Mediaboss Marketing

Andrew Puzder, the fast-food executive whom President Trump nominated to be labor secretary, emerged Monday as Democrats last, best hope of defeating one of Trumps Cabinet choices as four key Republicans are on the fence about his nomination.

The unenthusiastic reception from the Republican lawmakers comes after weeks of intense criticism from Democrats and liberal groups over workplace violations at Puzders restaurants Hardees and Carls Jr., sexually suggestive ads featuring bikini-clad models eating burgers, and his opposition to wage regulations. Puzder has also been accused of domestic abuse an accusation that was later recanted and has acknowledged hiring an undocumented worker for his home.

Puzder, 66, has faced the most early skepticism of any nominee besides Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who won confirmation. The Republican senators who were noncommittal about Puzders nomination on Monday Susan Collins (Maine), Johnny Isakson (Ga.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Tim Scott (S.C.) sit on the committee that will hold his confirmation hearing Thursday. If they oppose him, his nomination is all but certainly dead.

Even if Puzder makes it out of committee, his final status may come down to a tiebreaker vote from Vice President Mike Pence similar to what happened last week for Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. It is the latest reminder of the paradox of Trumps Cabinet nominees they have struggled for confirmation more than the nominees of any other administration in recent history, but criticism that might have in the past doomed a candidates chances may no longer prove decisive.

Some Republicans say they are willing to overlook issues related to undocumented workers or unpaid taxes for the opportunity to have a business-minded leader in the Labor Department. But the racy ads and domestic violence allegations may test some conservatives and womens groups.

Collins said Monday that she has reviewed footage of an Oprah Winfrey Show interview with Puzders ex-wife, Lisa Fierstein, who once appeared in disguise on the program to discuss the multiple times, she says, that Puzder physically assaulted her in the 1980s. Fierstein retracted the allegations, and he has always denied that he abused her.

Im going to wait until the issues that have arisen are fully explored at his hearing, Collins told reporters. I am reviewing the other information that has come to light, and Im sure all of this will be explored thoroughly, she added, without specifying what information is of concern.

Collinss revelation that senators have seen footage of Fiersteins interview with Winfrey is notable, because Democrats and other organizations have been desperately seeking the footage for weeks in hopes of airing it and derailing Puzders nomination.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), who chairs the health committee, told reporters Monday that he worked with Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), the committees top Democrat, to arrange for senators to view a tape of the episode. Alexander said he has not seen the segment himself but he does plan to vote to approve Puzders nomination.

His former wife has said it was all not true, Alexander said. She has reiterated that in a heartfelt letter to members of the committee and has been willing to talk to members of the committee, so I dont think thats an issue.

Puzders personal wealth has also earned scrutiny that has delayed his nomination for several weeks. Federal disclosure forms delivered to the Senate last week show that most of his wealth is tied to CKE Restaurants and that he plans to divest those holdings within six months if he is confirmed to lead the Labor Department.

The White House is standing by Puzder, declaring last week that he would be confirmed. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters that he is enthusiastically supporting the nominee.

Some business groups are also joining top Republicans in fighting the criticism by urging senators to back the nomination. A coalition of trade groups, including the International Franchise Association, the National Restaurant Association and the National Retail Federation, sent a letter to senators Monday praising Puzders business experience and policy acumen. Statewide restaurant associations in Maine and Alaska sent separate letters to Collins and Murkowski asking for their support.

If confirmed, Puzder would be the first labor secretary since the Reagan era to come to the role without any public-service experience.

Puzder got his start in the fast-food industry working as a personal attorney for Carl Karcher, the founder of the Carls Jr. restaurant chain. He helped Karcher avoid bankruptcy and in 1997 became executive vice president and general counsel for CKE. He then became president and chief executive of CKE in 2000, and he currently oversees 75,000 workers in 3,750 locations.

Puzder has spent much of his career promoting the idea that businesses thrive better when the government doesnt interfere. In interviews, speeches and op-eds, he has long argued that rules substantially increasing the minimum wage or expanding the number of people who qualify for overtime pay, for example, could drive up the cost of labor and decrease the number of jobs.

In an opinion piece for Forbes, he said that the Obama administrations overtime rule would force employers to cut costs elsewhere and limit some workers schedules. During a Business Insider interview last year, Puzder said that because of rising labor costs, he would consider investing in machines to replace some workers, because they never take a vacation, they never show up late, theres never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.

Labor groups and other critics say they are concerned about Puzders pure capitalist mind-set, noting that if confirmed, he may end up tilting the scales in favor of corporations.

But George Thompson, a spokesman for Puzder, said that if confirmed, Puzder would recuse himself from any business related to CKE and would remain impartial when it comes to rulemaking and enforcement.

Opponents also cite stories from employees at Hardees and Carls Jr. who allege they have had to work through breaks, not been paid for sick leave or been harassed on the job.

Hes going to be essentially responsible for enforcing the same laws that hes been breaking for years, said Kendall Fells, national organizing director of the Fight for $15, a group advocating for a higher minimum wage that organized lunchtime protests Monday at CKE offices in St. Louis and Anaheim, Calif., as well as restaurant locations throughout the country.

Womens groups, such as the National Womens Law Center, and labor advocates question whether he will defend female workers, citing what they say are demeaning ads that feature models eating burgers in skimpy outfits. Puzder, however, has defended the campaign as American and characterized it as a strategy for luring young, hungry guys.

On Tuesday, the Campaign for Accountability, a nonprofit watchdog, will head to a Missouri state court for a status update on its efforts to unseal Puzders divorce records, arguing that the domestic violence allegations raise serious concerns about his fitness to be labor secretary.

Yet some businesses and Republicans say they look forward to having someone in the Labor Department who understands that regulations can force businesses to make tough calls.

We dont want our workers to feel like theyre not being paid a fair wage, but we want people to understand the ramifications of it, said Peter Riggs, president of Pita Pit USA, a quick-service sandwich chain with about 600 locations in the United States and Canada. He understands what were going through.

Puzders fate will ultimately depend on whether his opponents can sway more than two Senate Republicans to vote against him.

The Republicans hesitating to publicly support him said they will make up their minds after the hearing.

No real story here, said a spokeswoman for Scott, noting that the senator hasnt been commenting on nominees until their confirmation hearing, with the exception of fellow South Carolina Republicans Nikki Haley, nominated to serve as United Nations ambassador, and Rep. Mick Mulvaney, nominated to lead the Office of Management and Budget.

Consistent with his policy on other nominees, Senator Isakson will make a final decision after Mr. Puzders confirmation hearing on Thursday, a spokeswoman said via email.

Murkowski said she will be working to learn more about Mr. Puzder leading up to and during the upcoming hearing, as well as through additional one-on-one conversations with him, a spokeswoman said.

Kelsey Snell contributed to this report.

Original post:
Four key Republicans could vote against Puzder for labor secretary - Washington Post

Congressional Republicans have developed a foolproof two-step plan to deal with President Trump in the White House. Step one: Have their cake. Step two: Eat it too.

Here's how Jonathan Martin and Matt Flegenheimer described that strategy in the New York Times on Monday:

After three weeks in the White House, Mr. Trump has made clear that he is going to continue promulgating conspiracy theories, flinging personal insults and saying things that are plainly untrue. And the Republican-controlled House and Senate seem to have made a collective decision: They will accommodate not confront his conduct as long as he signs their long-stalled conservative proposals on taxes, regulations and health care into law.

That reflects something similar to what Speaker Paul Ryan told PBS's Judy Woodruff in an interview earlier this month. "I reject the premise of this notion that the head of the legislative branch of government should just reject the duly elected head of the executive branch of government," said Ryan. "That makes no sense to me."

Down this road lies real danger for Republicans. Here's why.

At the core of this strategy is the idea that the average voter will differentiate between Trump and congressional Republicans. Or, even more unlikely, that people will separate Trump's words from their actions.

If the last two midterm elections 2010 and 2014 have taught us anything, it's that the president's party goes as the president goes. In 2010, Democrats lost 63 House seats; four years later they lost 23. In each of those elections, Democratic House members did everything they could to run from Obama and some of his less popular policies like the Affordable Care Act.

Now consider that Trump is, at least according to early polling, one of the most divisive and unpopular presidents in modern history. And that the Democratic base has been activated by the early days of the Trump presidency.

Given that, it's very hard to imagine that (a) the election will be anything but a referendum on Trump's first two years in office and (b) voters will separate their feelings about Trump from their feelings about congressional Republicans.

Imagine it's the fall of 2018. An endangered Republican say, California's Darrell Issa goes on TV with ads touting the accomplishments of the Republican Congress, making no mention of Trump. His Democratic opponent responds with ads highlighting all of the various controversial things Trump has said in the first two years of his presidency.

The idea that voters would distinguish between Issa's accomplishments as part of a Republican-led Congress and their view of Trump is nonsensical. The average voter will make no such distinction. If Trump is popular or not that unpopular then the likes of Issa can win. If Trump is unpopular, Issa likely loses.

This is a strategy built of necessity for congressional Republicans. Confronted with the prospect of President Trump, they had only two options: Turn against him each time he says something outlandish/untrue or try to ignore most of what he says and stay focused on the policies he can help get enacted.

They chose the latter. Which keeps them from being blasted day in and day out by the head of their party, who is also sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. What it doesn't do no matter what they think today is allow them to effectively distance themselves or run away from Trump at the ballot box in November 2018.

The 2018 election will be a referendum on Trump. Period. Congressional Republicans just have to hope what he accomplishes outweighs what he says in voters' minds. It's a very risky gamble.

View post:
Congressional Republicans have finally come up with a strategy to deal with Trump. It won't work. - Washington Post

Forbes

Do Republicans Have A Death Wish? Forbes Just when you thought things couldn't possibly get better for the Republican party, a startling thought is cropping up on Capitol Hill and on K Street. It's being reinforced by the ugly reception Republicans are getting at town hall meetings around the ... Robert Reich: The Real Reason Republicans Want to Repeal ObamacareAlterNet Are Republicans in Congress About to Betray Pro-Lifers While Fixing Obamacare?Townhall During Visits to Districts, Austin's Republican Congressmen Are Forgoing Town HallsKUT Care2.com all 35 news articles »

View original post here:
Do Republicans Have A Death Wish? - Forbes

Update: At least one Republican is now speaking out against Trump's handling of sensitive information -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Republicans got religion on information security during the 2016 campaign. But will they apply the same scrutiny to President Trump as they did to candidate Hillary Clinton and her email server?

As The Post's Philip Bump notes, there are now several examples of Trump playing fast-and-loose with potentially sensitive information the latest being the open-air situation room he conducted with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at a Mar-a-Lago on Saturday night, which David Fahrenthold details here. Trump has also left a key to classified information out in a secured bag as people without the proper security clearance were in the Oval Office. And then there's the viewing of documents at Mar-a-Lago usingcellphone flashlights, which Bump notes can be used like portable television satellite trucks when they are compromised.

The Post's David A. Fahrenthold looks at how President Trump's approach to national security compares with his campaign rhetoric. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

It's not clear whether any of it actually provided sensitive or classified information to people who shouldn't have seen or heard it, but there does seem to be a pretty casual attitude toward this stuff and at least a case to be made that this behavior is negligent. And that's pretty much exactly what Republicans warned against with Clinton.

At the time, Republicans highlighted FBI Director James B. Comey's statement that Clinton's handling of sensitive information was extremely careless.Though Comey recommended against criminal charges, he said individuals who did what she did would often be subject to security or administrative sanctions.

Republicans pounced, with some arguing that Clinton shouldn't be provided the intelligence briefings usually given to presidential nominees.

Leading that charge was House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), who wrote in The Washington Post in July:

The consequences for the safety of our nation are grave. Clintons actions may have allowed our enemies to access intelligence vital to our national security. The FBI found that hostile actors could very well have gained access to classified information sent and received by Clinton, her staff and their contacts.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said it's impossible to see how Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. can believe Clinton or any of her implicated staffers should ever again be provided access to classified information.

The most outspoken critics of Clinton included Trump's now-CIA director, Mike Pompeo, who was then a congressman from Kansas. We can't run the risk of more intelligence that puts Americans at risk of being exposed, Pompeo said on his Facebook page. (The post and a tweet to that effecthave been deleted by Pompeo, though it's not clear when.)

Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) also focused on Clinton's reckless behavior. It is already outrageous that our secretary of state was extremely careless with classified information during her service and recklessly put our national security at risk, he said. It is equally shameful and dangerous that this individual is now seeking to occupy the world's most powerful office, the American presidency.

No two situations are completely analogous. We know, for instance, that classified information did cross Clinton's server. It's not so clear that classified information was discussed out in the open at Mar-a-Lago or that classified documents were illuminated by those cellphone flashlights.

Republicans would also point out that Clinton took great pains to set up her email server in a certain way. Ryan said at the time that her actions do not seem careless at all. In fact, Clintons actions seem quite careful careful to place her own interests before our national security. There is no such evidence of deliberateness when it comes to what Trump's doing.

And then there's the matter of Trump being the president. You can't really call for a president to be deprived of his intelligence briefings. Ryan said in his op-ed thatClinton should be deprived of the briefings absent the voting publics explicit permission in November. Trump was given that explicit permission Nov. 8.

But there is still no evidence that Clinton's email server ever resulted in classified documents falling into the wrong hands. It was always an argument based upon negligence and the possibility of what might have happened.

Which seems to be at least somewhat applicable to what we've seen in recent days with Trump.

Read the original here:
Republicans railed against Clinton's 'extremely careless' behavior. Now they've got a Trump problem. - Washington Post

Republicans in Congress were divided Monday about whether to continue backing President Trumps embattled national security adviser, Michael Flynn, as the controversy around him grows.

At least one Republican House member Colorados Mike Coffman called for Flynn to resign if it is proven that the retired army general intentionally misled the president.

Coffman, a retired Marine officer who is targeted by Democrats in his House releection races, said it was Flynns duty to be fully transparent and forthright in his actionsanything less is unacceptable.

He added: If in fact he purposely misled the President, he should step down immediately.

The Republican lawmakers statement came as concerns on Capitol Hill mount over whether Flynn discussed sanctions on Russia in a call with that countrys ambassador to the United States before Trump was sworn-in as president. The Post reported Monday night that the acting attorney general warned the Trump White House that Flynn could be susceptible to blackmail from the Russians because he had misled senior administration officials about his communications with the Russian ambassador.

The White House sent conflicting signalson how it was handling the situation, with top aide Kellyanne Conway signaling earlier in the day that Flynn enjoys Trumps full confidence and spokesman Sean Spicer later indicating the president was evaluating the situation.

At least one top Republican House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) dismissed accusations against Flynn as baseless, calling him one of the best intelligence officers of his generation.

Hes being attacked maliciously by the press, which is not uncommon in this town, Nunes said in an interview on the Fox News show Your World with Neil Cavuto. I think what General Flynn is realizing is that being a general is much different than being in politics and hes just got to work his way through it.

Nunes and Trump ally Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.) were among a small group of lawmakers to offer a full-throated defense of Flynns actions as the controversy swirled on Monday. Collins told reporters that Flynn should absolutely stay on in his current position and downplayed the seriousness of the accusations against him.

I think some people are trying to blow this up, you know, make a mountain out of a mole hill, Collins said. I dont know what was said or not but theres nothing wrong with the national security adviser-elect, so to speak, speaking with world leaders.

The vast majority of Republicans on Capitol Hill remained silent about the burgeoning controversy, perhaps unsure about where the president and his administration stood.The Washington Post reported that Flynn discussed sanctions against Russia with that countrys ambassador to the United States in the month before Trump was installed as president.

Neither House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) nor Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) weighed in on the issue. But some key Republicans with seats on intelligence and defense-related panels did.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), one of the top Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters that Flynns contact with the Russian ambassador will be a part of the ongoing bipartisan investigation into alleged Russian interference into the 2016 election.

This and anything else that involves the Russians, Rubio said. Were going to go wherever the truth leads us.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he personally has confidence in Flynn. But the senator, often a Trump critic, said he does not have enough information to make a judgment about how Flynn handled his conversations with Russia.

I dont know enough about this particular situation to make a comment, McCain said.

Some said Trumps was the only opinion that mattered.

Whats important is if the president has confidence in the National Security Adviser, said Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.).

Burrs committee is leading the Senate probe into Russian activities in 2016, including an intelligence community assessment that the country was attempting to tilt the election to Trump.

[Congressional investigations into Russia start with no end in sight]

In a telephone interview with The Post on Monday, Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) declined to say whether Flynn should step down, saying he does not know what transpired beyond what he has seen in media reports.

Thats for the administration to sort out if he was untruthful, Dent said. I simply dont know and I cant speak to what he said.

The centrist Republican lawmaker said he was more worried about the contours of Trumps emerging Russia policy, which he said appears too conciliatory.

Im less concerned about Michael Flynn having conversations with the Russian ambassador than the substance of the Russian policy, Dent said.

Flynns troubles are complicated by the fact that Vice President Pence made public statements supporting Flynns earlier claim that he did not speak with the Russian envoy.

Hes speaking to Vice President Pence relative to the conversation the Vice President had with Gen. Flynn and also speaking to various other people about what he considers the single most important subject there is: our national security, Spicer said.

Flynn has been under fire since The Washington Post report revealed that he discussed sanctions with Sergey Kislyak, Russias ambassador to the United States, shortly before Trumps inauguration. Flynn denied that he discussed sanctions with Kislyak both publicly and in private conversations with senior White House aides.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) talked about the issues during a news conference with reporters in his home state.

Graham on Monday said the situation has created an issue that Flynn must address with Trump.

He has a problem that he needs to fix with this president, Graham told reporters. [The national security adviser] needs to be somebody that the president trusts and it needs to be someone that America trusts.

Graham said that he personally likes and respects Flynn but that the issue needs to be resolved quickly.

If that conversation was misrepresented by Gen. Flynn, that needs to be corrected, Graham said. Im going to leave it up to the president whether or not he believes Gen. Flynn can still serve him capably.

For their part, Democrats have been quick to call for Flynn to either be fired or lose his security clearance. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called Monday for Flynn to be let go.

We have a National Security Advisor who cannot be trusted not to put Putin before America, Pelosi said in a statement. National security demands that General Flynn be fired immediately.

Pelosi previously called for Flynn to lose his security clearance, a move endorsed by Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

I think thats an appropriate action, Cummings said in an interview with ABCs This Week.

Cummings said there are many unanswered questions about Flynns conversations with Kislyak and what, if any, security issues those conversations have created.

Did the president instruct General Flynn to talk to the ambassador? Cummings asked. And did he know about it? If he knew about this conversation, when did he know it? That, to me, that is the key question. And we need to find out what that answer is.

Sean Sullivan contributed to this report.

Visit link:
Congressional Republicans divided on whether to support Flynn - Washington Post