McCarthy denies elbowing Burchett on purpose
lead image
Several Senate Republicans have made a public show of grousing about Tommy Tuberville’s blanket holds on military nominations. They’re still not ready to sideline “Coach.”
On Tuesday, not a single Republican sided with Democrats as the Senate Rules Committee advanced a resolution that would allow mass confirmations of those nominees for the rest of the Congress, an effort that would effectively end Tuberville’s holds. Instead, Republicans sought more time to end the quarrel internally — after eight months of failing to do so.
The GOP reluctance Tuesday illustrates the tough spot the former college football coach put his party in: Republicans are loath to side with Democrats in a fight that’s wedged them between the military and anti-abortion activists. And despite the unenviable position he’s put GOP senators in, they are still hesitant to throw the Alabamian overboard due to his friendly, back-slapping persona.
Republicans had the opportunity to stick it to Tuberville in committee and didn’t — though they’re likely to soon have another chance on the floor, where it really counts.
The Senate GOP is really hoping it doesn’t come to that.
Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) added that “nobody wants to go down that path.” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said “everybody’s torn on the thing” and that she’d rather see the GOP “keep proceeding to try to find a solution.” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) echoed that he’d “like a better option” than to support the temporary rules change.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been among the most outspoken GOP opponents of Tuberville’s tactics. But he opposed the measure in committee “at this particular moment,” though he thanked those who worked on it and reiterated the other ways for Republicans to register their disapproval of Pentagon policy.
With hundreds of military officer nominations in the backlog, though, Republicans acknowledge a breaking point is coming. Even Tuberville has signaled he’s looking for an off-ramp, as it becomes clear that he’s testing the bounds of affability with his colleagues — and their patience.
That Tuberville’s roadblock lasted so long speaks to both the outsize power that individual senators wield and the clubby and deferential culture of the Senate. Tuberville has won over fellow Republicans with his down-home charm, and they’ve responded by giving him tremendous latitude.
“He’s very well-liked. If he was an asshole, no one would want to help him,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “Accommodating kind of a guy. And that’s why all of us are trying to find a way that’s good for him and us.”
“His own colleagues have given him a lot of leeway,” added Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who called Tuberville a friend. “But he knows it’s running thin.”
Tuberville has put a hold on every single military officer promotion until the Pentagon changes its policy of reimbursing travel costs for service members seeking an abortion. That would force Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to use copious floor time for what are normally routine nominations.
Those tactics surprised colleagues who wouldn’t expect a neophyte to grasp the Senate’s arcane rules in such a manner. But Tuberville says his playbook wasn’t some coincidence.
“I went to a lot of meetings at [the Conservative Partnership Institute] and took a lot of classes,” Tuberville said. “The thing about up here, you need to know the rules. Like playing a football game.”
Still, there is no evidence that Tuberville’s tactics are going to change the Biden administration policy. Schumer has repeatedly said he’s prepared to put the resolution to confirm nominees en masse on the floor, which would squeeze Republicans between military leaders and anti-abortion activists.
For his part, Tuberville rejects that his position puts his colleagues in a bind.
“Democrats would love to pit it against military and abortion. It’s really not,” Tuberville said. “It’s about the rule of law. And I don’t think military people are gonna look and say ‘Oh, well they voted for abortion over this.’ That’s so far from the truth.”
He hasn’t convinced all of his colleagues, some of whom tried to force confirmation of 61 individual nominees on the floor earlier this month, leading to a nasty confrontation as Tuberville blocked every single one. Then the party had an unusual closed-door conference meeting about how to get Tuberville to end his holds. Both were evident attempts from Republicans to find some way out that didn’t involve siding with Democrats.
“We’re on the same team,” Tuberville said. “They’re just mad at me. I’ve had fans mad at me all my life.”
As a first-term senator from an uncompetitive state, he’s not the sort of lawmaker that generally would ascend to political notoriety so fast. But he’s made a name for himself by wreaking havoc, grasping onto Senate rules as his cudgel in a manner more intense than even Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) or former Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who also weaponized the Senate holds to try and get policy changes.
All along, his aw-shucks Coach persona has insulated him — perhaps only moderately — from a full-on blitz from his colleagues.
“He’s got a winsome personality, and I think people think he’s approaching this out of a deep sense of deep conviction,” Thune said. “Which I think gives him more latitude.”
“He’s a really nice guy,” echoed Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who disagrees with Tuberville’s tactics. “I imagine he’s used to people yelling from the stands telling him they’re doing something wrong. I don’t think [coaches are] terribly influenced by what people might yell from the seats.”
Still, Tuberville may have overestimated how far his geniality could get him. Graham said “Coach was under the assumption that they’d be able to work it out.” Manchin, too, argued that “this thing got away and got ahead of him.”
“Tommy needs a way to get back off of this,” the West Virginia Democrat added.
Tuberville seems to be in agreement, repeatedly stressing that he wants to get this over with and that it’s been “frustrating” that this has gone on for so long. For months, he’s criticized the Pentagon for being unwilling to negotiate with him directly as GOP leadership left him to fend on his own.
However, he says his search for a resolution is starting to yield progress, just as Democrats get closer to forcing Republicans’ hand on the floor. But he wouldn’t give any specifics.
“I’ve got something that’s really working well,” Tuberville said. He declined to share any details, however: “Better not. I don’t want to jinx it.”
Senate Democrats took a critical step towards ending Tommy Tuberville’s eight-month-long blockade on military nominations.
The Rules Committee on Tuesday advanced a resolution that would allow military nominations to be confirmed en masse — an effort that would spoil Tuberville’s hold on military promotions, which he’s vowed to continue until the Pentagon reverses an abortion policy. There are more than 400 military officer nominations in the backlog, meaning individual votes on those promotions would take hundreds of hours.
The resolution, led by Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), was passed out of committee by a 9-7 vote along party lines. Senators have debated the best way to move past Tuberville’s holds for months and Sinema especially tried to move Democrats away from the extreme step of unilaterally changing chamber rules. The measure requires 60 votes to pass, meaning at least nine Republicans would have to support it on the Senate floor.
But those prospects are iffy — because Senate Republicans certainly didn’t want it to come to this.
Earlier this month, a group of Republican senators tried to press Tuberville on the floor to pass the nominations individually. He objected to every nomination they brought forward. GOP senators also held an unusual special conference last week to hash out ideas on how to get Tuberville to relent on his blanket holds. That didn’t work either.
Still, Senate Republicans aren’t eager to circumvent the power of an individual senator. They also don’t want to side against anti-abortion advocates, even as the military community has grown increasingly hostile over the holds and criticized Tuberville for jeopardizing national security.
Senate Majority Leader Schumer said he will bring the resolution to the floor unless Senate Republicans quickly find some other way to force Tuberville’s hand.
Another George Santos campaign aide has pleaded guilty to federal charges.
Sam Miele — a campaign fundraiser who worked for the Santos campaign during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles — pleaded guilty to a federal wire fraud charge as part of a plea deal Tuesday.
Miele admitted to impersonating a senior aide to former Speaker Kevin McCarthy to solicit donations to Santos’ campaign in late 2021. But he did not plead guilty to identity theft as part of the plea agreement.
The guilty plea will increase the pressure on Santos, as a House Ethics Committee report is expected to be made public this week.
Santos is currently defending himself against 23 federal charges and denies any wrongdoing.
Miele’s sentencing is set for April 30, according to a spokesperson for the U.S. attorney.
Last month, a former treasurer for Santos’ campaign, Nancy Marks, pleaded guilty to a charge of fraud conspiracy and implicated Santos in a scheme to exaggerate his campaign finance reports with fake donations and a fake loan.
A former fundraiser for Rep. George Santos pleaded guilty Tuesday to a federal wire fraud charge, admitting he impersonated a high-ranking congressional aide while raising campaign cash for the embattled New York Republican.
Sam Miele was caught soliciting donations in late 2021 under the alias Dan Meyer, who was then chief of staff for Rep. Kevin McCarthy, when the former House speaker was the Republican minority leader, according to Santos. Federal authorities still have not confirmed that Meyer was the aide who Miele impersonated.
Miele, who had been indicted on four wire fraud charges and one count of aggravated identity theft, is scheduled to be sentenced April 30. He faces more than two years in prison, according to estimated sentencing guidelines, a spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office said.
He also acknowledged he committed access device fraud by charging credit cards without authorization to send money to the campaigns of Santos and other political candidates, and for his own personal use, prosecutors said. That fraud totaled about $100,000, they said.
“The defendant used fraud and deceit to steal more than $100,000 from his victims, funneling this money into the campaign committees of candidates for the House, and into his own pockets,” Breon Peace, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said in a statement. “Defrauding potential political contributors undermines our democracy, and we will vigorously prosecute such conduct.”
Miele’s lawyer, Kevin Marino, did not immediately return phone and email messages Tuesday. Marino previously said Miele looked forward “to being exonerated at trial.”
Miele also agreed to pay about $109,000 in restitution, to forfeit another $69,000 and to make a $470,000 payment to a campaign contributor, prosecutors said.
Miele is the second campaign aide to Santos who took a plea deal in a federal probe. Last month, the ex-treasurer for Santos, Nancy Marks, pleaded guilty to a fraud conspiracy charge and implicated Santos in a scheme to embellish his campaign finance reports with a fake loan and fake donors.
Santos himself is facing a 23-count federal indictment that alleges he stole the identities of campaign donors and then used their credit cards to make tens of thousands of dollars in unauthorized charges. Federal prosecutors say Santos wired some of the money to his personal bank account and used the rest to pad his campaign coffers.
Santos, who represents parts of Queens and Long Island, is also accused of falsely reporting to the Federal Elections Commission that he had loaned his campaign $500,000 when he actually hadn’t given anything and had less than $8,000 in the bank. The fake loan was an attempt to convince Republican Party officials that he was a serious candidate, worth their financial support, the indictment says.
Santos has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him and has vowed to clear his name. Marks’ lawyer has said Marks would be willing to testify against Santos, which could deliver a severe blow to the congressman. It wasn’t immediately clear if Miele agreed to testify against Santos.
Earlier this month, Santos survived a vote to expel him from the House. Most Republicans and 31 Democrats opposed the measure while both his criminal case and a House Ethics Committee investigation proceed.
In an interview with The Associated Press in August, Santos said he promptly fired Miele in late 2021 after being informed that Miele had impersonated Meyer.
Santos also recounted what he believed was an attempt by Miele last summer to try to rejoin Santos’ campaign. Santos said his campaign received a lunch invitation from a purported deep-pocketed donor named Reyem Nad — which is Dan Meyer spelled backward.
“It’s like he’s obsessive and compulsive on that name,” Santos said. “You and I, if we got caught doing something stupid like that, the last thing we’d do is go anywhere near that name.”
Santos, who gained notoriety for fabricating major parts of his life story during his run for office, said he discovered Miele had sent the invitation. Santos did not go to the lunch but sent Marks, who told Miele he was not getting his job back, according to a Santos spokesperson.
Prosecutors said Miele’s impersonation included setting up a dummy email address resembling Meyer’s name as he reached out to more than a dozen donors between August and December of 2021.
They’re ‘the problem:’ Rep. Smith says GOP politics is hindering Ukraine aid
lead image
The House Intelligence Committee is quietly circulating details about how to reform a controversial surveillance program — and quickly running into backlash from privacy hawks.
The talking points from the panel — a copy of which were obtained by POLITICO — provide previously unreported details on what a forthcoming bill to reauthorize and reform Section 702 will look like. The authority, which expires at the end of the year, is meant to target non-U.S. residents abroad but has come under fire because of its ability to sweep in Americans’ communications.
In a notable shift for Intelligence Committee members, who are generally more closely aligned with the community they oversee, the panel will require a warrant for a subset of searches for Americans’ information swept in under 702. The panel’s bill would require a warrant for “evidence of a crime” searches, which are not related to foreign intelligence. The administration has signaled privately and publicly for months that it is opposed to any warrant requirement, arguing that it would undermine the effectiveness of the program.
The Intelligence Committee’s proposal isn’t yet finalized. But the talking point details are far narrower than those in a bipartisan, bicameral bill privacy hawks rolled out last week that would require a warrant for any U.S. person searches. The scope of a warrant requirement is expected to be the most contentious issue in the upcoming debate, and Republicans are predicting it will need to be hashed out on the House floor.
Privacy advocates quickly warned that limiting the warrant requirement to just “evidence of a crime” searches would exempt the bulk of searches for Americans’ information outside of the new requirement.
“The vast majority of 702 abuses we have seen were ostensibly for foreign intelligence purposes, which means not only does HPSCI’s proposed bill fail to establish meaningful new privacy protections for Americans, it mostly fails to even address the ongoing and already documented misuse of this powerful spying law,” said James Czerniawski, a senior policy analyst for Americans for Prosperity.
In addition to the warrant requirement, the forthcoming House Intel bill would require “independent audits” of all FBI queries for Americans’ information. The document, however, doesn’t provide details on who would complete the audit, ties FBI compensation to query compliance and dramatically reduces the number of FBI personnel who are able to search 702-collected data for Americans’ information.
The bill also includes broader reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the larger surveillance law 702 is housed under, and an associated surveillance court.
But privacy advocates are warning that it could also expand 702. The bill, according to the circulated talking points, would allow foreigners applying for visas, immigration or asylum to be searched under 702. That comes after the intelligence community disclosed earlier this year that the National Security Agency has been using the authority for vetting foreigners who are being processed for travel to the United States or benefits under immigration laws.
It would also boost the intelligence community’s ability to use the authority to track fentanyl and drug cartels. An executive branch advisory board recommend earlier this year specifically creating a counternarcotics certification to “allow the intelligence community to collect more intelligence information about fentanyl threats under Section 702 and to become more effective in supporting the government in its fight against fentanyl.”
“This is a shameful proposal that does more to expand warrantless surveillance than rein it in,” said Sean Vitka, policy director at Demand Progress, accusing the committee of being “more interested in hiding the ball from the rest of Congress than meaningfully protecting Americans’ privacy.”
The bill leaves out broader reforms pushed for by privacy advocates on and off Capitol Hill, previewing another point of contention in the end-of-year debate.
It doesn’t, for example, include legislation that would prevent data brokers from selling consumer data to federal law enforcement. It also doesn’t move a Reagan-era executive order on surveillance under the guardrails of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
A bipartisan bill unveiled last week includes both of those provisions. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who co-sponsored that bill, told POLITICO he expects both to also be incorporated into a forthcoming Judiciary Committee bill.
Biggs is part of a joint House Intelligence and Judiciary committee working group that was tasked with trying to come up with a path forward on the surveillance authority.
The two panels are expected to now move forward with their own bills — though there will be areas of overlap for FBI and FISA court reforms.
“The one thing that everybody agrees on is not only do you have to take care of 702, you have to take care of the broader stuff,” Biggs said.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said both he and the White House are on board Speaker Mike Johnson’s bill to avoid a government shutdown.
“The proposal before the House does two things Democrats pushed for,” Schumer told reporters. “We all want to avoid a shutdown. I talked to the White House and both of us agree, the White House and myself, that if this can avoid a shutdown it’ll be a good thing.”
The New York Democrat said he had negotiated some of the particulars of the stopgap spending package in talks with Johnson, including making sure that there were no cuts in the bill and that it would put defense funding in the latter of two set spending deadlines.
Still, Schumer called the two-tiered deadline — one in mid-January and the other in early February — “goofy” and made clear it’s not how he would have written a government funding patch.