Kelly is being a good Marine, Mr. Panetta said. He was loyal to me, and hes loyal to his commander in chief. I dont think some of the things the department is doing reflect the views of John Kelly.

Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and in the Morning Briefing newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on July 14, 2017, on Page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: Single-Minded at Homeland Security.

View original post here:
Job One at Homeland Security Under Trump: Immigration - New York Times

Updated | When news broke this week that Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort met with a Russian lawyer last year in hopes of digging up dirt on Hillary Clinton, they joined an ever-expanding club: People who met with Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign yet who claimed they did not. But for now, Vice President Mike Pence is keeping Americans in the dark as to whether he, too, is a member.

PencespokesmanMarc Lotterrepeatedly refused to answer questions on the subject Wednesday in an interview with Fox NewssBill Hemmer. Hemmer bluntly asked Lotter three times whether the vice president had ever met with Russian representatives, and each time he dodged the subject.

Related: Is Mike Pence the next president?

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

At first, Lotter insisted Pence was not focused on the areas where, you know, on this campaign, especially things that happened before he was even on the ticket,referring to the fact that Trump Jr.s Russia meeting took place June 9 and Pence didnt join the campaign until July 15. When Hemmer next pressed him, Lotter said, That stuff, the special prosecutors and the counsels are all looking at.

Hemmer then demanded a yes-or-no answer.

Im not aware of anything that I have seen,Lotter responded. All the focus that I saw with Vice President Pence during the campaign and since then has been focused on working the agenda that the people sent him to Washington to accomplish.

Lotters non-answer answers were circulating Thursday morning on Twitter, where they caught the attention of journalists including CNNsJim Acosta and The New York Timess Jonathan Martin. Many brought up the fact that Pencesaid flatly in January that of coursethe Trump campaign did not have any contact with Kremlin officials whomeddled in the U.S. election, dismissing reports to the contrary as bizarre rumors.

Isnt it telling that now even Mike Pences people will not say he did not meet with Russians, after Mike Pence in January said, Of course, we never met with Russians, we were meeting with the American people?MSNBC host Joe Scarborough said on his show Thursday.

People have been watching Pence this week in the wake of the Trump Jr. scandal because the vice president is next in the line of succession should Donald Trump Sr. be impeached. (Its unlikely, but thats a whole other story.)

In a statement released Tuesday, Pence seemed to put space between himself and the campaign, saying he wasnt aware of the June 9 meeting and was unconcerned with stories about Trump aides before he joined the ticket. But officials and sources close to Pence have fought back, saying he wasnt trying to separate himself from Trump Sr.

Theres absolutely no distance between the president and the vice president,deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters Wednesday. I dont know if theyve spoken directly about this, but I know theyve spoken today.

An earlier version of this article included an incorrect spelling ofMarc Lotter's last name.

Originally posted here:
Did Mike Pence Meet With Russia Too? His Spokesman Keeps Dodging the Question - Newsweek

Katherine Gregg Journal Political Writer kathyprojo

PROVIDENCE, R.I. Vice President Mike Pence and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are expected to have a private tte--tte while they are both in Providence on Friday, to deliver speeches to the National Governors Association's summer meeting.

It is not on the official NGA schedule, but Scott Pattison, the executive director and CEO of the Governors Association, and NGA spokeswoman Elena Waskey told The Journal that they anticipate Pence, the former governor of Indiana, will also meet privately in Rhode Island with the governors, many of whom are his friends.

Marc Lotter, the vice president's press secretary, confirmed the meetings in an email to The Journal. He said more details would be released later Thursday.

Trudeau's presence at the governors' event along with other officials from Canada, Mexico, India, China and Japan hasdrawn national attention.

As stated in a Washington Post article on the Governors Association event: "The sudden interest in the work of the governors from abroad reflects fears by leaders of some foreign governments about the direction of U.S. trade policy under a president who has sharply criticized free-trade agreements negotiated by past administrations."

With 1,500 expected attendees, Pattison said the Rhode Island conference appears to be drawing the largest number ever for a National Governors Association summer meeting, and if all the governors who registered show up one of the largest turnouts of governors.

Link:
Mike Pence, Justin Trudeau expected to meet privately in Providence - The Providence Journal

There's an old joke: A family has two sons. One son grows up and goes off to sea. The other becomes vice president of the United States. Neither is ever heard from again.

That joke made the rounds back in the 1910s, when the guy who liked to tell it, Thomas Marshall, was serving as Woodrow Wilson's vice president.

And while the vice presidency may have been something of a constitutional afterthought, a way to make sure the electoral college worked to pick a president, it has since evolved into an office with prestige, power -- and a pretty good chance of moving up to the presidency itself.

In this week's episode, we talk to two former chiefs of staff to past vice presidents as we chart the evolution of the office, from overlooked outpost to crucial cornerstone. And we remember some of the lesser known vice presidents in American history, like the two who voted against establishing the office in the first place, the guy who died before he even got to Washington, and the guy who compared the office to a "bucket of warm spit."

Read this article:
Podcast: Why Mike Pence may be the most powerful VP ever - The Hill

A few days ago, I woke up in the early dawn because I felt a tickle on my left shoulder. Opening my eyes, I saw a bug, and not just any bug. It was a scutigera coleoptrata, a nasty house centipede sporting a forest of legs. It was crawling on me. I jumped out of bed, emitting the sound one naturally emits when a hairy, leggy, gross-looking insect invades the sanctity of ones bed.

My husband, initially alarmed, started laughing when he realized the problem. When he finally stopped, he let out a long, contented sigh. Thats the girliest thing Ive ever seen you do, he said. That was awesome. Im pretty sure bearing his sons is the most girly thing hes seen me do. But I take his point.

Ive never been very girly. In childhood, I never formally protested my femininity by donning the backwards baseball cap (too clich), but I had no interest in dolls, ponies, beads, or ballet.Even in the bad old 1980s, American girls werent scolded all that much for gender non-conformism. I expect my mother was disappointed when her wonderful talents as a seamstress went unappreciated, but she generously kept those feelings to herself.

Throughout my adolescence and beyond, I was constantly hanging around with boys, but none of them were boyfriends. My interests seemed to steer me towards classes or clubs where girls were in the minority. It didnt much bother me, and Mom didnt panic either. I think she assumed that a girl who knew so many boys had to find a special one eventually. She was right. I met my husband in graduate school, and our very first conversation concerned the relative merits of analytic and continental philosophy. Some men like that kind of girl.

Marriage raised certain new questions about my relationships to men who werent my husband. I take matrimony very seriously, but male friendship has always been a significant part of my life too. It seemed to me that many of the guidelines that fellow religious conservatives recommended would be fairly problematic for me professionally and personally. Surely it should be possible to respect the sanctity of marriage without self-selecting out of beneficial professional opportunities, or wishing my male friends au revoir?

In one sense, opposite-sex friendship might seem easy for a woman who is so used to it. Ive had hundreds of male friends in my life, and only one became a lover. It seems natural that a lunch can just be lunch, a car ride just a car ride, and an extended discussion of Hayekian versus Randian libertarianism precisely that.

Thats not enough to settle the matter, though. Out of friendship, other kinds of feelings can grow, and married people should take active steps to ensure that they dont. This presumably is why some people choose to limit contact with non-familial members of the opposite sex, perhaps avoiding private meals or shared drinks, or time alone in cars or offices.

I had mixed feelings about the Mike Pence protecting my marriage controversy. On the one hand, its lovely to see an important and powerful man disciplining himself to show his wife that he is committed to their marriage. Thats a great example to set. On the other hand, I dont love the idea that the Mike Pence rules might become semi-normative for conservatives all across the nation.

If youre a male social worker or a female in the tech industry, the Mike Pence rules might be socially isolating, and a real hindrance to your career. For instance, Pence doesnt drink at mixed-company gatherings unless his wife is present. As a personal choice, that is fine; nobody should be obligated to drink alcohol at social gatherings. I, however, have multiple times found myself at a conference with perhaps two or three women among a few dozen participants.

If conservatives started informally viewing Pence rules as an expectation, that could be somewhat uncomfortable for me. People normally cant bring their spouses to conferences, and its awkward to think that my dining companions might see my mere presence at dinner table as the reason they cant have a glass of red wine with their steak. It seems like it might be easy to go from there to, Wouldnt it be nice if those two or three women werent here?

Its also pretty common for both scholars and journalists to use coffee or lunch as an occasion to discuss a story or paper, or just a topic of mutual interest. Often these meetings skirt the line somewhat between business and pleasure. Scholars usually like discussing ideas, and two colleagues might well get together just to discuss an argument or area of research that is of interest to both.

Its not exactly a business meeting. But those kinds of informal interactions are the stuff from which professional networks are built, so a woman in a male-dominated field or a man in a female-dominated field will be at a disadvantage if people see it as improper for married people to get together in that way.

Heres the interesting thing though: even as the Pence rules are potentially too restrictive, they may also not be restrictive enough. Among people who take marriage seriously, theres very little danger of suddenly forgetting ourselves and arranging a tryst with a random fellow conference-goer.

On the other hand, anyone who befriends people of the opposite sex should be attentive to the issue of emotional attachment. Friendship is good, but even casual interactions can create a sense of intimacy, which can lead to the sort of emotional dependence that may threaten a marriage. That kind of closeness, though, could develop in all kinds of ways, which neednt involve shared food or drinks, or even being in physical proximity. Lots of people fall in love online nowadays.

Do we have to ban opposite-sex friendship altogether? Thats pretty depressing. A less-drastic alternative might combine honesty (letting your spouse know whos joining you for coffee or a professional lunch) with an appropriate attention to the emotional distance that is fitting for opposite-sex friends. This last point requires you to be clear in your own mind about the difference between friendship and marriage.

Marriage takes work, and some of that work is difficult. It cant be all waltzes and candlelight dinners, because part of the point is to stick together through good and bad times. The upside of this is that you wont be alone through the bad times. It also means, though, that youll surely share some bad times. Not all of the memories you make with your spouse will be magical. That all applies before you bring the kids into it, and trust me: Kids make it that much harder.

With friends, you can tailor your interactions around common interests, and limit the relationship to that.

Especially if you and your spouse are shouldering a lot of stress at the moment, lighthearted moments with friends can provide some relief. Sometimes the shallowness, or at least the more targeted nature of our friendships, is part of what makes them enjoyable. Stressful or uncomfortable topics can just be avoided for the ninety minutes you spend with a particular friend, as you revel in your mutual love of Japanese gardens (or whatever).

If your friend is a ludicrously picky eater, you can just meet for coffee instead of lunch. If she has an annoying habit of talking during movies, dont make that a movie-going friend. There is a freedom to friendship that familial relationships tend not to have. With friends, you can tailor your interactions around common interests, and limit the relationship to that.

That freedom can be very pleasant, and its fine to enjoy that, up to a point. With opposite-friends, you do need to be more conscientious about maintaining appropriate context. Beyond the really obvious things (like decorum in dress), I think emotional closeness is the key.

If you have an idea and immediately think, Oh, I cant wait to discuss that with opposite-sex-friend! ask yourself why youre excited to talk to that person and not your spouse. If the reason is just that your friend shares your love of opera and your spouse doesnt, thats probably okay. If the friendship seems to be creeping outside those more targeted areas of mutual interest, it might be prudent to see less of that person, and to work on strengthening your friendship with the man or woman you married. An opposite-sex friend shouldnt be the person youre most eager to tell when you get really good (or really upsetting) news.

I suspect that many marriages run into trouble just over a failure to put the pleasures of friendship in their proper place.

Sometimes the practicalities of married life seem to be stacked against you. More than once, Ive had an enjoyable conversation with a stranger at a conference dinner, and thought wistfully, That was nice, but I wish my husband could have been the man across the table for that length of time. At home, the kids rarely leave us undisturbed for so long.

I suspect that many marriages run into trouble just over a failure to put the pleasures of friendship in their proper place. An enjoyable conversation or a passing moment of mirth supply a stark contrast to the tense discussion you had with your spouse this morning, and you become confused. Why is this person making you feel good today, when your spouse isnt?

Stay out of those treacherous waters by reminding yourself of what marriage really is. Modern people put a lot of stock in the emotional component of romantic love, which is fine to a point. If you start imagining that Jim must be your true soul mate, because he shares your love of pottery when Jack never has, youve definitely passed the point.

We shouldnt have to choose between getting married and having friends. The way to avoid that, though, is by keeping different relationships in their proper places.

A few weeks ago, my husband and I celebrated our tenth wedding anniversary. Were hoping this will be the first of many decade-versaries, so we kept it simple. We had dinner, saw a photography exhibit, and came home to find our kids watching dancing chimneysweeps with their babysitter.

As a married woman, I take pains to ensure that my husband is the only man who makes me feel like that.

Being out with my husband (for a whole evening!) got me reflecting on how much I still enjoy the simple boy-girl dynamics of a date. Youd think that might all get buried under the mountain of stress and responsibility. Sometimes it does, but that pleasure can re-emerge with surprising ease, and its still very sweet.

The simple things are still fun. Me putting on a skirt for him. Him pulling out a chair for me. Theres a palpable pleasure that comes just from strolling through a gallery, being a couple. It reminds you of the thrill you got at 16, when a boy called to invite you to a dance. You boy. Me girl. Us together. It never really gets old.

As a married woman, I take pains to ensure that my husband is the only man who makes me feel like that. He is, and Im grateful for it, because even if youre not a pretty in pink sort of lady, it still feels good sometimes just to be a girl.

Right here I could burst into a rendition of Natural Woman, but its a little soon after the bug incident to start gunning for a new record. So Ill just say that I do value my friends of both sexes, as I have my entire life. But that only heightens my appreciation of the man whos still the one.

See the rest here:
The Mike Pence Rule Is Great For Him But Not For Everyone - The Federalist