The Global Magnitsky Act enables the United States to sanction the world’s worst human rights abusers and most corrupt oligarchs and foreign officials, freezing their U.S. assets and preventing them from traveling to the United States. Sanctioned individuals become financial pariahs and the international financial system wants nothing to do with them.

Before proceeding, ask yourself: is Global Magnitsky right for my case? The language of the Global Magnitsky Act as passed by Congress was ex-panded by Executive Order 13818, which is now the implementing authority for Global Magnitsky sanctions. EO 13818 stipulates that sanctions may be considered for individuals who are engaging or have engaged in “serious human rights abuse” against any person, or are engaging or have en-gaged in “corruption.” Individuals who, by virtue of their rank, have ordered others to engage or have facilitated these acts also are liable to be sanctioned.

Keep in mind that prior to the EO’s expansion of the language, human rights sanctions were limited to “gross violations of internationally recognized human rights” as codified in 22 USC § 2304(d)(1). The original language also stipulates that any victim must be working “to expose illegal activity car-ried out by government officials” or to “obtain, exercise, defend, or promote internationally recognized human rights and freedoms.” As for sanctions for corruption, it identifies “acts of significant corruption” as sanctionable offenses. This is generally thought to be a stricter standard than the EO’s term “corruption.” It may be worthwhile to aim for this higher standard to make the tightest case possible for sanctions.

As a rule, reach out to other NGOs and individuals working in the human rights and anti-corruption field, especially those who are advocating for their own Global Magnitsky sanctions. Doing so at the beginning of the process will enable you to build strong relationships, develop a robust network, and speak with a stronger voice.

Download the full guide to learn more.

***  And harass they did. Bill Browder is a distant buddy and I watched his communications this morning as he was arrested in Spain. The warrant:

Spanish anti Russian mafia prosecutor Jose Grinda about the huge amount of money from the Magnitsky case that flowed to Spain. Now that I’m released my mission carries on. Meeting with Prosector Grinda now. This was the SIXTH Russian arrest warrant using Interpol channels. It was NOT an expired warrant, but a live one. Interpol is incapable of stopping Russian abuse of their systems. He is right.

There is not, and never has been, a Red Notice for Bill Browder. Mr Browder is not wanted via INTERPOL channels. https://t.co/8zI3IepOMh

— INTERPOL (@INTERPOL_HQ) May 30, 2018

Interpol is a mess for sure. Which is it Interpol? Did you make a call to have Browder released? Un huh…

Then Browder responded: Russia has sent notices to have me arrested through Interpol systems at least THREE times in the last 10 months. It’s a matter of public record that Russia slipped these notices through Interpol controls without them noticing.

***

United States citizens are outraged about the Kremlin’s incursion into the U.S. electoral system, but that is unfortunately just the tip of the iceberg. Russia is also trying to hijack the U.S. judiciary for corrupt purposes, expropriation and political repression, which has received little attention.

Unlawful seizure of private assets and private companies by the Kremlin has been the norm since Vladimir Putin became president in 2000. Russia’s law enforcement agencies and courts are regularly used for the enrichment of the ruling elite.

Annual State Department and Freedom House reports underscore that the Russian judicial system lacks independence from the country’s powerful executive branch.

The Sergei Magnitsky case is the best-known example of the Russian state’s co-opting of the courts to support its kleptocracy. A cabal of Russian tax and law enforcement officers conspired to defraud Russian taxpayers of $230 million, the largest tax fraud in Russian history, by targeting Bill Browder’s company, Hermitage Capital.

When Magnitsky, Browder’s tax attorney, discovered the fraud and notified authorities, Hermitage and Magnitsky were charged with their own fraud. Magnitsky was then arrested and died in pre-trial detention at the age of 37.

Since then, Russian authorities have repeatedly called on Interpol to disseminate red notices to harass Browder and other victims. Interpol, which is meant to facilitate cross-border coordination among law enforcement agencies, is susceptible to abuse as it passes on requests and notices from states without much scrutiny.

Russia misuses Interpol’s red notices to gain the support of international law enforcement agencies, including U.S. law enforcement, in pursuing political dissidents and victims of corporate raiding.

Russian legal authorities also abuse the U.S. court system by exploiting U.S. federal discovery laws. Under these laws, a foreign party can use the U.S. federal courts to compel discovery from any person under U.S. jurisdiction.

The Russian authorities used this law repeatedly against Yukos and its affiliates, after confiscating the oil giant from Mikhail Khodorkovsky and other shareholders.

More recently, agents of the Russian state have engaged in two federal court cases in New York: a 2016 attempt to loot the assets of Janna Bullock and her real estate investment firm RIGroup, and a 2018 effort to plunder the personal property of banker Sergei Leontiev, a former shareholder of Probusinessbank.

The Russian state is using the discovery process to extract information to further criminal charges and extortion schemes against individuals who fled to the U.S. seeking the protection, safety and rule of law now being undermined.

The Russian government and its associates have developed similar strategies to use federal and state courts to recognize and validate bogus decisions from Russian courts, exploit the U.S. Bankruptcy Code on behalf of sham creditors aligned with the Russian state and enforce illegitimate claims and orders issued by corrupt Russian judges.

Although U.S. judges are permitted to consider evidence questioning the legitimacy of a foreign judicial decision, they are rightly hesitant to speculate on whether another country upholds the rule of law.

Such a determination requires significant analysis beyond the scope and ability of most courts and therefore leaves the U.S. judiciary ill-equipped to defend itself against Russian incursion.

The U.S. is slowly beginning to fight back against Russian intrusion into our courts. In 2017, the United States sanctioned two Russian private-sector lawyers, Yulia Mayorova and Andrei Pavlov, who repeatedly represented Russian government agencies in the United States.

After passage by Congress of the “Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act,” the U.S. sanctioned Artem Chaika, the son of Russia’s prosecutor general, who used his father’s position to extort bribes and win contracts for himself and his cronies, while driving out competition.

More needs to be done to keep Russian lawlessness abroad at bay. The House and Senate judiciary committees should investigate the hacking of U.S. courts and hold hearings to examine the threat they pose, with an eye toward developing legislation that will help block future attacks.

The Department of Justice and the State Department should consider establishing a joint task force to coordinate with U.S. courts, where victims of abuse by corrupt governments could submit their evidence.

The State Department already produces annual reports that opine on the state of foreign judiciaries, which can be put to good use to protect the integrity of U.S. courts.

David Hogg on MSNBC

Leave it to the Progressive left to hoist an unaccomplished high school student up as their “golden calf”, their messiah, their Anointed One to deliver civilian disarmament where nearly 50 years of lies and deceit have failed.

Despite the fawning and sycophancy, David Hogg is nothing special. His only claim to fame is he was present at a tragedy. “Survivor”: is a bit hyperbolic. In defense against the accusations he was not at school the day of the shooting, a teacher came forward and stated that she pulled him into a classroom for his safety.  Ok, fine he was in the building. He did not witness the shooting, nor was he under fire. Was it a sad and frightening experience for him? No doubt, but that hardly qualifies him as a “survivor” The word was deliberately chosen by his minders to make him both a sympathetic character and to make him seem above reproach, being a “survivor” is akin  to being a “victim” and how DARE you question a victim! This courtesy, of course, is only reserved for Friends of The Narrative.

Amanda Collins who is an ACTUAL victim and survivor (raped outside the campus police station at University of Nevada-Reno in 2007) was attacked by Democratic Colorado State Senator Sen. Evie Hudak who opined that if Ms Collins had been allowed her concealed carry gun on campus not only would she have been raped but that the rapist would have taken her gun and used it against her.  But I digress….

Mr. Hogg has not graduated High school, attended college, held an adult job (or any job that I could find).  He has not raised a family, invented anything, built anything, ran for office, won a campaign, nothing. Of course he is just a  High School student and these accomplishments would be rare among his peers, nor had I accomplished anything of note at his age. The question therefore is why then is HIS voice so important?  Optics. It looks cool to have high school students at the podium and it plays well. Everything with the Left is marketing, optics, and messaging. If their position was honest and truthful, they wouldn’t need to do any of it. I also can’t help but notice there were originally more in his little authoritarian gaggle, but like TV Talent shows, the judges have picked him to be the next Progressive Idol.  If Emma Gonzales had stepped up her game and not worn the Cuban flag on her Che Guevara army jacket it might have been her I would be writing about today.

The rhetoric he spouts is nothing new, it’s the same tired crap most of us have been fighting since before he was born.  He has no experience with firearms, and nothing to qualify him as an “expert” on gun violence, its causes, or solutions. He is like a cover version of a song that wasn’t any good to begin with.  He only knows what his handlers tell him, he has not done any research on the subject (except what he is handed to read). He just stands at the mic, spews his uninformed vitriol and basks in the adulation.  Tragically, he believes that this is how his world will always be..

His latest “Five point plan ” is an essay in ignorance.  It is so easily refuted even his classmate Kyle Kashuv easily slapped it down.

His “plan” includes a mix of things that already exist, and things that would have done nothing to save his classmates (I doubt he even remembers them at this point),   He clearly copied these answers of off someone else’s paper. He probably should have cheated off the smart kid

It is completely evident to anyone who can see through the Progressive left propaganda that David Hogg is now fighting a defensive battle to maintain his relevance. Like a child actor from a cancelled series, he is just starting to learn the  sun is setting for him.

At press time, there have been two school shootings since Parkland, and neither of them have fit the narrative.  In Maryland, the shooter was engaged by police officer, Was deliberately targeting a girl who broke up with him, shot two students (which negates the “mass” definition)  and used a stolen pistol. In Santa Fe Texas the shooter used a revolver and a shotgun, both Stolen.

Mr Hogg’s cliche about “high capacity magazines” in his five point plan ignores that his classmate/shooter used the supposedly “safer” 10 round magazine.

Babchenko reacts during the news conference in Kyiv on May 30.

Hat tip to Ukraine officials, they have fully embraced Russian tactics and used them against the Kremlin’s normal hit job assignments on journalists.

Related reading: Journalistic death and Critics toll in Putin’s Russia

Babchenko wrote a chilling book, titled One Soldier’s War in 2009. In 1995,  he was forced into the Russian military and sent to Chechnya. He has a history with the brutality of Putin.

***

Before ushering Babchenko into the room, Gritsak said investigators had identified a Ukrainian citizen who allegedly was paid $40,000 by the Russian security service to organize and carry out the hit. The unidentified Ukrainian man in turn allegedly hired an acquaintance to be the gunman, Gritsak said.

The man allegedly paid to organize Banchenko’s killing was detained Wednesday, he said, showing a video of the arrest.

Gritsak said killing Babchenko was part of a larger alleged plot by Russian security services. The Ukrainian man was also supposed to procure large quantities of weapons and explosives, including 300 AK-47 rifles and “hundreds of kilos of explosives,” to perpetrate acts of terror in Ukraine, he said.

Babchenko said he was not allowed to go into the details of the sting operation, but said Ukrainian law enforcement had been aware of a contract on his head for two months. He said he was approached by the Ukrainian Security Service, the SBU, a month ago.

KYIV — Ukrainian security officials said they faked the death of a dissident Russian journalist in an effort to catch people it says were involved in a Russian plot to kill him.

Vasyl Hrytsak, the head of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU), shocked reporters at the SBU headquarters in Kyiv on May 30 when he announced that journalist and Kremlin critic Arkady Babchenko was still alive, a day after Ukrainian authorities announced he had been killed by a gunman outside of his Kyiv apartment.

Hrytsak told reporters that Ukrainian intelligence sources learned that Russia’s security services had ordered the killing of Babchenko several months earlier.

ALSO READ: Transcript Of Babchenko’s Remarks

Hrytsak also said a suspected organizer of an attempted murder plot against Babchenko, identified as a Ukrainian national, was detained as a result of a “special operation” by the SBU.

“We have prevented an attempted murder of Babchenko by carrying out a special operation,” Hrytsak said on May 30. “Thanks to this operation, we were able to foil a cynical plot and document how the Russian security service was planning for this crime.”

Babchenko made a dramatic appearance at the live May 30 television briefing after Hrytsak’s announcement, saying the fictitious reports of his death were part of an SBU operation that had been prepared for two months.

***

“As far as I know, this operation was prepared for two months. A result of that was this special operation,” Babchenko told the briefing. “They saved my life. I want to say thanks. Larger terrorist attacks were prevented.”

Babchenko did not specify what those other planned attacks were. But Hrytsak said the SBU had received information about a plot to kill 30 people in Ukraine, including Babchenko. The security service declined to say who the other 29 people were.

Hrytsak said the detained Ukrainian citizen in the case — a former separatist fighter in eastern Ukraine — had been recruited by Russia to find someone to kill Babchenko. The SBU said the Ukrainian suspect was given $40,000 to organize the killing of Babchenko — $30,000 for the killer and $10,000 for being an intermediary.

“It is known that once the killing was done, [the suspect] was planning to leave Ukraine…He was planning to travel to Russia via a third country,” Hrytsak said.

“We managed not only to break this cynical provocation but also to document the preparation of this shameful crime by Russian special services,” he added.

Prosecutor-General Yuriy Lutsenko, who appeared alongside Babchenko at the May 30 press briefing, said it was necessary to fake the journalist’s death so that the organizers of the plot to kill him would believe they had succeeded.

Babchenko said he had no choice but to take part in the operation.

“I did my job. I’m still alive,” Babchenko said.

“I would like to apologize for what you have all had to go through,” said Babchenko, who broke into tears at times. “I’m sorry, but there was no other way of doing it. Separately, I want to apologize to my wife for the hell that she has been through.”

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said his government would provide round-the-clock protection to Babchenko and his family and called the security services’ effort a “brilliant operation.”

“Ukrainian law enforcement agencies are becoming stronger every day in countering Russian aggression,” Poroshenko said on Twitter. “It is unlikely that Moscow will calm down — I’ve given an order to provide Arkady and his family with protection.”

** Петро Порошенко‏Verified account @poroshenko

Вітаю @servicessu з блискучою операцією зі збереження життя російському журналістові Аркадію Бабченку. Українські правоохоронні органи з кожним днем стають сильнішими у протидії російській агресії. Навряд чи Москва заспокоїться – доручив надати Аркадієві та його родині охорону

Ukrainian by Microsoft

Congratulations @servicessu with a brilliant operation on preserving the life of the Russian journalism Arcadia Babenku. Ukrainian law enforcement agencies are becoming stronger in counteraction to the Russian aggression. Hardly Moscow will calm down-commissioned to give the arcade and his Family Protection

11:16 AM – 30 May 2018

Meanwhile, the Reporters Without Borders media watchdog criticized Ukrainian authorities for staging Babchenko’s death, saying it “would not help the cause of press freedom.”

“It is pathetic and regrettable that the Ukrainian police have played with the truth, whatever their motive…for the stunt,” Christophe Deloire, the head of the group, said.

“All it takes is one case like this to cast doubt on all the other political assassinations,” he said, referring to the deaths and attempted assassinations of several Kremlin critics outside of Russia in recent years.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said after Babchenko’s reappearance on May 30 that officials in Moscow were glad Babchenko was still alive.

But Zakharova said Ukrainian officials had circulated a false story as “propaganda.”

Transcript: Arkady Babchenko’s Remarks After SBU Sting Operation (Edited)

“First, I’d like to apologize for everything you’ve had to go through. I’ve been at the funeral of many friends and colleagues, and I know this nauseous feeling. Sorry for imposing this upon you, but there was no other way.

“Special apologies to my wife for the hell she’s been through these two days. Olya, excuse me, please, but there was no other option.

“I’d also like to thank the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) for saving my life. … This operation has been prepared for two months. I was told about this a month ago. …

“A week or two ago, Russia announced that [Islamic State] were preparing terrorist attacks before the Champions League [final in Kyiv]. I think it was going to be my [assassination]. …

“What else to say? As I said, two months ago I was approached and told that my assassination has been commissioned and money allocated. Forty-thousand dollars. It turns out I’m quite valuable!”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that he had only seen media reports so far and otherwise had “no information on the matter.”

He said he did not know “who is doing the accusing and what the accusations are…I cannot say anything,” Peskov said.

Kyiv police and officials from Ukraine’s Interior Ministry had announced on May 29 that Babchenko had died in an ambulance on the way to a hospital after being shot in the back at his Kyiv apartment, where he has lived in exile since August 2017.

Reports of the 41-year-old’s supposed death had stunned colleagues and added to tension between Moscow and Kyiv, whose ties have been badly damaged by Russia’s seizure of Crimea and backing for separatist militants in a devastating war in eastern Ukraine.

In a post to Facebook just hours after news of Babchenko’s death emerged, Prime Minister Volodymyr Hroysman said, “I am convinced that the Russian totalitarian machine could not forgive his honesty and principled position.”

Before Babchenko’s dramatic reappearance on May 30, Peskov said allegations of a Russian assassination plan were part of an anti-Russia smear campaign.

Aleksandr Bortnikov, the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), said Ukrainian allegations of an FSB plot were nonsense and a provocation.

Babchenko is well-known for his criticism of the Kremlin.

His reporting about Moscow’s support for pro-Russia separatist fighters in eastern Ukraine brought him severe criticism by Russian state media and from Russian officials.

Babchenko told RFE/RL in December 2016 that “all of the elements” of Russia’s state “propaganda machine” were engaged against him after he posted comments to Facebook about the crash of a Russian military plane in the Black Sea.

All 92 people on board were killed, including members of the Russian Army’s renowned choir, the Aleksandrov Ensemble, who were traveling to give a performance for Russian troops in Syria.

Babchenko said the reaction by state officials and state media to his remarks was intended to send a signal to Russian society that “we must be in one line; we must express sadness; we must appear sad — and anyone who doesn’t must be destroyed.”

‘Forced To Flee’

Babchenko told RFE/RL in late 2016 that State Duma Deputy Vitaly Milonov, Federation Council member Frants Klintsevich, and Russian media like Channel One and Life News were “stitching together some fake news” about him.

Babchenko said: “A major effort is being organized. They aren’t investigating why the plane crashed but instead are persecuting me.”

In February 2017, writing for Britain’s The Guardian newspaper, Babchenko said: “I can tell you what political harassment feels like in [President Vladimir] Putin’s Russia. Like many dissidents I am used to abuse, but a recent campaign against me was so personal, so scary, that I was forced to flee.”

Babchenko served in the Russian Army during the first separatist war in Chechnya in the 1990s before he became a journalist.

He worked as a military correspondent and wrote for several Russian media organizations, including the Moskovsky Komsomolets daily newspaper and Novaya Gazeta, as well as TV Tsentr, and Channel One TV.

He had been scathingly critical of the Kremlin in recent years. He moved to Kyiv in the autumn of 2017, where he worked as a host for the Crimean Tatar TV station, ATR.

I am fed up with hearing “black conservative this, black conservative that,” and “black conservatives say this” and “black conservatives say that,” ad nauseum. And don’t get me started on my contempt for the “African-American” assignation. My personal empirical experience(s), persuades me that when a cogent and articulate opinion is presented, said is based upon something far superior to a crayon color.

I am furthermore persuaded that the strength of any discourse, intellectual or not, is based upon the ability to present reasoned opinion and that is not based upon skin-color.

My business cards include the following personal quote: “Black is a color, not a race.” I am persuaded that it is time for America to move beyond crayons and coloring books. And using verbal crayons is exactly what is being done with this damnable insistence upon the prostitution of “skin color. It is tantamount to taking a crayon and trying to color without going outside the lines.

It is insulting to my intelligence to be recognized exclusively as a “crayon color” and even more egregious to have people ascribe merit or value based upon same. Being recognized, as a crayon color is not a portrait of embracing self worth, it is tantamount to saying the person cannot find self worth in any capacity outside of the crayon box.

We are Americans and it is time that “One nation under God, with liberty and justice for all,” is taken as an absolute. I’m not interested in the complaints that venal skin color mongers and stenotopic dullards whose cosmological world view is based upon the number of streets in their neighborhood, who see prejudice and so-called racism behind every bush and under every bed.

How does being a color make a person more knowledgeable, give them a higher degree of professionalism, make them more politically astute, or a Godlier minister? Spare me the social jeremiads and the mournful ballads of inculcated immiseration. And by all means spare me the cacophonic orchestrations of how bad slavery was blah-blah-blah. Preceding a professional assignation for me or anyone else with a crayon color prefix should be viewed as demeaning and insulting.

There are those who claim to be conservative(s) but who grip a crayon color prefix as if it were a solid gold or platinum caduceus.

Being reduced to a crayon color as the prefix before professional endeavor and or ideological construct is the most insidiously baneful form of alienation and derogation today. It’s a cancer that’s preventing a unified fabric of America and sadly, even the well-intended are blind to same.

People should want to be recognized as the best of “all” not the best of a particular color. As I’ve oft argued, being the best of a particular color has only marginal value. It is a perverse form of self-induced alienation that by definition marginalizes a person/people. I work to be the best of all. That is a challenge worth getting up each morning to pursue.

The very nature of being a crayon color is the suggestion that “the person is different.” And the difference is based upon that which is the absolute worst method of quantifying, i.e., skin-color.

An example of that which I speak is the recent incident at a Rittenhouse Square Starbucks, involving two young men who happened to be a “color.” It is well documented that Starbucks has an unimpeachable historical record of insulting people and groups. They’ve insulted President Trump supporters, they’ve offended Christians, they’ve gone out of their way to insult and offend law enforcement, military, and legal American citizens. But somehow the treatment that experienced by two young men who were a “color” made it worse. Starbucks’ record of insulting law enforcement is well known. But it wasn’t until the crayon color pimps saw there was a market to be exploited financially that the color-coded Muslim front group called the “Black Star Project,” began their well-practiced claims of “racism.”

These people cannot have it both ways. They cannot claim to be oppressed and have new cars, new “Air Jordan’s,” jobs, and the trappings of disposable cash. They cannot claim to be oppressed and be millionaires and billionaires. They cannot practice the lifestyles of the poor and promiscuous and complain about not having enough to eat. I could site many more examples, but my point is understandable.

It’s no different for those who claim to be free of the emotional and psychological imprisonment of “the others” and fixate upon being a crayon color.

There will be those who offer protestation alleging those who think as I do are ashamed of their race, sellouts and fools desiring to be the “skin color” with less melanin. However, they’re who are ignoring the fact – “black is a color not a race.”

Primer: Why are there unions in the federal government anyway? Anyone?

Highlights from the 2017 data:

–The union membership rate of public-sector workers (34.4 percent) continued to be more than five times higher than that of private-
sector workers (6.5 percent). (See table 3.)

–Workers in protective service occupations and in education, training, and library occupations had the highest unionization rates (34.7
percent and 33.5 percent, respectively). (See table 3.)

–Men continued to have a higher union membership rate (11.4 percent) than women (10.0 percent). (See table 1.)

–Black workers remained more likely to be union members than White, Asian, or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)

–Nonunion workers had median weekly earnings that were 80 percent of earnings for workers who were union members ($829 versus $1,041). (The comparisons of earnings in this release are on a broad level and do not control for many factors that can be important in explaining earnings
differences.) (See table 2.)

–Among states, New York continued to have the highest union membership rate (23.8 percent), while South Carolina continued to have the lowest (2.6 percent). (See table 5.)

Trump signs executive orders making it easier to fire feds, overhaul official time

President Donald Trump signed three executive orders Friday that aim to reduce the time it takes to fire poor-performing federal employees and overhaul federal employees union rights, including cuts to official time.

In a conference call with reporters on Friday, senior White House officials said the executive orders call back to a promise Trump made at his State of the Union address, in which he sought to empower every cabinet secretary with the authority to award good federal employees and to remove poor performers more quickly.

“Today, the president is fulfilling his promise to promote more efficient government by reforming our civil service rules,” said Andrew Bremberg, the assistant to the president and the director of the Domestic Policy Council. “These executive orders will make it easier to remove poor-performing employees and ensure that taxpayer dollars are more efficiently used.”

One of the executives orders aims to make it easier for agencies to fire poor-performing employees and makes it harder for those employees to hide adverse employment information when seeking re-employment at another agency.

The Government Accountability Office has found it takes between six months and a year, on average, to remove federal employees flagged for misconduct, plus an average of eight more months to resolve appeals.

“Every year, the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey has consistently shown that less than one-third of federal employees believe the poor performers are adequately addressed by their agency,” Bremberg said.

Under this EO, agencies will be required to report disciplinary actions records and management of poor performers to the Office of Personnel Management.

Data from the Office of Personnel Management shows that federal employees are 44 times less likely to be fired than a private-sector worker.

The Trump administration first sought to make it easier to fire federal employees under the  VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act.

Under that authority, the Veterans Affairs Department, under the first full year of the Trump administration, fired 2,537 people — about 500 more federal employees than the agency let go in 2016.

Cuts to official time

A second executive order would significantly reduce the amount of time that federal employees can be paid for union work while on-the-clock.

Under the executive order, federal employees would not be able to spend any more than 25 percent of their work hours on through official time.

The executive order calls on agencies to renegotiate contracts with labor unions and reduce official time by about two-thirds.

The White House claims more than 470 Veterans Affairs Department employees, including 47 full-time nurses, spend 100 percent of their work-hours on union-related business.

Renegotiated labor contracts

A third executive order would curtail the labor contract bargaining window between government and unions.

The terms of regotiated contracts would be overseen by a new Labor Relations Working Group, which the EO orders OPM to establish.

In addition, the executive order would require federal union contracts be posted to an online database, with the goal of promoting transparency.

Senior White House officials said a drawn-out bargaining benefits union negotiations. Federal agencies, they said, paid $16 million in salaries for union negotiators in 2016.

Elevating federal workforce? Or an ‘assault’ on feds?

OPM Director Jeff Pon said the executive orders will protect federal employees who are doing their jobs, while making it more efficient to remove those who are not.

“By holding poor performers accountable, reforming the use of taxpayer-funded union time, and focusing negotiations on issues that matter, we are advancing our efforts to elevate the federal workforce.  The vast majority of our employees are dedicated public servants who are dedicated to their missions and service to the American people.  It is essential that we honor their commitment, and these measures reflect just that,” Pon said in a statement.

J. David Cox, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said the president’s trio of executive orders would chip away at federal employees rights.

“This is President Trump taking retribution on an apolitical civil service workforce,” Cox said.

National Treasury Employees Union President Tony Reardon called the executives orders “an assault on federal employees.”

“Rather than promote efficiency in the federal sector, the administration is demanding federal workers lose their ability to challenge unfair, arbitrary and discriminatory firings and other actions. This would begin the process of dismantling the merit system that governs our civil service,” Reardon said in a statement.

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), signaled his support for the executive orders.

“These reforms will improve accountability and productivity in the federal workforce, and I applaud the Trump administration for taking action to restore the public interest as the top priority of government operations,” Johnson said.

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the chairman of the Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management Subcommittee, said the EOs would reign in employee unions’ influence over government operations.

“These executive orders strive to make the federal government more efficient, not only for the taxpayer, but for our great federal workers. We have thousands of federal employees who work very hard for the nation; it’s important that their work is not frustrated by the poor performance of a small few,” Lankford said.