Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON A few weeks after the 2013 government shutdown, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) compared the Republicans in the House to the preschoolers she once taught. To deal with a bunch of fractious, obstreperous 4-year-olds, she said, you need a plan.

When Murray made her comparison, she was about to sit down with Rep.Paul Ryan(R-Wis.) in what turned out to be the only significant successful bipartisan budget negotiation Congress has managed since the shutdown.

Four years later, the House is still roiled by a crowd of sharp-elbowed and feuding Republican lawmakers who cant agree even on how to do the one thing they all say they want repeal Obamacare. But now, theres a new alpha boy atop their playground monkey bars.

President Donald Trump outdid them all, belittling, bullying and insulting his way to the Oval Office.

Murray is familiar with the personality type.

There is a bully in every classroom,Murray said this week. And the best way to teach other children in your preschool class that its not OK is to make it not OK.

That is precisely what Murray and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are trying to do. Since there are only 48 senators on their side of the ledger, they lack the votes to beat back Trump and a raft of nominees that Democrats see as historically awful. What they can do is show the country and their Republican colleagues that its not OK. Murray is turning out to be Schumers deadliest weapon in that fight.

The greatest difficulty with that strategy is that Republicans dont especially want to be shown. None have been willing to admit even that nominees might lie to them, and voted to confirm two who at the very least said things that were not true. They confirmed Scott Pruitt as Environmental Protection Agency chief Friday, even knowing that they had not reviewedthousands of emails that had just been released related to his environmental lawsuits.

Still, there have been some notable successes from the Democrats perspective, particularly with nominees going through the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on which Murray serves as the top Democrat.

Chief among them is the withdrawal of labor secretary nominee Andrew Puzder, a fast-food maven who was fond of employing scantily clad women to peddle his Carls Jr. burgers, and whose restaurants have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for labor and safety violations.

The salacious ads and history of labor law infractions probably were not the daggers that did in the labor nominee, however.

Ironically, his troubles started with a video created by a woman who Trump floated as a potential presidential running mate on the Reform Party ticket in 1988 Oprah Winfrey, via her TV show. Avideo from The Oprah Winfrey Show featured Puzders ex-wife dressed in disguise in 1990 to allege domestic abuse.

That she had gone on the program had been known since shortly after Puzders nomination, but Winfreys producers stonewalled media attempts to obtain the episode. The Oprah Winfrey Networks lawyers did temporarily provide a videotape to the HELP Committee that they refused to leave behind. Murray and her staff worked with committee Chairman Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) to make sure other senators saw it or at least had a chance to. Although Puzders former wife, Lisa Fierstein, later recanted the allegations, it had an impact. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said that she had seen the tape and wanted to make it public.

Murray has made a habit of maintaining bipartisan relationships and working across the aisle, passing things like the rewrite of theNo Child Left Behind Act. A firm member of the Pantsuit Nation, and a politician who launched her Senate career as a mom in tennis shoes, she politely and privately wielded a stiletto against Puzder, offering trenchant insights into Puzders attitudes in private conversations with Republicans in hallways and on the Senate floor. One thing Puzder said in an interview was particularly disturbing to the handful of Republicans who were prepared to oppose him.

Someone asked him why he wanted to be secretary of labor, and he said that it would be the best job he could have with his clothes on, Murray said. I presented that to one Republican senator who said to me, quote, he doesnt get it, does he?

Whether it was specifically the video that felled Puzder can be debated. Revelations that he employed an undocumented immigrant as part of his household helpfor years hurt him with a number of conservative Republicans, as did Puzders advocacy for immigration reform.

For Murray, he was a walking highlight reel of all that is wrong with Trump.

This is a president who got elected after a video came out of him on the bus with Access Hollywood. When that happened, that was such a defining moment for many people, Murray said. But the people who voted for him said thats OK, he wont do this going forward. And yet to me his nominee shared many of those same sexist, horrible attitudes towards women.

Thats what I felt really took him down, and should have taken him down, she said.

Murray and the Democrats also scored a near miss with an especially focused strategy to question then-Education Department nominee Betsy DeVos.

The billionaire charter school advocate botched numerous questions that Murray and other Democrats on the HELP committee had prepared in advance, and then followed up on. Especially glaring was DeVos lack of understanding of federal disability laws, exposed when Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) asked how her own disabled child would be able to get an education in one of the publicly funded charter schools that DeVos favors. DeVos did not understand that providers of public education are supposed to provide it to all of the public. Public schools spend significant resources to ensure disabled children get an education, and while charter schools are required to as well, they often fightthe requirement.

Other questions showed that she was unfamiliar with basic debates in the education community. She was also caught in a possible lie when she said she had nothing to do with her familys foundation giving $5 million to the anti-gay religious group Focus on the Family. Devos insisted it was all her mothers doing. Murray came back with a tax filing from the foundation that listed DeVos as a vice president. DeVos claimed it was a clerical error, but records showed she was listed in the position for 17 years.

DeVos terrible showing cost her two Republican votes, and for the first time in history, a vice president had to break a 50 to 50 tie in the Senate to confirm her.

None of that work to bring down those nominees was an accident, Murray said.

I felt from the beginning, this administration who I think expected to win was putting together a cabinet without doing the critical work that one should do at the cabinet in vetting people, in knowing what issues they might have, Murray said. So I directed my staff to do that with Betsy DeVos, with [Health and Human Services Secretary Tom] Price. And with Puzder.

Aides familiar with the strategy said that Murray vowed to do that vetting herself when she came back to Capitol Hill after the election. She reassigned a slew of policy staff and turned them into temporary investigators, churning out detailed memos that were then shared with other senators and their staff. No other committee appears to have done as thorough a dive into the backgrounds of the nominees coming before them.

Heading into the DeVos hearing, Murray made sure to coordinate Democratic questions, to avoid overlap and make sure effective follow ups were delivered. When, for instance, Hassan asked DeVos about her role in the Prince Foundation, and DeVos demurred, Hassan was able to pull out tax documents with her name on them.

As each new embarrassment and unflattering detail emerged, Schumer would often highlight them in his morning Senate floor speeches that the Democratic leaders then spread further in news conferences.

Since Democrats themselves changed the rules around nominations in 2013 to allow confirmations to pass on simple majority votes, theres little they can do beyond slowing down the process and trying to give the public enough time to see exactly who is ascending to power in the reign of Trump.

And Murray said she intends to keep showing why its not OK.

As I have had constituents tell me since the day of the election, Senate Democrats are the only barrier we have to fight back against things that arent right coming from a Republican administration, Senate and House, Murray said. So, were it. We started working from day one to be the people who take that role on.

Ryan Grim contributed reporting.

View post:
A Mild-Mannered Woman From Washington Is The Democrats' Deadliest Weapon - Huffington Post

A strong majority of Americans say Democrats should look to cooperate with President Trump to strike deals, according to the inaugural Harvard-Harris poll provided exclusively by The Hill.

The survey found that 73 percent of voters want to see Democrats work with the president, against only 27 percent who said Democrats should resist Trumps every move.

The findings are significant as Democratic leaders in Congress are under growing pressure by their liberal base to obstruct the president's agenda. The poll shows the party is divided on how to deal with Trump: 52 percent of Democrats polled say they should cooperate with him on areas of agreement and 48 percent saying they shouldn't.

Those figures are nearly identical when the question is flipped 68 percent of those polled say that Trump should be willing to compromise and find ways to work with Democrats in Congress. Thirty-two percent said Trump shouldnt bend at all, even if it means finding ways to achieve his agenda without congressional approval.

This shows that voters want Trump and Democrats to compromise and if they dont, they both may pay a heavy price with the electorate, said Mark Penn, the co-director of the Harvard-Harris poll.

The Hill will be working with Harvard-Harris throughout 2017.

The chances of bipartanship this year appear dim. More than 60 House Democrats boycotted Trump's inauguration and GOP leaders in Congress don't anticipate much, if any, help from the other side of the aisle.

While liberals are furious at the Trump administration for ramping up deportations of illegal immigrants, some Democrats were encouraged that Trump this week struck a softer tone in discussing children brought into the country illegally through no fault of their own.

However, Trumps broader agenda of repealing the Affordable Care Act, slashing spending, rolling back regulations and cracking down on immigration are anathema to Democrats, who are growing more entrenched in opposition to the president with each passing day.

Conversely, Trump has been frustrated with the Senate for the slow pace of confirmations for his Cabinet nominees. The president feels Democrats are out to sink key figures in his inner circle, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who resigned this week amid controversy. Trumps pick for Labor secretary, Andy Puzder, also withdrew his nomination this week under fire from Democrats and some in the GOP.

Trump and his team feel under siege by civil servants and many in the Intelligence community, who he blames for damaging leaks meant to embarrass and undermine his administration.

Still, a majority of Americans 50 percent said they believe Trump will be effective in implementing his agenda, against only 40 percent who said he would fail.

While Trump entered the White House with a historically low approval rating, leading many Democrats to question his mandate to govern, the Harvard-Harris poll put him at a respectable 45 percent favorable and 51 percent unfavorable.

Forty-eight percent said they approve of the job Trump is doing, compared to 52 percent who say they disapprove.

Trump has a better approval rating than Republicans in Congress, who post a 43-57 split, or Democrats, who came in at 41 positive and 59 negative.

The online survey of 2,148 registered voters was conducted between Feb. 11 and Feb. 13. The partisan breakdown is 39 percent Democrat, 30 percent Republican, 27 percent independent and five percent other.

Excerpt from:
Poll: Americans want Democrats to work with Trump - The Hill

WASHINGTON

Ask Republican lawmakers about the specter of protests in their districts next week, and they'll likely shrug off constituent outbursts as "manufactured" or "scripted."

The GOP is largely adopting the Democratic posture from the summer of 2009 that angry voices at town halls don't represent a political threat. That may be true. The question is how Republicans now, and Democrats back then, arrived at that conclusion.

Even as some GOP lawmakers move to hold their constituent forums online or over the phone instead of in-person, they insist they're not worried.

In a Wednesday letter to Republican chiefs of staff, Matt Gorman, communications director at the National Republican Congressional Committee, dismissed recent protests that have erupted at town halls across the country.

"Don't be fooled by this incredibly vocal minority that is attempting to drown out the millions of voices that have since its passage called for Obamacare's repeal," he wrote.

Unlike the tea party, Republicans say, this year's protests are a strictly partisan reaction to the 2016 election, with Democrats targeting Republicans.

"I don't have scientific methodology to say that or prove that to you," said FreedomWorks' Jason Pye, whose tea party-aligned group is organizing its own protests to encourage lawmakers to repeal the 2010 health care law.

"But based on the emails I'm getting from groups on the left I subscribe to them all I doubt this is an organic movement," Pye said.

To Republicans, the conservative bent of the districts where some of the most vociferous protesting has occurred is proof that GOP lawmakers have nothing to worry about. Tennessee Rep. Diane Black encountered tough questions last month, but both she and President Donald Trump won her district by nearly 50 points last fall.

"There's a huge difference between political theater, which people are paid to create, and the actual feelings of constituents, which show up in surveys and election results," said longtime GOP operative Mike Shields, who recommends members do "tele-town halls" because they can reach more people.

Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz encountered 1,000 constituents inside a high school auditorium in his district last week, with hundreds more left outside. The Beehive State has never been hospitable to Trump, but the congressman won a fifth term by 47 points last fall. (About 78,000 people voted against Chaffetz, so even in his district, there's a base of people to protest him.)

"The idea that suddenly there's a big liberal movement there that could take the congressman out is absurd," said Shields, a veteran of the Republican National Committee and, most recently, a super PAC dedicated to preserving the GOP's House majority.

Republicans have pointed to a SurveyMonkey poll that found that 85 percent of participants in last month's women's marches identified as or leaned Democratic. The online poll, conducted Jan. 26-30, sampled self-reported marchers. Republicans haven't yet done their own polling of the crowds, but they've cited this survey as proof that the protesters don't pose a new political threat to them.

Democrats, however, see protests in ruby-red districts as evidence of the extent to which Americans even Republicans have woken up to the reality that they might lose their health care.

"The way they've gerrymandered the hell out of districts, (Republicans) feel warm and toasty safe. But it's a time like this that has a way of taking out members," said Democratic media consultant John Lapp, a former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Democrats would know. They acknowledge that at the time of the tea party's rise, their party was slow to see the writing on the wall.

But there were signs.

"In 2009, we saw a dramatic shift as the health care debate went on over the summer," said Jon Vogel, who was executive director at the DCCC at the time. Generic ballot polling in Democratic congressional districts started to trend toward the Republicans.

"Between the August town halls and the November loss of the Virginia and New Jersey governors' races, that's when the problems we were facing crystallized, even if we weren't ready to admit it," said Jesse Ferguson, a former DCCC communications and independent expenditure director.

"From then on, there were a lot of attempts to convince ourselves it wasn't a big deal but they were all just distractions," Ferguson added.

In the spring of 2010, Democrats won the special election to hold on to the late Rep. John P. Murtha's seat in Pennsylvania, reassuring them that they could weather any tea party insurgence at the ballot box that fall.

Instead, the party lost 63 House seats in the midterm election.

"I don't think anybody really saw the wave that was coming until people started counting votes on election night," said Bill Burton, a DCCC veteran from the 2006 cycle who worked in the White House during President Barack Obama's first term.

Burton cautions that Democrats have work to do to harness this year's town hall energy for 2018.

Vogel predicts there'll be even more energy on Democrats' side once congressional Republicans move closer toward repealing the health care law.

"I find it hard to believe we're going to win that seat in Utah," Vogel said. "But if we have that much energy there ... imagine how much energy" there may be in a true swing seat."

Colorado Rep. Mike Coffman, who represents a perennially targeted swing district, was one of the first Republicans to find himself overwhelmed by the number of constituents who showed up at an event to meet one-on-one with him. The five-term congressman hasn't planned a town hall for next week. Instead, he said he'll be visiting hospitals and advocacy groups.

Representatives from the NRCC's communications staff have met with at least 70 members' offices over the last several weeks to offer suggestions about remaining "visible and accessible to their constituents." But Gorman stressed in Wednesday's letter that the types of public events members host is up to them.

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen won his New Jersey seat by 19 points last fall, but he finds himself on the DCCC's target list this year. He won't be holding any in-person town halls next week, though. He's cited scheduling and the difficulty of finding a venue in his suburban 11th District.

Meanwhile, a group of Democratic and Republican constituents who oppose repealing the health care law and cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood have secured venues for town halls, which they plan to hold with or without the congressman.

Asked on Tuesday in an interview off the House floor whether he sees that kind of protest as a political threat, Frelinghuysen demurred.

"Quite honestly, everybody works pretty hard to represent their district," he said, before scurrying into an open elevator.

Go here to read the rest:
Like Democrats before them, GOP dismisses town hall threat - MyPalmBeachPost

President Trumps purportedly lax security practices are the subject of a letter sent from more than a dozen congressional Democrats this week to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Rep. Ted Lieu, California Democrat, urged committee leadership this week to investigate troubling reports that have emerged recently with respect to Mr. Trumps operational security, including his apparent use of a consumer-grade Android smartphone to communicate over Twitter, among other items of concerns.

Those reports, according to Mr. Lieu and 14 colleagues, suggest Mr. Trump is jeopardizing national security by egregiously failing to implement commonsense security measures across the board.

Cybersecurity experts universally agree that an ordinary Android smartphone, which the President is reportedly using despite repeated warnings from the Secret Service, can be easily hacked, the Democrats wrote in a letter to committee leadership sent on Wednesday this week and made public two days later.

This behavior is more than bad operational security it is an egregious affront to national security, they wrote to Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, Utah Republican, and ranking member Elijah Cummings, Maryland Democrat.

The congressmen want the Committee to hold public hearings devoted partially to the presidents smartphone usage and the security risks therein, according to the letter, the likes of which have already made waves across Washington since Mr. Trump took office last month.

In addition to concerns surrounding Mr. Trumps smartphone usage, the lawmakers write that administration officials have been documented discussing national security issues in public settings and using private email accounts for official business, among other insecure practices. In light of Mr. Trumps frequent tweets, however, the Democrats warn that Mr. Trumps smartphone is a particularly deserving of a congressional probe.

The use of an unsecured phone risks the President of the United States being monitored by foreign or domestic adversaries, many of whom would be happy to hijack the Presidents prized Twitter account causing disastrous consequences for global stability, they wrote. More frighteningly, hackers could present the President with alternative information, which, as the President has repeatedly demonstrated, can have a huge impact on his beliefs and actions.

It is out hope that you can put our national security and the American people first and seriously investigate these concerns in a public hearing. Our country depends on it, their letter said.

Mr. Chaffetz, meanwhile, already expressed concerns of his own this week over Mr. Trumps security practices. The Republican wrote the White House on Tuesday demanding answers involving the security protocols in place at the presidents Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida after it emerged that Mr. Trump and the Prime Minister of Japan discussed national security issues in the presence of the public last week.

Another letter sent this month to the Pentagon by Senate Democrats asked the Defense Department to explain how it is safeguarding Mr. Trumps smartphone from hackers.

While it is important for the President to have the ability to communicate electronically, it is equally important that he does so in a manner that is secure and that ensures the preservation of presidential records, Sens. Tom Carper of Delaware and Claire McCaskill of Missouri wrote in a February 9 letter to the Pentagon.

Here is the original post:
Democrats ask for hearings involving Trump's smartphone security - Washington Times

WASHINGTON With President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans threatening to go after the people who leaked classified material about Trumps ties to Russia, Democrats are asking the Justice Department to investigate the potential intimidation of whistleblowers and they want Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself.

In a particularly stern letter, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee asked DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to look into whether the Trump administration has engaged in any improper effort to intimidate or threaten whistleblowers. Democrats also asked the inspector general to determine whether Sessions should sit out that sort of investigation, considering his personal ties to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, who was also involved with the Trump campaign.

Trump campaign aides had contact with Russian intelligence officials during the election and Trump has long-standing ties to Russia,The New York Times revealed this week. Intelligence agencies also concluded that Russian officials tried to influence the U.S. election.

Given the significance and magnitude of these developments, we believe it is appropriate that your office in conjunction with other Offices of Inspectors General, if necessary conduct an investigation, Democrats wrote to Horowitz, who has served as the DOJ inspector general since early 2012.

Outraged that whistleblowers are turning over classified information to the news media, Trumptargeted leakers on Thursday in one of his classic early morning Twitter rants, saying that leaks have been a big problem in Washington for years and that low-life leakers will be caught.

Later that afternoon, in a confrontational and at times, unhinged press conference, Trump went after whistleblowersagain, saying they were left over from the Obama administration.

The two lead authors of the Democrats letter, ranking Judiciary Committee member John Conyers (D-Mich.) and member Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), noted Trumpsangry and unhinged threats and attacks on the law enforcement and intelligence communities, only adding to our concerns about the conflicts with Attorney General Sessions.

We therefore believe it is more important than ever that the Inspector General conduct this requested review, they continued.

Sessions has a number of potential conflicts of interest in investigating the Trump administrations threats against whistleblowers, as The Huffington Post noted this week:

Sessions relationship with the Trump campaign is especially relevant because Flynns contacts with Russian envoys reportedly began before the election. Sessions was the first senator to endorse Trump. White House chief strategist Steve Bannon described Sessions as the clearinghouse for policy and philosophy in the Trump administration, and the fiercest, most dedicated, and most loyal promoter in Congress of Trumps agenda during the election. Sessions regularly appeared with Trump on the campaign trail, and the Alabama senator formally nominated Trump at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July. One of Sessions former aides became a senior adviser in the Trump White House.

Its unclear whether the Justice Department would actually look into the potential intimidation of whistleblowers, especially with Sessions presiding over the department. But Democrats appeal to the inspector general appears to be a way to get around the attorney general and receive an answer from an Obama-appointed official.

Read Democrats full letter below.

Continued here:
Democrats Want An Investigation Into Donald Trump's Whistleblower Threats - Huffington Post