Donald Trump’s flailing domestic agenda received a spark of life on Wednesday, with top lawmakers in both parties expressing new hope that the president’s North American trade pact could be ratified by Congress this year.

Key officials negotiating the deal with Mexico and Canada are working both sides of the Capitol in an effort to ease concerns not only over the provisions of the pact but Trump’s ongoing tariff war with Mexico, Canada, Europe and China.

Story Continued Below

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team were upbeat about the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement as they left a meeting with Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s top trade official, saying he finally seemed to take heed of their demands to modify the trade deal after weeks of the two sides mostly talking past each other.

And Senate Republicans, who have been critical of Trump’s decision to slap tariffs on U.S. allies, were relieved at signs that the administration appears to be backing off that offensive as part of an end-game agreement with Canada and Mexico, as well as Congress.

“I’m pretty optimistic about it,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). “Everybody wants to do it, I saw Mrs. Pelosi say that she wanted labor reforms done by the Mexicans and they proceeded to do the labor reforms. And I think there’s just a broad bipartisan acknowledgment that this is in Americans’ best interest and we ought to get it done.”

Rep. Scott Peters, a pro-trade Democrat from California, said Pelosi would put the trade deal on the floor only when she feels comfortable, but added, “I certainly think when she does that, we’ll have the votes.”

Whether Pelosi is ultimately willing to give Trump a huge bipartisan accomplishment to run on in 2020 is unclear, and her caucus’ left flank is almost certain to oppose the trade deal on its merits.

But the potential shift in attitudes on the Hill comes at a critical moment for Trump, who has faced sharp criticism from Republicans and Democrats over his aggressively protectionist trade agenda. Both parties have major leverage over his trade deal, his top legislative priority.

Pelosi is fighting to ensure that the agreement’s labor and environmental protections are strongly enforceable. And Senate Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) says he won’t move the USMCA trade deal as long as tariffs remain on U.S. allies, but he and other Republicans say the administration is finally softening.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin confirmed on Wednesday that U.S. officials are “close to an understanding with Mexico and Canada,” on the tariffs, which have been in place for nearly a year. “It is a priority of ours.”

Still, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle distanced themselves from Trump’s decision to escalate his trade war with China over the past week. Members also warned that the move could hurt the chances of getting the trade agreement with Mexico and Canada — which already faces an uphill battle — through a divided Congress.

And the new North American trade agreement is a key signal to how the rest of Trump’s first term will go: If he can’t pass that, there’s little hope of getting an immigration or infrastructure deal off the ground.

Yet after weeks of beleaguered whip counts and frustrated lawmakers, the uptick in optimism on Capitol Hill was real on Wednesday.

“There are issues to be sorted out,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), a trade agreement skeptic, after leaving the Lighthizer meeting. “We believe we can get there, but we’re not there yet.”

The U.S. trade chief is doing all he can to court the entire party, meeting with the Congressional Progressive Caucus last week.

Pelosi has made clear that she will not hold a vote until the Trump administration makes changes surrounding enforcement of the replacement deal for NAFTA. Some Democrats have also expressed concern about the deal’s labor and environmental standards, as well as provisions they say would lock in high prescription drug prices, issues they all reiterated to Lighthizer on Wednesday.

Democrats have been more receptive to the deal in recent weeks after Mexico passed a landmark labor reform law required under the pact. But Pelosi has indicated she still needs to see how Mexico implements the reforms.

Pelosi has also specified that she wants to see changes in the underlying text of the agreement — something that Lighthizer as well as Mexican and Canadian officials have repeatedly rejected.

But House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) indicated that Lighthizer was not so steadfast against making changes to the text in the meeting this week.

“He didn’t speak one way or the other about the mechanics of reopening the text, but he understood the concerns … and that absent resolution, it would be very difficult to get to yes on the agreement,” Jeffries told POLITICO.

The Trump administration has been intensifying pressure in recent weeks to get the USMCA ratified, with Vice President Mike Pence traveling across the country to showcase the deal.

Pence told Senate Republicans that he has spoken to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau about moving the agreement through Congress, and Canadian officials are in active talks with the Trump administration on a breakthrough on the tariffs.

Though it’s only May 2019, advocates of the deal know they need to move quickly. As the Democratic presidential campaign ramps up, the possibility of passing new major legislation decreases significantly. Republicans and pro-trade Democrats say that if the legislation can’t pass before the chamber breaks for August, it may stall permanently.

“The window was before the August recess, in part because of politics that already exist. The window hasn’t expanded. Congress can act, but it’s already difficult. It becomes more difficult in time,” said Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.).

“Once it goes beyond October, forget about it,” added Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.).

Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland was also on the Hill on Wednesday to convey the message to lawmakers that the window is closing for Canada to ratify the new pact this year. The Canadian Parliament adjourns in mid-June and will not be back for a normal session until 2020. Ratification efforts could be further complicated next year if the trade deal becomes the subject of controversy in the fall Canadian election.

And if a vote were held in the Senate today, there’s essentially no way the trade agreement would pass given GOP outrage over the tariffs on allies. Though the trade deal can’t be filibustered, Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said he will need Democratic votes to get it across the finish line. The White House, however, has done little to court Senate Democrats, according to Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).

Instead, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) are coordinating with House Democrats on enforcement demands to firm up the Democratic whip count. Republicans privately say Pelosi and Senate Democrats will push for more legislative sweeteners, including perhaps a minimum wage increase.

“I could see where Democrats would kind of dig in and want a fight and not give Trump an accomplishment, but I think this is something everybody kind of needs to get done,” said Thune. “And if it doesn’t get done, the alternatives aren’t very good.”

Some Republicans had urged the White House to rush the deal through Congress while the GOP still had the House last winter. The administration didn’t listen, waiting for Pelosi to assume her post as speaker — which some in the GOP are now lamenting.

“We were right, and they were wrong,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “Because I don’t know if we’re going to get that thing approved.”

Unpopular Opinion: there is such a thing as too many eggs.

— Vita Coco (@VitaCoco) May 15, 2019

Fuck that. Save that nasty shit for someone else. I would rather drink your social media persons piss than coconut water.

— Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) May 15, 2019

And although coconut water is disgusting this is extremely funny.

— Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) May 15, 2019

u deserve it Tony I am proud to have worked with them !!!!

— christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) May 15, 2019

Mitch McConnell may have been premature in declaring “case closed” on the Mueller investigation, but Senate Republicans are now ready to bang down the gavel and truly move on from the Russia investigations.

With Donald Trump Jr. agreeing to an interview with the Senate Intelligence Committee after a brief but explosive fight over Chairman Richard Burr’s subpoena, Republicans see the committee’s two-year bipartisan investigation into Russian interference winding down.



“We’re near the end,” Burr (R-N.C.) said in a brief interview. “The first iteration of the report is out for declassification right now. I can’t tell you how long that takes. I’m hopeful we’ll push that out in a couple weeks.”

Story Continued Below

Those words are sure to come as a relief to Senate Republicans.

“It should be the end of it. It better be the end of it,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). A conclusion after the Trump Jr. subpoena battle is “appropriate, it’s clean. It maybe even restores some confidence in the process.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s probe has at times created an awkward dynamic between the GOP and the White House, and Republicans are eager to see it come to a close. That would leave House Democrats as the only remaining investigators — which would help Republicans paint the continued scrutiny as a partisan exercise meant to harm Trump.

“I would expect that a lot of the Democrats wish that [Trump Jr.] hadn’t come because they’d rather keep the narrative alive. It’s going to end this narrative. Done,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who is up for re-election in 2020 and faces a conservative primary challenger. Tillis backed Burr’s work as chairman but said he disagreed with the subpoena.

“We need to get over it,” Tillis said. “So this produces closure on this side and we can just watch the circus on the other side of the Hill.”

Members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have emphasized that their investigation into Russian interference is about oversight and vastly different than special counsel Robert Mueller’s deep dive into potential criminal conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin along with obstruction of justice by the president.

The Senate investigation, led by Burr and Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) has remained largely bipartisan, a stark contrast to the one from the House Intelligence panel previously led by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) or House Democrats’ new wave of probes.

Yet over the past week the tension between Burr and many of his GOP colleagues became the main story. Shortly after McConnell’s “case closed” speech on the Senate floor, the Trump Jr. subpoena became public and created a massive GOP backlash toward Burr. But the chairman stood firm, grinning while he roamed the Senate and refusing to comment on the criticism.

Now that the GOP infighting has passed and Trump Jr. has agreed to come back for a final round of closed-door questioning, senators say the investigation is likely almost over with findings set to be unveiled in a bipartisan manner.

“The Senate Intel Committee worked very hard to keep this as non-partisan as possible” said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a former Intelligence Committee member. “That’s a positive thing if they can get all the way to the end.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley added he doesn’t think “there’s any doubt you’re at the end.” Earlier this week, when it was unclear whether Trump Jr. would comply with the subpoena, some were preparing for the possibility that the Senate would have to vote on enforcing compliance — putting Republicans in the tough position of either siding with Trump or their Senate colleague. Grassley said that the Senate is “better off” not having to do that.

Yet not everyone is satisfied. Sen. Rand Paul is frustrated that Burr hasn’t already closed shop.

“I don’t think it’s wise of the committee nor Republicans to keep beating a dead horse,” said the Kentucky Republican.



Democrats said Wednesday that Trump Jr.’s appearance before the panel was a positive development but they were quick to dismiss Republicans calls to move on.

“The Republicans declared it was over before it even started so I don’t even pay any attention to that, they’re just trying to spin it in the same way that [Attorney General William Barr] tried to spin the Mueller report,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who added that there are still outstanding law enforcement investigations that are nonpartisan.

Although the Senate is disengaging, the House’s battle with Trump over the Mueller report and its explosive evidence of obstruction of justice is only beginning.

House Democrats have launched a series of investigations into the administration and have called on the Justice Department to provide the unredacted version of the report. They’re demanding that Mueller testify and the House Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed former White House counsel Don McGahn, a key witness in the Mueller probe.

Trump, meanwhile, is rejecting all of Democrats’ oversight requests. The White House sent a letter Wednesday to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) accusing him of harassing the president in response to the committee’s wide-ranging probe on corruption and potential obstruction of justice.

The move is unlikely to halt Nadler’s inquiries.

“They say the Justice Department can’t hold him accountable since a sitting president cannot be indicted and now they’re saying that Congress cannot hold a president accountable,” Nadler said in response. “The American people ought to be astonished by a claim by the White House that the president cannot be held accountable, that he’s above the law, that he is in fact a dictator.”

Republicans are more than happy to change the subject, not wanting to get tied in any way to the probes into Trump. That’s especially true for those who are up for re-election and are eager to cultivate Trump’s supporters.

If the Senate Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan investigation is indeed ending, Republicans insist that remaining congressional investigations into Trump — all in the House — will be viewed as pure politics.

“Now the Mueller report is concluded, there’s not much else for us to do other than I think sort of wrap it up,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “I understand the political temptation for our Democratic friends is they’re never going to want this to end. But I don’t think there’s much justification for continuing on much longer.”

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order laying the groundwork to block Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the U.S., a move aimed at neutralizing Beijing’s ability to compromise next-generation wireless networks and U.S. computer systems.

The order prohibits the purchase or use of any communications technology produced by entities controlled by “a foreign adversary” and likely to create an “undue risk of sabotage” of U.S. communications systems or “catastrophic effects” to U.S. infrastructure.

Story Continued Below

The Commerce Department has 150 days to produce rules that can identify “particular countries or persons” as foreign adversaries. Those rules are almost certain to name China, Huawei, or both.

“Foreign adversaries are increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in information and communications technology and services,” Trump said in his executive order, “in order to commit malicious cyber-enabled actions, including economic and industrial espionage against the United States and its people.”

The order is sure to raise Beijing’s ire at a time when the world’s two largest economies are struggling to resolve a market-shaking trade war. The directive also comes as the Justice Department seeks the extradition from Canada of a Huawei executive charged with violating sanctions on Iran.

Trump’s long-awaited executive order invokes the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and declares a national emergency to empower the government to block the purchase of technology linked to foreign adversaries.

The order declares that “the unrestricted acquisition or use” of such technology “augments the ability of foreign adversaries to create and exploit vulnerabilities” in U.S. infrastructure “and thereby constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.”

As POLITICO reported in February, the White House initially planned for Trump to sign the order that month before a major wireless industry conference in Barcelona. The move would have buttressed the Trump administration’s argument that U.S. allies should not let Chinese firms build and operate the 5G networks that will soon power cellphones and the growing ecosystem of internet-connected devices.

The order was delayed, however, after Trump indicated his displeasure with it and after he extended the deadline for trade negotiations with Beijing. Administration officials did not want the order to disrupt the trade talks, sources said.

But the apparent breakdown of those talks this week opened the door for the executive order, according to a former Trump transition official who requested anonymity to speak candidly.

“The Administration has no qualms about poking the Chinese this week compared to the weeks and months prior,” this person said.

While the order comes amid warnings about Huawei enabling Chinese spying through 5G networks, it is written in a neutral way that is meant to give Commerce flexibility to name any adversaries it identifies — and to insulate the U.S. from Chinese criticisms.

“The executive order is company and country-agnostic,” a senior administration official told reporters during a briefing.

Huawei did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In addition to the Commerce-led process of identifying foreign adversaries and promulgating rules to block purchases, the order requires the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to assess threats from dangerous technology and produce an initial report on them within 40 days. It also requires DHS to produce annual reports on communications technology that presents security vulnerabilities, with the first report coming within 80 days.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement that the order was part of Trump’s commitment to combating “foreign adversaries who are actively and increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in information and communications technology infrastructure and services in the United States.”

Trump’s allies in Congress cheered the order and urged Commerce to blacklist Chinese firms.

“Chinese components remain a Trojan horse for telecommunications infrastructure around the globe,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said in a statement, “and the Department of Commerce should deny their adoption entirely.”

The order authorizing a telecom ban is the latest salvo in a broad campaign to combat what U.S. officials call China’s unfair and disruptive practices. While Trump’s trade war has dominated the headlines, his administration has been pursuing a parallel campaign to disrupt Chinese cyber espionage, which since the early 2000s has led to staggering amounts of intellectual property theft and the most devastating counterintelligence breach in U.S. history, the hacking of more than 20 million people’s highly sensitive background documents from the Office of Personnel Management.

Most of the government’s law enforcement actions have focused on trade-secrets theft. In December, the Justice Department brought indictments against two Chinese hackers on charges of running a decadelong economic espionage campaign. Chinese operatives allegedly stole hundreds of gigabytes of data from U.S. businesses and government agencies during that campaign.

But Wednesday’s executive order, which languished for months after passing an interagency review, responds to a different concern.

The directive is part of a government-wide effort to grapple with the threats that foreign governments pose to the U.S. “supply chain,” the massive, convoluted and often opaque web of firms that produce goods and services for American companies and government agencies.

As globalization transformed how and where companies made their products, it created new security risks as governments struggled to identify the sources of components used in sensitive technology. And the increasing awareness of these vulnerabilities has opened new fronts in how the government approaches cybersecurity.

In the wake of embarrassing data breaches, government agencies have focused on simple solutions like multi-factor authentication — which requires a temporary code in addition to a standard password to access an account — and diligent patching of software flaws. But experts say that until the government can fully map out who is producing its hardware and software, there remains a more pernicious risk of stealthy technological tampering by advanced adversaries like China and Russia.

As a result, securing the U.S. supply chain has become a top priority for the federal government in recent years. Complementary activities are underway at the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the telecom agency NTIA and the technical standards agency NIST. And a law signed in December created a multi-agency council to consider proposals to ban risky technology from government networks.

New procurement rules will apply tighter cybersecurity standards to contractors in an effort to close vulnerabilities in that part of the government’s acquisition process. Regulators are working on a rule to ban Huawei and ZTE products from government networks; a similar rule targeting the Russian cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab took effect in July. And a House panel is considering how best to prevent vulnerable telecom equipment from reaching rural communities, some of which host U.S. military bases.

Lawmakers have introduced a steady stream of legislation to address telecommunications security, and committees have occasionally held hearings on the issue, including one on Tuesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The U.S. has also tried to kneecap Huawei and ZTE beyond its borders. Officials have urged allies to end contracts with the telecom firms and strip the companies’ technology from their networks. The campaign has accelerated in recent years as countries move closer to rolling out 5G technology, which is designed in such a way that infiltration poses greater risks than with current 4G infrastructure.

American diplomats have played hardball on the issue, warning allies that using Huawei will jeopardize their intelligence-sharing partnerships.

The strategy has yielded results in countries like Japan, Australia and New Zealand, but some of the U.S.’s closest allies, including Britain, Canada and Germany, remain unconvinced.

Huawei and ZTE have consistently denied helping the Chinese government spy on their customers, and U.S. officials have offered no public evidence of such behavior, though they argue that doing so is unnecessary because the risks are clear-cut.

The goal of Trump’s new executive order is to “move the needle” on countries’ purchasing choices, a source close to the administration told POLITICO in February.

The U.S. delegation at the Barcelona wireless conference, led by officials like Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, emphasized this message to foreign counterparts and telecom executives.

“Contracts are going out now,” said the source close to the administration. “Extra stigma could change the situation out in the countries on this major decision.”

Paul Triolo, who leads the Eurasia Group’s geotechnology practice, said the order “is significant primarily as a signal to European allies that the U.S. is serious about putting in place a legal structure to formally exclude vendors from its 5G network.”

“Supporters of the U.S. position are clinking champagne glasses today in European capitals,” he said, “as the EO will give them ammunition to continue to press governments and carriers to adopt a tougher line on Huawei in the coming months.”