Sadly, our only other choice is Claire McCaskill.Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Josh Hawley declined on Saturday to clarify why his government staff used their personal email addresses to organize meetings with campaign consultants in the attorney general’s office, saying only that members of his team “always comply with every aspect of Missouri law, and do so to the fullest.”
The Star reported Wednesday that within weeks of Hawley’s swearing in as attorney general in 2017, the political team that would go on to run his U.S. Senate campaign had stepped in to help direct his official office and raise his national profile.
[...]
The attorney general’s office initially declined to comment on the story. It eventually released a statement insisting that “no taxpayer resources were expended for campaign purposes” and “no government employee participated in political activity.”
But instead of using their government-issued email to help organize and discuss the consultant meetings, which would automatically be subject to the state’s open records laws, Hawley staff used their personal email addresses.
[...]
The Star’s reporting was based on emails, text messages and other records obtained over the last few weeks. The Hawley campaign has not asked for any corrections or retractions, and has not disputed any facts detailed in the story.
[...]
Hawley was [later] asked specifically whether he denies that The Star has emails showing communication between his official government staff and his political consultants.
Hawley did not directly answer that question and instead repeated his line that no one ran the attorney general’s office but him, according to audio recorded by St. Louis Public Radio.
Kansas City
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.Lawmakers voted 52 to 45 to confirm Jeffrey Bossert Clark to be the assistant attorney general for environment and natural resources. Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), both running for reelection GOP states, joined all Republicans present in voting to confirm Clark.
Clark is and attorney at the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, where he has represented numerous industry clients, including oil giant BP in its efforts to fight certain claims from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster and spill, and the Chamber of Commerce. He’s said climate change science is “contestable.”
[...]
Clark’s responsibilities at the DOJ will include being the top law enforcement official in pursuing claims against polluters and companies that violate environmental laws. He’ll also be responsible for defending Trump’s aggressive deregulatory agenda against an onslaught of lawsuits.
The Hill
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.“I have been thorough in examining Judge Kavanaugh’s record. And while the recent allegations against him are troubling and deserve a thorough and fair examination by the Senate Judiciary Committee, my decision is not based on those allegations but rather on his positions on several key issues, most importantly the avalanche of dark, anonymous money that is crushing our democracy.
“He has revealed his bias against limits on campaign donations which places him completely out of the mainstream of this nation.
[...]
“Going even further, Judge Kavanaugh will give free reign to anonymous donors and foreign governments through their citizens to spend money to interfere and influence our elections with so-called ‘issue ads.’ These ‘issue ads’ are now flooding the airways in this nation to directly influence election outcomes, drowning the concept of individuals having the strongest voice in our democracy. Judge Kavanaugh has clearly said that there should be literally no restrictions on these ads. [...] And in a court opinion, he went out of his way to say that foreign nationals weren’t restricted from creating or contributing to these ads—even when that wasn’t the issue before the court.
[...]
“While I am also uncomfortable about his view on Presidential power as it relates to the rule of law, and his position that corporations are people, it is his allegiance to the position that unlimited donations and dark anonymous money, from even foreign interests, should be allowed to swamp the voices of individuals that has been the determining factor in my decision to vote no on his nomination.”
Claire McCaskill
Of course they did.The White House statement released after Friday's meeting lacked details of any new security efforts.
"The President’s discussion with his NSC addressed threats posed to our elections from malign foreign actors, efforts underway to provide cybersecurity assistance to state and local authorities, and actions to investigate, prosecute, and hold accountable those who illegally attempt to interfere in our political and electoral processes," the White House statement said. "The Trump Administration will continue to provide the support necessary to the owners of elections systems — state and local governments — to secure their elections."
[...]
After nearly two years of calling Russian election interference a hoax and its investigation a witch hunt, President Donald Trump on Friday presided over the first National Security Council meeting devoted to defending American democracy from foreign manipulation.
"The President has made it clear that his administration will not tolerate foreign interference in our elections from any nation state or other malicious actors," the White House said in a statement afterward.
But current and former officials tell NBC News that 19 months into his presidency, there is no coherent Trump administration strategy to combat foreign election interference — and no single person or agency in charge.
[...]
To be sure, individual government agencies have responded in various ways. The Department of Homeland Security is working with states to improve cyber security in voting systems. The FBI created a "foreign influence task force," and the Justice Department announced a new policy his month to inform the public about bots and trolls on social media. The National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command are coordinating to counter Russian influence in cyberspace, the general in charge of those agencies has said.
But even members of Trump's national security cabinet have acknowledged the need for a central, unifying effort — one that experts say is missing. Senior officials have also admitted that the government has failed to take steps necessary to give the Russians second thoughts about intervening in American politics.
[...]
If any evidence was needed that the Russians haven't been deterred, a Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, said Thursday she was the target of an unsuccessful Russian hacking attempt. A Microsoft official says that company has also observed attempted Russian hacks against two other unnamed candidates.
[...]
Last week, House Republicans voted down a proposal by Democrats to increase election funding to states by $380 million.
NBC
!The White House eliminated the job of cyber security coordinator on the National Security Council.
And yet, you didn't. What's the game?Schumer said McConnell has committed that if negotiators fail to reach an immigration deal before the stopgap spending measure expires on Feb. 8 “the Senate will immediately proceed to consideration of legislation” to protect "Dreamers."
He said McConnell has promised that immigration debate “will be neutral and fair to all sides.”
“Now there is a real pathway to get a bill on the floor and through the Senate. It is a good solution, and I will vote for it,” Schumer said.
The Hill
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a resolution that would have secured pay for service members, noting that Trump has been trying to divide the country by invoking the military and putting the blame on Democrats if they were to go unpaid in the event of a shutdown.
She then said, “I don’t want one moment to pass with there being any uncertainty of any soldier anywhere in the world that they will be paid for the valiant work they do on behalf of our national security.”
[...]
McConnell quickly objected to McCaskill’s resolution — and instead left military pay up in the air along with the other casualties of his party’s decision to grind the federal government to a halt.
[...]
The move was slammed by the military advocacy group VoteVets, who noted that Republicans were willing to use the military “as a prop” to attack Democrats, but when it came time to take substantive action, they dropped the ball.
Will Fischer, the organization’s director of government relations, noted that “veterans make up 1/3 of the entire federal workforce,” and that the Republican shutdown meant they would be “hit twice” because they will end up “missing paychecks and having benefits denied or delayed.”
In a statement to Shareblue Media, Fischer explained, “It gets harder and harder to believe that Donald Trump and the Republicans want anything other than a shutdown, when they make military pay a key talking point, but then block Democrats’ bill to make sure our military is paid, during a shutdown.”
[...]
In 2013, President Barack Obama signed legislation that ensured military pay would continue, uninterrupted by that year’s shutdown — which was also engineered by Republicans in Congress).
[...]
Republicans have shown their cards on the military, and have come down firmly against them. Now, they don’t even want to protect their pay.
Shareblue
