It's shaping up to be a pretty ugly day for Bitcoin.

 After soaring past $250 earlier, it's tumbled all the way down to current levels around $150.

 Bitcoin is now 44 percent off its intraday high of $266.

 At its low of the day ($105), it had lost 61 percent of its value from the peak.

 The chart below shows Bitcoin prices from April 9 through today.

 bitcoin.clarkmoody.com

 The virtual currency briefly staged a sizeable comeback this afternoon before getting slammed again.

 The biggest question everyone has had about Bitcoin in recent weeks - aside from how it works - is whether or not it's in a bubble.

 After all, the virtual currency has seen a remarkable rise since January, when it was trading below $15.

 Already this afternoon, since the plunge began, we've seen some interesting defenses of the virtual currency popping up on the Internet.

 A Reddit user posted a graphic showing the Spartans' shields from the movie 300 redesigned as Bitcoins with the word HOLD! across the top.

 Another Reddit user sought to use technical analysis to explain away today's move.

 However, episodes like today's highlight the biggest problem with Bitcoin: confidence. ||||| Courtesy of Casascius/Wikimedia Commons

 Update, 3:13 p.m.: The bitcoin market is extremely volatile today, with the price ranging from a low of $120 to a high of $266. You can see the latest prices at the top of the page here.

 Let me begin this column with a lengthy disclosure. One morning last week, I stopped at my bank, filled out a withdrawal slip for $1,027.51, and walked away with an envelope full of cash. The odd amount was deliberate; I had been instructed by LocalTill to be exact in everything I did. What’s LocalTill? Don’t bother Googling it—its shady-looking website offers only murky details, explaining that the firm is a way for “merchants to accept secure transactions when selling goods online.” It’s something like PayPal, except LocalTill isn’t tied to your bank account or credit card, and instead deals only in cash. This makes its transactions less traceable, less regulated, and, as I would soon experience, more final.

 Next, per LocalTill’s instructions, I drove to a local Bank of America branch and asked for an out-of-state wire transfer slip. I scrawled out LocalTill’s New York bank account number and handed my wad of cash to the teller. This was a dizzying moment: I’ve been on the Internet forever and have been well-schooled in frauds that begin with the instruction, “First, wire your money to an out-of-state account …” Yet here I was doing exactly that. If LocalTill was a scam, I’d have no recourse. So why was I willing to take such a risk?

 Bitcoin, of course. Bitcoin is a “digital currency” invented in 2009 by a cryptographic expert who went by the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, but whose true identity remains unknown. It exists only in computers, minted at a regular rate by a network of machines around the world, and its value isn’t regulated by any government. The currency, like its creator, clings to the shadows. Bitcoins are like cash in that they aren’t tied to your identity, and transactions made with bitcoins are irreversible and untraceable. But they’re like credit cards in that they aren’t physical. In the past, if I wanted to pay you for certain unmentionable services rendered, I’d have to get a fancy briefcase, fill it with bills, then take a long, dangerous trip with my stash. Bitcoin allows me to transfer money to you online, instantly, for free. As a result, it’s perfect for the black market—a couple of years ago, it became a media sensation when Gawker reported on its use as the central currency on Silk Road, a site that sold virtually any drug in the world. Lately bitcoin has also been hailed as an emerging global safe haven, a place for nervous Europeans and panicky gold-bug types to store their wealth away from the prying reach of financial regulators.

 Advertisement

 I’m not very panicky about the world’s currencies, nor am I looking to buy drugs online. Indeed, I don’t care at all for bitcoin as a currency. Instead, I wanted to buy bitcoins as pure, shameless speculation. I wanted a chance to ride a rocket ship. Partly due to its growing legitimacy as a currency but mainly because of speculators like me, the value of bitcoin is entering a bubble phase—its exchange rate with real-world currencies is hiking up at an incredible, likely unsustainable pace. In 2011, back when Gawker reported on Silk Road, you could buy a bitcoin for about $9. Since then the price has seen terrific fluctuations, but it has generally gone up. At the start of this year, each bitcoin was worth about $20. From there the chart turns into a hockey stick—by March, bitcoins hit $40, and within a month they’d doubled again.

 Courtesy Bitcoincharts.com.

 Three weeks ago, I began hearing about bitcoin everywhere I turned. One afternoon I had lunch with a partner at Andreessen Horowitz, the large Silicon Valley venture firm, who told me that he’d been fielding pitch after pitch for start-ups that offered bitcoin-related services. After lunch, I got an email from David Barrett, the CEO of the fantastic expense-reporting start-up Expensify. Barrett wanted to let me know that his firm would soon let people submit expenses and get paid by their employers in bitcoins. He explained that the feature wasn’t a gimmick. Bitcoin would be helpful for people who regularly submitted expenses internationally; other services—like PayPal—charge hefty fees for moving money overseas, but with bitcoin people could send money for free.

 I made a mental note to start looking into a story about bitcoin’s apparent rise to legitimacy. But before I could get started, bitcoin took over the media. Henry Blodget was calling bitcoin "the perfect asset bubble." Felix Salmon published a lengthy treatise on why the bubble was sure to burst. The New Yorker spoke to some of bitcoins' leading boosters about the future of the currency. Meanwhile the price just kept going up: Early last week the value of bitcoins soared past $100 each. This week, it went past $200. If you want a bitcoin today, it will cost you about $235, and if you wait till tomorrow, it will be more.

 Hence, my disclosure. No one is quite sure why the price of bitcoins has spiked so quickly, but one of the leading theories is that it’s been hit by what Quartz’s Zach Seward calls a “demand crisis.” The world’s supply of bitcoins is essentially fixed, but because people in the media keep talking about it, demand keeps rising. This leads to higher prices—and as prices go up, people who currently hold bitcoins develop greater and greater expectations for the currency. This causes bitcoin holders to hoard their stash, which further reduces supply, which in turn boosts the price and sparks yet more media attention—and the cycle continues until the bubble pops.

 Advertisement

 Thus, by writing about bitcoin, I’m serving, in some small way, to raise its price. And as of last week, that benefits me directly. Thankfully, my wire transfer to LocalTill went through; after taking its $21.51 processing fee, the firm transferred my $1,000 to Bitfloor, one of the many online bitcoin exchanges where people trade bitcoins for cash. I immediately put in a purchase order, and within seconds the deal was done. I was the proud owner of 7.23883 bitcoins, which I’d purchased for about $138 each. If I sold my coins now, my original $1,000 investment would be worth $1,700—not a bad return in less than a week’s time.

 But I’m not selling just yet. I agree with Blodget and Salmon that the bitcoin market is a bubble; at some point, as in all bubbles, prices will stop rising and they’ll likely plummet, and a lot of people will lose a lot of real and imagined money. But that’s pretty much all anyone can say about the market with any certainty. When the bubble will burst, at what price and for what reason, is completely unpredictable. And until then, while prices are going up, you could make a lot of real money from this digital funny money.

 My own guess is that the bubble’s popping isn’t imminent, and I think that when prices do fall, they’ll land somewhere higher than the $138 I paid for my bitcoins. I’m certain that I’ll be able to double my investment, and I might even hold out to triple it. (After that I’ll get shakier about keeping bitcoins.) Why do I think prices will get that high? Because at the moment, it’s a logistical nightmare to turn dollars into coins. You’ve got to take several leaps of faith, trusting sites that look like they were put together by teenagers. I initially tried to buy coins using MtGox, the largest trader, but the cash-processing service it uses refused to accept deposits greater than $500. What’s more, last week, shortly after bitcoins hit $142, MtGox was hit by a denial-of-service attack that took it offline for several hours. The site I used, Bitfloor, is hardly any safer. Last fall it was hit by an epic hack that resulted in the theft of 24,000 coins, at the time worth $250,000—and worth, amazingly, $5.6 million today.* (Bitfloor now claims to store most of its customers’ coins in machines that aren’t connected to the Internet, and it uses two-factor authentication to protect its users’ accounts.)

 At the moment, the shadiness of the bitcoin market dissuades mainstream investors. And—as we saw in the housing and dot-com bubbles—it’s when the masses get involved that bubbles really take off. Over the next few months, I expect that we’ll see better, more secure services for transferring dollars into bitcoin exchange systems. You’ll be able to send money to sites like MtGox instantly from your bank account. At that point—when ordinary people can order up bitcoins as easily as they bought shares of Pets.com back in 1999—the real money will pour into the bitcoin economy, and that’s when prices will begin to get really crazy.

 That’s just a theory. It could be a stupid one; bitcoin could collapse tomorrow. And remember, I’ve got a conflict of interest here—if this piece gets you interested in bitcoin, I get richer. Still, though, one week into my bitcoin trade, I’m very, very pleased with myself. ||||| A financial network is a technological platform that people build businesses on top of. And the traditional banking and credit card networks are closed platforms. If you want to build an e-commerce site, a payment network like Paypal, or any other service that deals in dollars, you need to convince incumbent financial institutions to do business with you. Getting such a partnership is difficult and involves a lot of red tape.

 There's a good reason for the high barrier to entry: electronic transactions in the conventional banking system are generally reversible. If someone makes a fraudulent charge to your credit card, you can dispute the transaction and in most cases the bank or the merchant, not the customer, will cover the cost. That's convenient for consumers, but it requires the financial system to be a fairly close-knit web of trust. Allowing a new member into the club creates risks for everyone else. So the incumbents are understandably reluctant to deal with anyone who isn't well-known and well-capitalized.

 Bitcoin is different. Because transactions are authenticated cryptographically and cannot be reversed, there's no need to restrict access to the network. There's no risk to accepting payments from complete strangers. That means people don't need anyone's permission or trust to go into business as a Bitcoin-based merchant or financial intermediary. Accepting Bitcoins also allows merchants to avoid much of the administrative overhead, like dealing with chargebacks, that come with a conventional merchant account.

 Of course, what looks like a plus for merchants can look more like a minus for consumers. Consumers generally like the conventional banking system's strong consumer protections. We like the fact that we're not on the hook for fraudulent banking transactions, and that the FDIC will make us whole if the bank holding our money goes bottom-up.

 And Bitcoin looks inferior to the conventional banking system in other ways too. Visa and Mastercard are accepted at millions of locations around the world. Only a handful of merchants accept Bitcoins. Conventional banks have elaborate websites with features like direct deposite of paychecks and automatic bill-paying. Dealing with Bitcoin is too intimidating for all but a tiny minority of tech-savvy enthusiasts.

 If you've read Clay Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma, the last three paragraphs should ring a bell. The book's argument helps to explain why a seemingly inferior payment network like Bitcoin has generated so much excitement.

 The term Christensen coined, "disruptive innovation," has become so overused as to become a cliche. But he gave it a fairly precise meaning with a lot of explanatory power. A disruptive technology is one that's simpler and cheaper than what's already on the market. Often, disruptive technologies are also inferior to what's already on the market. They tend to be dismissed as impractical toys by industry incumbents.

 The PC is a classic example of a disruptive innovation. The first PCs were much less capable than mini-computers and mainframes that were already on the market at the time. They had less powerful hardware and software and little if any customer support. And if you'd asked a hobbyist circa 1978 what PCs were good for, he probably wouldn't have had a good answer.

 But the low cost and simplicity of PCs meant that a lot more people could play around with them. One of those tinkerers, Dan Bricklin, invented the spreadsheet, the PC's first "killer app." And over time, people gradually figured out how to use these cheap, simple computers to perform functions that had previously required a computer that cost ten times as much. Most "servers" today are just souped-up PCs, and they're orders of magnitude cheaper than computers that existed before 1975.

 The Bitcoin economy today looks a lot like the PC market circa 1978. Most people today look at Bitcoin and see an impractical curiosity. They're happy with the banking services they've already got and can't imagine why anyone would want to use an alternative currency that's much less widely accepted and offers many fewer consumer protections.

 But a minority of nerds are playing around with it. Interesting applications keep popping up. There are Bitcoin-based banks, casinos, drug emporia, derivatives markets, retailers, and much more. Many of the new applications seem weird or marginal, and most of them probably won't amount to anything. But one of them might prove to be Bitcoin's Visicalc.

 When people dismiss Bitcoins because they can't think of how they'd use it, they're missing the fact that Bitcoin is a platform, not a product in its own right. When ordinary users started buying computers, it wasn't because they thought it would be cool to own a computer. They did it because they wanted to do spreadsheets or word processing or email. Similarly, ordinary users aren't going to start using Bitcoins just because it's a cool technology. If normal users start using Bitcoin, it will be because they're interested in gambling, or cheap international money transfers, or some other applications that hasn't been invented yet. And Bitcoin's intermediary-free architecture means that many more people can try their hand at building the platform's killer app.

 Disclosure: I own some bitcoins. ||||| The price of the electronic currency Bitcoin continues to soar.

 Six weeks ago, Bitcoin was trading at $35. Since then, the price has continued to surge to new highs. Just this morning, Bitcoin blasted through $250.

 As is always the case with such price moves, observers have been dismissing Bitcoin as a "bubble" since long before prices even hit $35.

 And the observers may well be right.

 Bitcoin may be a bubble.

 Someday, Bitcoin prices may come crashing down, causing the suckers who own them then to lose their shirts.

 But, in the meantime, those who are speculating in Bitcoin are just laughing at all the people who are dismissing Bitcoin as a bubble. These speculators have made 7X their money in six weeks, which is a return that more than justifies the risk they took of potentially losing everything. (As long as the chance of each outcome is roughly the same, downside of 100% and upside of 600% is a great bet.)

 Like the assets at the center of most powerful asset bubbles, Bitcoin has sound theoretical underpinnings. The world can benefit from a convenient global electronic currency that is not subject to the whims and political incentives of governments trying to get themselves reelected.

 Importantly, Bitcoin also has a small and (at least theoretically) finite supply. So the more demand for Bitcoins increases, the more the price of Bitcoins should rise.

 Of course, as in any bubble, the more Bitcoin prices rise, the more demand there will be for Bitcoins. Bitcoin buyers may tell themselves stories about how they are buying a "store of value" in an inflationary world, how Bitcoin is a "good investment," and so forth, but these stories will seem much less compelling if Bitcoin prices suddenly drop, say, 75%.

 If Bitcoin prices crash, all the folks who now think Bitcoin is a "good investment" will suddenly start crying bloody murder that they were tricked into buying something with no inherent value. And they will want to jettison their Bitcoins at any price someone will pay for them.

 (This is just the way bubble psychology works. Sorry about that.)

 In the meantime, though, Bitcoin prices could rise another 2X. Or 10X. Or 100X.

 Why?

 Because there's really just no way to figure out what a "fair price" for Bitcoin is. There's is theoretically a finite supply of it. And there is theoretically nearly unlimited demand for it. So there's no theoretical reason why Bitcoins can't eventually trade for $500, or $2,500, or $25,000. Or even $250,000.

 And that means that brass-balled speculators will likely continue to plow into Bitcoin, as long as think it will continue to appeal to new speculators who haven't yet entered the game.

 But!

 Because Bitcoins have no inherent value (only the value that they can be exchanged for, which is determined in large part by speculators), Bitcoin prices could crash permanently at any time.

 So it's worth thinking about what might cause Bitcoin prices to come crashing down.

 Here are some things:

 A sating of demand. At some point, everyone who could ever learn about or use Bitcoin will know about it, and many of them will own it. Given the lack of awareness about Bitcoin among the general population, as well as the complexity and "friction" involved in owning Bitcoin, we are a long way from this point.

 At some point, everyone who could ever learn about or use Bitcoin will know about it, and many of them will own it. Given the lack of awareness about Bitcoin among the general population, as well as the complexity and "friction" involved in owning Bitcoin, we are a long way from this point. A drop in the price of Bitcoin (for whatever reason). Another thing that could cause demand for Bitcoin to drop is a Bitcoin price crash. If Bitcoin prices crash, many of those who already own them will not want to own them anymore--and they'll jettison them. This will cause a further price crash, which will further reduce demand. Etc.

 Another thing that could cause demand for Bitcoin to drop is a Bitcoin price crash. If Bitcoin prices crash, many of those who already own them will not want to own them anymore--and they'll jettison them. This will cause a further price crash, which will further reduce demand. Etc. A Bitcoin counterfeiting or hacking or theft scare. Bitcoin aficionados will smugly tell you that Bitcoin "can't be counterfeited." Please. Anything can be counterfeited. To counterfeit something, you don't have to create the actual thing. You just have to create something that fools other people into thinking you have the actual thing. If there's a computer system out there that can't be hacked or fooled by a very clever hacker, I haven't seen it yet. Meanwhile, even if the Bitcoins themselves can't be faked, the systems that account for them can certainly be hacked. This has already happened. And if someone figures out a way to steal or delete or otherwise destroy all your Bitcoins, you will be much less likely to invest in them.

 Bitcoin aficionados will smugly tell you that Bitcoin "can't be counterfeited." Please. Anything can be counterfeited. To counterfeit something, you don't have to create the actual thing. You just have to create something that fools other people into thinking you have the actual thing. If there's a computer system out there that can't be hacked or fooled by a very clever hacker, I haven't seen it yet. Meanwhile, even if the Bitcoins themselves can't be faked, the systems that account for them can certainly be hacked. This has already happened. And if someone figures out a way to steal or delete or otherwise destroy all your Bitcoins, you will be much less likely to invest in them. A government crackdown on Bitcoins. If Bitcoin gains general acceptance, governments may begin to frown on it. After all, general acceptance of Bitcoin would usurp the governments' sole authority to create legal money. Governments don't like having their authority usurped. So they may begin to enact laws that prohibit the use of Bitcoin.

 If Bitcoin gains general acceptance, governments may begin to frown on it. After all, general acceptance of Bitcoin would usurp the governments' sole authority to create legal money. Governments don't like having their authority usurped. So they may begin to enact laws that prohibit the use of Bitcoin. An increase in the supply of Bitcoins. Bitcoin aficionados will also proudly assert that only a certain number of Bitcoins will ever exist (21 million, if memory serves) and that no more can be created. Again, keep dreaming. The supply of Bitcoins as currently defined may, in fact, be limited. But there's nothing stopping the folks who created Bitcoin (or anyone else) from creating a new equivalent or better Bitcoin. Aside from the fact that Bitcoin appears to be well designed, there is nothing special about it.

 Bitcoin aficionados will also proudly assert that only a certain number of Bitcoins will ever exist (21 million, if memory serves) and that no more can be created. Again, keep dreaming. The supply of Bitcoins as currently defined may, in fact, be limited. But there's nothing stopping the folks who created Bitcoin (or anyone else) from creating a new equivalent or better Bitcoin. Aside from the fact that Bitcoin appears to be well designed, there is nothing special about it. A better Bitcoin (or even just another Bitcoin). This is a very real risk, one that Bitcoin enthusiasts don't spend enough time worrying about. Again, there is nothing special about Bitcoin. Although awareness of it is growing, it's still complicated and hard to use. And monetary philosophers are already pointing out that the "finite supply" of Bitcoins may, in fact, be too small, limiting their usefulness. So if Bitcoin can gain traction, then so can any other electronic currency. And if another electronic currency begins to displace Bitcoin, the "finite supply" argument will go out the window. There might soon be a nearly unlimited amount of a better Bitcoin.

 All of these factors--and many others--could cause Bitcoin prices to crash.

 Bitcoin speculators would do well to remember that.

 SEE ALSO: I'm Raising My Bitcoin Price Target To $400

 Get the latest Bitcoin price here. |||||

Write a summary.

– The price of Bitcoins is skyrocketing at a head-turning rate—they're currently worth more than $200 each, up from $90 when we wrote this piece on the phenomenon two weeks ago—which has everyone wondering: Is this a bubble? And should you buy anyway in the likely event that it is? Here's what people are saying: Farhad Manjoo at Slate gives a first-hand account of the confusing and frankly downright shady process for buying the coins. "You've got to take several leaps of faith, trusting sites that look like they were put together by teenagers," he writes. But that's why he thinks this bubble still has legs. Bubbles, he theorizes, take off when mainstream buyers get involved. Once better Bitcoin sites appear, the masses will arrive, and "prices will begin to get really crazy." Speculators "are just laughing at all the people who are dismissing Bitcoin as a bubble," writes Henry Blodget at Business Insider. Because the most you can lose on Bitcoins is 100% of your money—and you stand to make much more than 100% back. Like, say, 600% (which investors have made in the last six weeks). That said, lots of things could obliterate the market, like hacking, or a government crackdown. Timothy Lee at Forbes thinks Bitcoins are a bonafide disruptive technology. "The Bitcoin economy today looks a lot like the PC market circa 1978," he observes. "Most people today look at Bitcoin and see an impractical curiosity." But Bitcoin isn't a product, it's a platform, and one with lots of room to grow. But Kurt Eichenwald at Vanity Fair is far, far less convinced, calling the system "very cool. But also very foolish." Bitcoins aren't a currency anymore—currencies are based on "a rational expectation of relatively stable valuation," and Bitcoin prices are anything but stable or rational. "In essence, the market is a fantasy," based on speculators and investors. And when they stop buying, who will replace them? "My bet? No one." It's worth noting that the price took a really nasty hit today, falling 24% from its intra-day high of $266.


Recently, HIGH TIMES sat down with Saturday Night Live cast member Pete Davidson to discuss his use of medical marijuana for Crohn’s disease.

 Davidson is an outspoken advocate of the medicinal use of cannabis and believes the New York State medical marijuana program is inadequate and difficult to navigate. He takes offense to those who wish to keep healing pot hard to procure and illegal, saying, “I wouldn’t be able to perform on SNL if I couldn’t smoke weed!”

 Pete also believes that cannabis should be legal beyond just medical purposes. He’s a proud and productive pot person who’s even won the respect of Lorne Michaels.

 “Pete’s really focused for someone who mostly talks about how much pot he smokes,” Michaels told the New York Times.

 Season 42 of Saturday Night Live premiers on NBC October 1st at 11:30 p.m. EST, and Pete’s first hour-long stand-up special “SMD” airs on Comedy Central October 29th at 11:00 p.m. EST. ||||| Just wanted to let you guys know I'm okay. I know I've kinda been missing, on social media and on the show. I quit drugs and am happy and sober for the first time in 8 years. It wasn't easy, but I got a great girl, great friends and I consider myself a lucky man. I'll always be here for you guys, I promise. Remember to never give up hope because sometimes that's all we got. We are a family and I appreciate all your love and support. It's nice to be back in action ❤ ||||| “Saturday Night Live” funnyman Pete Davidson got serious Monday night with a serious note about his sobriety.

 The 23-year-old comedian, whose fireman father died in the Sept. 11 attacks, has revealed previously that he took medical marijuana for his Crohn’s disease.

 “Just wanted to let you guys know I'm okay. I know I've kinda been missing, on social media and on the show. I quit drugs and am happy and sober for the first time in 8 years. It wasn't easy, but I got a great girl, great friends and I consider myself a lucky man,” Davidson captioned a photo on Instagram.

 “I'll always be here for you guys, I promise. Remember to never give up hope because sometimes that's all we got. We are a family and I appreciate all your love and support. It's nice to be back in action.”

 Pete Davidson says medical marijuana helps him perform

 Davidson, who joined the late night sketch show in 2014, is the youngest member of the cast.

 In September, he explained his disease, which was diagnosed when he was 17 or 18, and how he used pot to cope.

 Pete Davidson revealed Monday that he's been sober for the first time in eight years. (Andy Kropa/Andy Kropa/Invision/AP)

 "I found that the things the doctors were prescribing me, and seeing all these doctors and trying new things, weed was the only thing that would help me eat," Davidson told High Times magazine.

 "My stomach would be in pain all day and I wouldn't be able to eat, but then I'd smoke and I can eat and do my shows. I wouldn't be able to do ‘SNL’ if I didn't smoke weed. I wouldn't be able to do anything really. Me performing not high has gone awful. It's awful for me because I don't feel well."

 Pete Davidson credits Kid Cudi’s music for saving his life

 He also credits Kid Cudi’s music for saving his life.

 “He saved my life. I would have killed myself if I didn't have Kid Cudi. If you're 25 and under, I truly believe that Kid Cudi saved your life,” Davidson said during an interview with Power 105.1's The Breakfast Club in October, just weeks after the rapper checked himself into rehab for depression.

 “It's kind of comforting to know your hero goes through the same stuff you do.”

 Sign up for BREAKING NEWS Emails privacy policy Thanks for subscribing! |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– Noticed Pete Davidson's absence from SNL as of late? Well, there's a good reason behind it: The 23-year-old has been focusing on his sobriety. After telling High Times last fall that he couldn't function without the medical marijuana he's prescribed for Crohn's disease, Davidson now says, "I quit drugs and am happy and sober for the first time in eight years" in an Instagram post. Rapper Kid Cudi might have inspired that sobriety, per the New York Daily News. Last fall, Davidson told a radio station, "I would have killed myself if I didn't have Kid Cudi," who'd checked himself into rehab a few weeks earlier.


Here is a news article: Protesters listen to speakers at a demonstration against a proposed ban of transgendered people in the military in the Castro District, Wednesday, July 26, 2017, in San Francisco. Demonstrators flocked... (Associated Press)

 WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military will continue to permit transgender individuals to serve openly until Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has received President Donald Trump's "direction" to change the policy and figured out how to implement it, America's top military officer said Thursday.

 In a memo to all military service chiefs, commanders and enlisted military leaders, Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said "there will be no modifications" to current policy for now, amid questions about Trump's announcement on Twitter that the U.S. government will not "accept or allow" transgender people to serve in any capacity in the military.

 "I know there are questions about yesterday's announcement," Dunford began, adding that nothing would change until the president's direction has been received by Mattis and Mattis has issued "implementation guidance."

 "In the meantime, we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect," Dunford wrote. "As importantly, given the current fight and the challenges we face, we will all remain focused on accomplishing our assigned missions."

 The Dunford statement suggests that Mattis was given no presidential direction on changing the transgender policy. Mattis has been on vacation this week and has been publicly silent amid questions about Trump's announced ban. His spokesmen declined to comment Thursday. On Wednesday they said the Pentagon would work with the White House and provide revised guidance to the military "in the near future."

 Dunford himself was not aware that Trump was going to announce the ban, a U.S. official said. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter and so spoke on condition of anonymity.

 Trump's announcement caught the Pentagon flat-footed and unable to explain what it called Trump's "guidance."

 "Please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military," the commander in chief tweeted.

 Trump wrote that he had consulted with "my generals and military experts," but he did not mention Mattis, the retired Marine general who recently told the service chiefs to spend another six months weighing the costs and benefits of allowing transgender individuals to enlist. At the time, Mattis said this "does not presuppose the outcome of the review," but Trump's tweets appeared to have done just that.

 The Pentagon has not released data on the number of transgender people currently serving. A Rand Corp. study has estimated the number at between 1,320 and 6,630 out of 1.3 million active-duty troops.

 Criticism for Trump's action was immediate and strong from both political parties.

 John McCain, the Arizona Republican and Vietnam War hero, said Trump was simply wrong.

 "Any American who meets current medical and readiness standards should be allowed to continue serving," he said. "There is no reason to force service members who are able to fight, train and deploy to leave the military -- regardless of their gender identity."

 Not everyone at the Capitol agreed.

 Rep. Duncan Hunter, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said: "It's about time that a decision is made to restore the warrior culture and allow the U.S. military to get back to business."

 Transgender people already in uniform were concerned about what comes next.

 "Everybody is hurt, everybody is scared," said Rudy Akbarian, 26, who is in the military but did not want to identify his branch.

 Trump's sudden declaration appears to halt a decades-long trend toward more inclusive policies on military service, including the repeal in 2010 of a ban on gays serving openly. President Bill Clinton in 1993 began the push to allow gays to serve. In December 2015, President Barack Obama's Pentagon chief, Ash Carter, announced that all military positions would be open to women. Liberalizing policy on transgender troops was the next step.

 Just last week, when asked about the transgender issue at a Senate hearing, Gen. Paul Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, "I am an advocate of every qualified person who can meet the physical standards to serve in our uniformed services to be able to do so."

 Transgender service members have been able to serve openly since 2016, when Carter ended the ban. Since Oct. 1, transgender troops could receive medical care and start changing their gender identifications in the Pentagon's personnel system.

 Carter also gave the services until July 1 to develop policies to allow people already identifying as transgender to join the military if they meet normal standards and have been stable in their identified genders for 18 months.

 On June 30, Mattis extended the July 1 deadline to next Jan. 1, saying the services should study the impact on the "readiness and lethality of our forces."

 White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Trump had made "a military decision." She said it was his judgment that allowing transgender service "erodes military readiness and unit cohesion."

 Sanders said the "president's national security team was part of this consultation" and that Trump "informed" Mattis of his decision immediately after he made it on Tuesday. ||||| CLOSE President Donald Trump said he will reverse former President Obama's policy that allowed transgender troops to serve openly in the military. USA TODAY

 Protesters gather in front of the White House on July 26, 2017, in Washington, D.C. Trump announced on July 26 that transgender people may not serve "in any capacity" in the U.S. military, citing the "tremendous medical costs and disruption" their presence would cause. (Photo: Paul J. Richards, AFP/Getty Images)

 WASHINGTON – Military leaders sought to reassure transgender troops Thursday that their jobs and health care are safe – at least for now – after President Trump's tweets a day earlier that implied an immediate end to both.

 The Navy offered the most specific guidance, saying no transgender sailors will be discharged and the service will continue to provide health care for them, according to an email obtained by USA TODAY.

 Meanwhile, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Joe Dunford, told all the service chiefs in a memo that there will be no changes in transgender policy until Defense Secretary Jim Mattis receives specific direction from the White House.

 Yet administration officials said that guidance may be weeks or even months away.

 White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said there was no timetable to implement Trump's tweets on Wednesday morning that declared transgender troops would not be welcome to serve in any capacity, and that the military would not pay for their medical treatment.

 Military leaders acknowledged the tumult created by those tweets, and that they were blindsided by the announcement.

 The Navy's guidance, which came in an email from Vice Adm. Robert Burke, also acknowledges that Trump's announcement is "causing concern for some of our sailors and that they likely have questions."

 What's more, Burke indicates that Trump's tweets caught military brass unawares.

 Burke notes that the office of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is "working to quickly discern the President's intent." Mattis was on vacation when Trump made his announcement.

 The Defense Secretary, and by extension, the Navy "will not take any personnel actions or change any policy until further guidance from the President is received," Burke wrote, adding that transgender sailors receiving medical care will continue "to receive all necessary medical care" and none would be discharged.

 He concluded by saying, "treating service members with dignity and respect is something we expect from our Sailors at all times."

 Related:

 Trump's decision to ban transgender troops in three tweets left the White House and Pentagon scrambling to determine how to proceed in the immediate aftermath Wednesday. One day later, there has been no formal policy guidance issued from the White House about reversing the policy that started last year under the Obama administration to allow transgender troops to serve openly.

 In July 2016, then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter outlined a plan to allow transgender troops to receive treatment that ranges from counseling to hormone treatment to gender reassignment surgery. Before that, those service members could have been discharged for medical reasons. There may be as many as 6,600 transgender troops on the military's active duty force of 1.3 million, according to a RAND Corp. report.

 As civil liberties and LGBTQ groups continue to denounce Trump's decision, the White House has been unable to answer questions about whether transgender service members would be dismissed from the military – even if they are currently deployed to conflict zones such as Afghanistan.

 CLOSE Here is a guide to understanding LGBT terms. Sara Snyder, USA TODAY

 Explaining his rationale on Wednesday, Trump said the U.S. military "must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail."

 Yet any saving Trump hoped to achieve by denying transgender troops medical care will be overshadowed by the cost of replacing them.

 The RAND Corp., a non-partisan think tank commissioned by the Pentagon to study the issue, found that only a few hundred of the estimated 6,600 transgender troops would seek medical treatment in any year. RAND found those costs would total no more than $8 million per year.

 Replacing them transgender troops would likely be far more costly. The Army, for example, is spending $300 million this year on bonuses and ads to recruit 6,000 soldiers. That does not include the money needed to train, equip and pay them.

 Though Trump's tweets said he made the decision after consulting "with my generals and military experts," it remains unclear who took part in those discussions.

 Navy Capt. Greg Hicks declined to comment on whether Trump consulted Dunford on repealing the policy. Those conversations are private and confidential, said Hicks, Dunford’s spokesman.

 Contributing: David Jackson

 Related:

 Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2vaPuxX |||||
A summary of this is?

– The US military will continue to permit transgender individuals to serve openly until Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has received President Donald Trump's "direction" to change the policy and figured out how to implement it, America's top military officer said Thursday. In a memo to all military service chiefs, commanders, and enlisted military leaders, Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said "there will be no modifications" to current policy for now, amid questions about Trump's announcement on Twitter that the US government will not "accept or allow" transgender people to serve in any capacity in the military, the AP reports. "I know there are questions about yesterday's announcement," Dunford began, adding that nothing would change until the president's direction has been received by Mattis and Mattis has issued "implementation guidance." The Dunford statement suggests that Mattis was given no presidential direction on changing the transgender policy. Mattis has been on vacation this week and has been publicly silent amid questions about Trump's announced ban. His spokesmen declined to comment Thursday. On Wednesday they said the Pentagon would work with the White House and provide revised guidance to the military "in the near future." Dunford himself was not aware that Trump was going to announce the ban, a US official said. Trump's announcement caught the Pentagon flat-footed and unable to explain what it called Trump's "guidance." The Navy is in sync with Dunford's direction: In an email obtained by USA Today, Vice Adm. Robert Burke said transgender sailors will not be discharged and will continue to receive medical treatment until the White House issues clear guidance.


Summarize this article:

Donald Trump's presidential campaign is planning on a political convention packed with sports stars.

 “It’s gonna be a great combination of our great politicians," said Ivanka Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee's daughter, during a Wednesday radio interview, according to Buzzfeed, "but also great American businessmen and women and leaders across industry and leaders across really all the sectors, from athletes to coaches and everything in between.”

 She added that the July 18-21 convention in Cleveland was "not gonna be a ho-hum lineup of the typical politicians.”

 However, the campaign's efforts to secure the attendance of some of their top choices in the sports world have been rocky.

 People familiar with the planning of the convention told Bloomberg Politics on Tuesday that campaign aides were lining up several retired athletes, coaches and other sports leaders to appear at the convention. On Wednesday, former undisputed world heavyweight champion Mike Tyson and NASCAR CEO Brian France, two of those on the list, both announced through spokespeople that they would not attend. Former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka, another sports legend organizers listed, said he was willing to appear but had not been asked to do so.

 The list of athletes outlined by those familiar with the planning also included Bobby Knight, the former Indiana University basketball coach who Trump frequently credits for his Indiana primary victory.

 QuickTake How the U.S. Elects Its Presidents

 The sports stars’ specific roles at the convention have not yet been finalized, and it is unclear whether any of them will speak on stage to delegates and television cameras. Representatives of those lined up to appear did not respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.

 Get the latest on global politics in your inbox, every day. Get our newsletter daily.

 Separately, third-party groups have booked musicians to perform at venues throughout Cleveland during the July 18-21 convention: 1970s-era rock band Journey; Bret Michaels, the frontman of the 1980s-era metal band Poison; 80s hitmaker Rick Springfield: country singer Martina McBride, who rose to stardom in the 1990s; country band Rascal Flatts, who formed in Ohio in 1999; and The Band Perry, a siblings trio known for country pop songs.

 After this story’s publication, Trump said at least one of the sports figures, Tyson, wasn’t asked to fill a speaking role. News of Tyson’s involvement had sparked disapproval online on the same night Trump likened the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal to “rape.”

 “Iron Mike Tyson was not asked to speak at the Convention though I'm sure he would do a good job if he was,” Trump tweeted. “The media makes everything up!”

 On Wednesday, Jo Mignano, Tyson’s personal publicist, told Bloomberg Politics that the former boxer will not attend the convention. “He’ll be nowhere near Cleveland,” she said.

 Trump has boasted in the past about his endorsement by Tyson, who has re-emerged in popular culture in recent years with roles in popular movies like “Hangover” and the publishing of a well-received memoir.

 “Mike Tyson endorsed me, I love it,” Trump said in April in Indiana. “You know, all the tough guys endorse me. I like that.”

 Following the Indiana rally, Trump was criticized for touting the endorsement of Tyson, who had served three years in prison after being convicted in the state for raping a beauty pageant contestant.

 Tyson and France have publicly backed Trump, and Ditka has voiced strong support for the presumptive Republican nominee.

 On Wednesday, Ditka told the Chicago Tribune that he was "happy to do it" but was unaware of any talks to appear at the convention. A NASCAR spokesperson speaking on behalf of France said Wednesday that he "does not plan to speak at nor attend the convention," according to Motorsports.com.

 Trump has said on the campaign trail that he wants the event to be a gathering of “winners”—and not politicians, like at past conventions. “We’re going to do it a little different, if that’s OK,” he said in Virginia earlier this month. “I’m thinking about getting some of the great sports people who like me a lot.”

 The cost for the musical performances will be covered by various private groups, not the Republican National Committee or the convention's host committee, said Kirsten Kukowski, convention spokeswoman. She declined to comment on program details.

 The organizations hosting the concerts are Concerts for a Cause, the Creative Coalition, the Cleveland Clinic's educational foundation, law firm Jones Day’s foundation and others. A representative of The Beach Boys, one of the bands that organizers said on Tuesday would perform in Cleveland during the convention, issued a denial to Bloomberg Politics on Wednesday.

 The design for the stage, with curving white staircases and a huge digital screen made up of more than 600 LED panels, was unveiled at a news conference Tuesday inside Quicken Loans Arena. ||||| Former world heavyweight champion Mike Tyson and ex-Bears coach Mike Ditka will appear on behalf of Donald Trump at the Republican National Convention, reports Bloomberg’s Jennifer Jacobs and Kevin Cirilli.

 Tyson and Ditka are expected to be joined by former Hoosiers coach Bobby Knight and NASCAR CEO Brian France, according to the report. It’s unclear if any of the four will speak at the convention, but they will be on hand to support Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee.

 Trump has boasted about his many athlete endorsers throughout his campaign. In a June speech, Trump mentioned Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger and Dana White as some of his supporters and people who he’d like to invite to the convention.

 • USWNT star Sydney Leroux is using Donald Trump toilet paper

 Brady has called Trump a friend, while Roethlisberger backed away from Trump after the speech.

 The Republican National Convention will take place in Cleveland from July 18–21.

 [Bloomberg] |||||

– A lot of leading Republicans are planning to skip this year's Republican National Convention, but that won't be a problem for Donald Trump, insiders tell Bloomberg: He was planning to focus on sports figures instead of politicians and has already lined up a few "winners." According to Bloomberg's sources, the sportspeople include boxer and convicted rapist Mike Tyson, Chicago Bears great Mike Ditka, former Hoosiers coach Bobby Knight, and NASCAR chief Brian France, all of whom have endorsed Trump. Trump has bragged about the Tyson endorsement, though the candidate tweeted Tuesday night that Tyson "was not asked to speak at the Convention though I'm sure he would do a good job if he was." Sports Illustrated reports that Trump named Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and UFC president Dana White earlier this month as supporters that he would like to have speak at the convention, though Roethlisberger quickly announced that he won't be at the convention and has no intention of becoming involved in politics during his playing career. Bloomberg reports that musicians booked by third-party groups to appear in Cleveland during the convention include the Beach Boys, Journey, and former Poison frontman Bret Michaels.


CONSIDERING OPTIONS: There's a chance Murkowski could run as a Libertarian if Miller beats her.

 The Alaska Division of Elections said Thursday that it has more than 20,000 absentee and questioned ballots left to process from Tuesday's primary election. Most are expected to be Republican primary ballots that will decide the too-close-to-call race between U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Joe Miller.

 Miller is currently leading Murkowski by 1,668 votes.

 Elections officials on Thursday evening released the first detailed breakdown of the remaining ballots.

 The state has received back 11,266 absentee ballots so far out of over 16,000 requested. The ballots had to be postmarked by Tuesday's election but can come in as much as 15 days afterward.

 There are also 658 early votes not yet counted and 8,972 questioned ballots. A ballot can be "questioned" for several reasons. Often the reason is that the voter cast the ballot in a precinct other than where they live.

 Miller said in a Thursday interview that he expects to maintain his lead with the help of military absentee voters. He also said Murkowski shouldn't think about a third-party candidacy or an independent write-in effort if she loses in the primary.

 "If Sen. Murkowski is going to keep her word, she's going to get out -- if the voters decide that in fact I prevail in this primary election. She said at the Kenai forum on Friday that she would respect the will of the Alaskan voter and we're going to hold her to it," Miller said by phone from Fairbanks.

 Murkowski campaign manager John Bitney responded that Murkowski was focused on the ballots that are left to be counted and "any speculation about anything else is absolutely premature."

 There is a possibility that Murkowski could run on the Libertarian ticket in the November general election if she loses the Republican primary. The Alaska Libertarian Party is discussing the possibility and its Senate candidate, David Haase, has said he is open to talking to Murkowski about him stepping aside.

 Andrew Halcro, a Murkowski supporter who served with her in the state Legislature, called Haase on Wednesday and discussed the possibility. Halcro said he was acting on his own and not coordinating with the Murkowski campaign.

 Halcro said he did bring it up with Murkowski on Thursday morning. "She said what she's told (the media), that she's considering all the options," he said.

 Halcro said he thinks Murkowski should pursue the Libertarian route if she doesn't win the primary. She has the campaign cash left and a network in place to run a strong statewide campaign, he said.

 THREE MORE COUNTS

 The Division of Elections isn't saying how many of the ballots left to count are for the Republican primary and how many are for the Democratic primary.

 But three times more Republican than Democratic ballots were cast on Election Day in the Senate race. Murkowski campaign manager Bitney watched absentees being sorted at the Division of Elections Thursday and said a "very, very high percentage" of them were Republican.

 Anchorage attorney Tom Van Flein was at the Division of Elections observing for the Miller campaign.

 Van Flein is best known as the personal lawyer for Sarah Palin, who endorsed Miller.

 The Division of Elections plans to count all the absentee ballots on Aug. 31 that it has received by then. Some of the questioned ballots will be disqualified; for example if it turns out the voter really wasn't registered in Alaska. Those that are valid will likely be counted on Sept. 3. Elections officials said they'll do a final count of absentees and any other remaining ballots on Sept. 8.

 The number of remaining ballots changes daily as more absentees come in and there's no way to know how many will be disqualified. But if all the current number of 20,896 remaining ballots were counted and three-fourths of them voted in the Republican Senate primary, Murkowski would need the vote on roughly 55 percent to win.

 NATIONAL ATTENTION

 Both sides are keeping close watch. The Washington Post cited unnamed sources in reporting Thursday that the National Republican Senatorial Committee will be sending lawyer Sean Cairncross to assist Murkowski's campaign during the ballot count. It's not clear what his role will be, but Miller called it questionable.

 "We're just hoping that the lawyering up that's going on with the National Republican Senatorial Committee isn't going to be resulting in any improper meddling in our primary," Miller said.

 Miller said he's beating Murkowski because of his volunteer network and "common sense message."

 "Alaskans are common sense folk, they recognize our nation is at a bankrupt position right now," he said.

 Murkowski campaign manager Bitney said people should remember "he hasn't won yet." ||||| Joe Miller, the Republican candidate who is poised to knock off Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) in a primary contest, said Thursday he is concerned she will launch a protracted legal battle to save her seat.

 Miller, an Iraq war veteran who received the backing of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), emerged from the election Tuesday night with a narrow lead over Murkowski, an incumbent who assumed the seat from her father.

 But officials are still counting absentee ballots in the close race, and a lawyer for the GOP Senate campaign committee is heading to Alaska to assist the senator.

 ADVERTISEMENT

 "We are looking right now to make sure that the election — that the votes — are accounted for fairly, without any type of game play," Miller said in an interview on Fox Business Network. "It concerns us any time somebody lawyers up and tries to pull an Al Franken, if you will. We are very concerned that there may be some attempt here to skew the results."

 Alaska officials will start counting absentee ballots next Tuesday, but observers expect a protracted process to determine the winner.

 Miller was referring to the 2008 Minnesota Senate contest that pitted now-Sen. Al Franken (D) against then-Sen. Norm Coleman (R). Coleman's razor-thin lead the morning after election night triggered an automatic recount that resulted in an eight-month legal battle.

 The candidate expressed concern specifically about the lawyer sent to help Murkowski.

 "You know we are concerned," he said. "We’ve got, I think, some game play going on here with the national Republican Senatorial Committee meddling in our primary election.”

 Democrats have pounced on the election results, painting them as an example of GOP infighting that could do in the party in the November midterms.

 They have also portrayed the election as another potential victory for a Tea Party-backed candidate, a group which Democrats have said is outside the mainstream.

 The primary campaign was contentious and drew national attention in its final days due to Palin's involvement. Murkowski was critical of Palin for writing a Facebook note calling her part of the problem in Washington and referencing the fact that she was appointed to the seat by her father, then-Gov. Frank Murkowski, who was unseated by Palin in 2006.

 For his part, Miller expressed confidence in the support he has received and predicted he would emerge victorious, barring any "game play."

 "But, we believe as soon as the votes get counted, if there is not any game play, we are going to come out where we are now.”

  |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– Still no winner in the Alaska Senate race, but Joe Miller retains his slim lead and incumbent Lisa Murkowski continues to deflect (but not deny) speculation that she's considering a third-party run. Also, still no love lost between candidates, notes the Hill: Upon hearing that the GOP Senate campaign committee is sending a lawyer to help Murkowski, Miller declared, "It concerns us any time somebody lawyers up and tries to pull an Al Franken, if you will. We are very concerned that there may be some attempt here to skew the results." With about 20,000 absentee or questioned ballots still to be counted, Miller leads by 1,668 votes, reports the Anchorage Daily News. He's confident of victory, as rumors fly in the state that Murkowski could run against him in the fall on the Libertarian ticket. The party's current candidate says he'd be willing to step aside for her.


As an 18-year-old man ran from his New Smyrna Beach house bleeding from four gunshot wounds, his father stepped outside, pointed a handgun and fired one more shot, police said.

 Eugene Blackwell Sr. shot his son Eugene Blackwell Jr. at 6:34 p.m. on Father’s Day while the two were inside their Edward Street home, New Smyrna Beach Sgt. Eugene Griffith said.

 The final shot missed the fleeing teen.

 The younger Blackwell, who just graduated from New Smyrna Beach High where he was a star weightlifter, had just broken up a fight between his father and his mother, Windy Blackwell, Griffith said, and the elder Blackwell was not pleased with the interference.

 “He shot his son four times,” Griffith said Monday morning. “It escalated after the mother left the house.”

 The elder Blackwell was arrested early Monday and charged with attempted first-degree murder. He was being held without bail Monday at the Volusia County Branch Jail.

 Neighbor Richard Tredeaux told investigators that after he heard the initial gunfire coming from the Blackwell house, he saw Blackwell Jr. running from the residence. Tredeaux said he saw Blackwell Sr. emerge from the home and point something at the teenager. He heard another gunshot and then the elder Blackwell yelled out, “Yeah (expletive deleted) how do you like that?” the arrest report states.

 Griffith said Blackwell Jr. was airlifted to Halifax Health Medical Center in Daytona Beach in critical condition. He was listed in satisfactory condition on Monday, said Tangela Boyd, hospital spokeswoman.

 Sgt. Griffith said Blackwell Jr. interrupted his parents when their argument turned physical early Sunday evening. According to the arrest report, Blackwell Sr. grabbed his wife by the neck after he asked her whether she had been talking to a man named “Frank.”

 Windy Blackwell, 42, told police the family had a pleasant Father’s Day. She told police her husband then went out to visit a friend and that when he returned he started asking her about “Frank.” Windy Blackwell denied talking to anyone named “Frank,” but did tell her husband that she wants a divorce, the report states. She said her husband grabbed her by the throat and that’s when her son intervened, the report shows.

 Windy Blackwell said her husband has been abusive throughout their 23-year relationship and that he has been abusive with their son, the report states. Court records show Blackwell Sr. has been arrested several times on charges of battery and domestic violence. He was convicted of battery in 1992. There are two other children in the family, but Windy Blackwell said they were not home when the fight erupted.

 The mother told police that Blackwell Jr. told her to leave the house. After she left reluctantly, Blackwell Sr. turned on his son, Griffith said. When the mother returned to the residence a few minutes later, though, she learned that her son had been shot and that he was being taken to the hospital. She talked to Blackwell Jr. before he was taken away and he told her that he was fine, the report states.

 Blackwell Sr. had taken off in his Dodge pickup, police said. Another neighbor, Justin Drury, told police that he saw the elder Blackwell speed away in his truck. Drury, who along with Tredeaux, called 9-1-1, followed the suspect until he abandoned his vehicle on Duss Street, a dead-end road, the report states.

 In his 9-1-1 call, Drury told the dispatcher, “You’re gonna love this — I’m following the suspect.”

 Blackwell Jr. ended up on Tredeaux’s driveway at the 700 block of Edward Street. Tredeaux said the teen yelled, “He shot me! He shot me! My dad shot me! Call 9-1-1!” as he ran down Edward. Tredeaux, who said he teaches shooting sports at the Boy Scouts camp in Paisley, said he grabbed a chair for the teenager and tried to calm him down as he called 9-1-1.

 “He was shot all over the body,” Tredeaux told the sheriff’s dispatcher. “He says he can’t breathe.”

 In the 9-1-1 recording, Tredeaux could be heard repeatedly telling the moaning teenager to “stay calm” and “stay with me.”

 Drury’s wife, Tami, told police that she also saw the victim running and holding his side. Tredeaux said he was able to help Blackwell Jr. and keep him calm because, “I took emergency preparedness with the Boy Scouts and various police departments in the area.” He said police told him not to discuss the shooting or the case.

 Griffith said Blackwell Sr. shot his son in the abdomen, the leg, the hip and the arm.

 Investigators were present when the teen was in surgery and were told by the doctor that one bullet had struck several organs and another bullet was lodged in his hip and was too dangerous to remove. The doctor said Blackwell Jr. was also shot in the right arm, and that was a “through and through shot,” the report states.

 Blackwell Sr. tried to surrender at the Volusia County Branch Jail later Sunday night, but was taken back to New Smyrna Beach police headquarters. Investigators attempted to interview him just after midnight Monday, but he refused to talk and said he wanted an attorney, the report states. Blackwell Sr. was denied bail by a judge at his first appearance hearing at the jail on Monday afternoon.

 The younger Blackwell helped the New Smyrna Beach High School weightlifting team win a state title in April in Class 2A by finishing second in the 183-pound division. ||||| Man shot son on Father's Day, New Smyrna Beach police say Eugene Blackwell Sr. held on no bond at Volusia Jail

 EVAN LAMBERT IN ORANGE COUNTY. THANK YOU. IT'S FATHER'S DAY. FATHER'S DAY. AND HE SHOT HIS SON. YOU'VE GOT IT. YOU GOT THE WHOLE STORY. STRONG WORDS FROM THE GRANDFATHER OF A TEEN THAT POLICE SAY WAS SHOT BY HIS OWN FATHER. THAT FATHER WENT BEFORE A JUDGE THIS AFTERNOON ON ATTEMPTED MURDER CHARGES AND WAS DENIED BOND. AS AMAKA UBAKA TELLS US IT STARTED AS THE TEEN TRIED TO DEFEND HIS MOTHER FROM HIS FATHER'S ABUSE. Reporter: A TEEN INTERVENED TO SAVE HIS MOM FROM HIS FATHER'S ABUSE BUT POLICE SAY WHILE HE WAS DEFENDING HIS MOM, HIS DAD PICKED UP A GUN AND SHOT HIM MULTIPLE SOMETIMES. EUGENE BLACKWELL, JR. RAN FROM HIT HOUSE DOWN THE STREET, UP HERE TO THIS HOME WHERE HE COLLAPSED RIGHT HERE IN THE GRASS. THE GUY HAS BEEN SHOT. HE'S IN MY DRIVEWAY. Reporter: A NEIGHBOR'S FRANTIC CALL TO 911 AFTER POLICE SAY A TEEN WAS SHOT FOUR TIMES BY HIS OWN FATHER. THE BODY, THE LEG, THE BULLET, EVERYWHERE. THE YOU GO UNLOADED ON HIM. POLICE SAY 45-YEAR-OLD EUGENE BLACKWELL, SR. STARTED ARGUING WITH HIS WIFE WHEN SHE BROUGHT UP A DIVORCE AND THAT'S WHEN SHE SAYS BLACKWELL GRABBED HER BY THE THROAT AND THEIR SON, EUGENE BLACKWELL, JR., INTERVENED. HE TOLD HIS MOTHER TO LEAVE THE HOUSE AND SHORTLY AFTER THAT BLACKWELL SHOT HIS 18-YEAR-OLD SON MULTIPLE TIMES. JUSTIN AVIS HEARD THREE SHOTS. RAPID FIRE, THREE SHOVES BANG, BANG, BANG. ONE RIGHT AFTER ANOTHER. SCARY TO SEE THIS HAPPEN SO CLOSE TO HOME. Reporter: WHILE THE TEEN RAN FOR HOPE BLACKWELL DROVE OFF TO THIS INTERSECTION WITH ANOTHER NEIGHBOR FOLLOWING CLOSE BEHIND. HE WENT DOWN A DEAD END ROAD AND I PARKED AT AN INTERSECTION AND WATCHED THAT DEAD END ROAD. Reporter: THE TRUCK WAS ABANDONED BUT SEVERAL HOURS LATER BLACKWELL TURNED HIMSELF INTO POLICE WHERE HE WAS ARRESTED FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER. AMAZING SOMETHING LIKE THAT CAN HAPPEN ON FATHER'S DAY. ACCORDING TO THE ARREST AFFIDAVIT THERE WAS A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THROUGHOUT THE 23 YEARS THAT THIS COUPLE WAS TOGETHER. BLACKWELL'S WIFE ALSO SAYS HER HUSBAND PHYSICALLY ABUSED THEIR TEEN SON IN THE PAST. POLICE SAY THEY'RE STILL LOOKING FOR THE GUN THAT WAS USED IN THE SHOOTING BUT THEY DID GO INSIDE THE HOME AND FOUND MORE THAN A

 NEW SMYRNA BEACH, Fla. -

 A man shot and critically injured his teenage son during a family argument in New Smyrna Beach on Father's Day, according to police.

 [LISTEN: 911 call released in New Smyrna Beach shooting]

 New Smyrna Beach police said Eugene Blackwell Sr., 46, shot his 18-year-old son, Eugene Blackwell Jr., four times around 6:15 p.m. Sunday.

 According to police, Blackwell had been fighting with his wife at their home and choked her when she brought up the possibility of divorce.

 The wife left the home as Blackwell Jr. intervened, and a short time later, his father shot him, police said.

 "The guy's been shot," a neighbor told 911. "He's sitting here in my driveway. ... The guy just unloaded on him."

 Blackwell Jr., who was shot in his chest area, hip, thigh and elbow, was airlifted to Halifax Health Medical Center in Daytona Beach.

 Police said Blackwell Sr. drove away from the home after the shooting but later turned himself in to authorities.

 Blackwell Sr. was arrested on charges of battery and attempted first-degree murder. He was being held without bond at the Volusia County Jail.

 Watch Local 6 News and stay with ClickOrlando.com for more on this story. |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– Police say a Florida teen stopped his parents from fighting on Father's Day and was shot four times for his efforts, the Daytona Beach News-Journal reports. Eugene Blackwell Jr., 18, a star weightlifter, separated his mom from the elder Blackwell, 45, and got her out of the house. Then the father allegedly unloaded on Eugene, shooting him in the chest, elbow, hip, and thigh, reports WKMG. "He was shot all over the body," said a Smyrna Beach neighbor who called 911. "He says he can’t breathe." The neighbor could be heard telling the young man "stay calm" and "stay with me." Meanwhile another neighbor followed the alleged shooter, who had driven off in a Dodge pickup. "You’re gonna love this—I’m following the suspect," the man told 911 before stopping at the mouth of a dead-end street where the father had parked. The suspect later turned himself in and was charged with attempted murder. This morning, Eugene was undergoing surgery for multiple bullet wounds at a hospital in Daytona, the Orlando Sentinel reports. So what started the fight? The mother brought up the idea of a divorce and the elder Blackwell began choking her, police say.


Article:

Kellyanne Conway, President Trump Donald John TrumpMike Huckabee: If Trump nominated Moses to the Supreme Court Dems would still be unhappy Trump admin likely to detain migrant families for months during immigration proceedings: report ICE chief to protesters: We're not the ones separating families MORE's senior adviser, promoted Ivanka Trump's line of clothing and accessories during an appearance on "Fox & Friends" early Thursday, imploring viewers to "go buy Ivanka's stuff."

 "Go buy Ivanka's stuff, is what I would tell you." Conway said. "I hate shopping but I'm going to go get some for myself today."

 "Go buy Ivanka's stuff!" Kellyanne Conway tells "Fox & Friends" viewers from the White House briefing room. pic.twitter.com/noIhnVgcAk — Andrew Kirell (@AndrewKirell) February 9, 2017

 The hashtag #BuyIvanka is widely circulating on Twitter on Thursday.

 Stand with Ivanka Trump!

 We will never shop at #Nordstrom#BuyIvanka pic.twitter.com/IvK1mEPEi6 — Texas Lone Star (@SouthLoneStar) February 9, 2017

 ADVERTISEMENT

 "I'm going to give it a free commercial here, go buy it today," Conway said.

 Chris Lu, former deputy secretary of Labor, on Thursday tweeted a screenshot of the federal ethics law he believes Conway broke with her comments.

 "This is the federal ethics law that @KellyannePolls just violated," Lu tweeted, tagging the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and Rep. Jason Chaffetz Jason ChaffetzTucker Carlson: Ruling class cares more about foreigners than their own people Fox's Kennedy chides Chaffetz on child migrants: 'I’m sure these mini rapists all have bombs strapped to their chests' After FBI cleared by IG report, GOP must reform itself MORE (R-Utah), the chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

 Lu highlighted a portion that says: "An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives."

 The law applies to employees of an "agency," which is defined as "an Executive department, a Government corporation, and an independent establishment."

 Conway's comments on Fox News's morning show come after President Trump on Wednesday lashed out at Nordstrom for dropping his daughter’s clothing line.

 "My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!" Trump tweeted.

 My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 8, 2017

 Former President Obama's ethics czar said Thursday that Trump’s criticism of the retail giant for dropping his daughter’s apparel brand is "an abuse of the office of the presidency."

 "It is an example of why Donald Trump and his family needed to step away, needed to make a more definitive break," Norm Eisen, who later served as U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic under Obama, told MSNBC's Katy Tur.

 "And I think it's an abuse of the office of the presidency. He's putting the bully in the bully pulpit."

 This report was updated at 10:06 a.m. ||||| President Trump's adviser Kellyanne Conway was unrepentant Thursday night for using her White House position to promote first daughter Ivanka Trump's fashion brand, despite a backlash from ethics experts and public officials.

 Her comment to "go buy Ivanka Trump stuff" was made from the White House Thursday morning while talking to Fox News.

 The White House said later in the day that Conway had been "counseled" about the matter.

 And in a remarkable rebuke to the White House, a bipartisan letter was sent to the Office of Government Ethics Thursday, asking that office to determine whether she should receive a stronger disciplinary response, including suspension, demotion or dismissal.

 Conway appeared again on Fox Thursday evening and, when asked about the uproar, said, "I'm not going to comment on that... I have nothing more to say about it." She said that the president "supports me 100%."

 "At some point, I hope American women work for a boss that treats them the way President Trump treated me today," Conway said.

 Conway said that the White House is "aware of the letter" to the ethics office and is "reviewing it internally."

 The letter was authored by Representative Elijah Cummings, a Democrat, and Jason Chaffetz, Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee.

 It warned, "In this case, there is an additional challenge, which is that the President, as the ultimate disciplinary authority for the White House employees, has an inherent conflict of interest since Conway's statements relate to his daughter's private business."

 "For this reason, we request that you use authority Congress granted to you...to 'recommend to [Trump] the appropriate disciplinary action (such as reprimand, suspension, demotion or dismissal) be brought against'" Conway.

 A day earlier, the president had attacked Nordstrom department stores for dropping his daughter's line of clothing and accessories.

 Ethics lawyers, lawmakers and government watchdog organizations called for investigations into Conway's endorsement, and suggested or said outright that she had violated government ethics law.

 White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that Conway has been "counseled on that subject, and that's it." He did not elaborate.

 Conway was appearing on "Fox & Friends" when an interviewer raised the subject of Ivanka Trump. Conway praised the president's daughter as a "very successful businesswoman" and a "champion for women empowerment," and offered statistics about how many stores sell her merchandise.

 "Go buy Ivanka's stuff, is what I would tell you," Conway said. "It's a wonderful line. I own some of it. I fully -- I'm going to just, I'm going to give a free commercial here: Go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online."

 Related: Trump's Nordstrom blast retweeted by @POTUS

 Federal law says that public employees may not use their positions "for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity."

 Cummings earlier called Conway's TV plug "a textbook violation of government ethics laws and regulations enacted to prevent the abuse of an employee's government position." Chaffetz did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 Larry Noble, the general counsel of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan organization of election law experts, said that in his opinion, Conway "may have violated the law."

 An ethics group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, asked for the Office of Government Ethics and the White House counsel's office to look into the "apparent violation of law" and to "take any necessary discipline against her."

 The Office of Government Ethics advises executive branch officials on how to avoid conflicts of interest. Its director harshly criticized Trump last month for his decision to not divest ownership of his business interests.

 Related: Is Ivanka Trump's brand losing its bling?

 The office did not return a request for comment, but it said in a series of tweets that it was fielding an "extraordinary volume" of phone calls, emails and web traffic from citizens in response to "recent events."

 The ethics office stressed that it does not have enforcement power, like Congress or the FBI. When it learns of possible ethics violations, it said, it contacts the relevant agency and provides guidance.

 1/OGE's website, phone system and email system are receiving an extraordinary volume of contacts from citizens about recent events. — U.S. OGE (@OfficeGovEthics) February 9, 2017

 Richard Painter, who served as chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, said he would not address whether any White House official was violating the law.

 But he said public officials, when giving speeches or interviews in an official capacity, may not promote the products of "a particular private business belonging to the employee's own family, the President's family, a friend, a campaign contributor or anyone else."

 "That was strictly forbidden in the Bush administration because it is illegal," he said.

 Stan Brand, a former chief legal officer for the House of Representatives, said that Conway's endorsement appeared to be "technically a violation."

 He suggested it was doubtful that any law enforcement official would pursue "a single statement like this," but he said "a pattern or practice of such conduct could become a problem."

 Related: Nordstrom stock defies Trump

 Nordstrom said last week that it would no longer carry Ivanka Trump's line of clothing ando accessories because of "brand performance." An online campaign called #GrabYourWallet has encouraged shoppers to boycott Ivanka Trump merchandise.

 In addition, the company that owns TJ Maxx and Marshalls said that it recently sent a memo to workers instructing them not to highlight the Ivanka Trump brand in stores. It did not provide a reason for those instructions.

 And the Belk department store chain said it plans to pull Ivanka Trump products from its website, but will continue to offer them in stores. Belk said the decision was a response to customer feedback.

 On Wednesday, Trump tore into Nordstrom for mistreating his daughter.

 "My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!" he tweeted.

 The message was retweeted by the official presidential Twitter account, @POTUS, and raised eyebrows among ethics lawyers.

 Noble said the president's tweet was "totally out of line."

 Related: Ethics office swamped with calls after Conway plugs Ivanka Trump line

 "He should not be promoting his daughter's line, he should not be attacking a company that has business dealings with his daughter, and it just shows the massive amount of problems we have with his business holdings and his family's business holdings," Noble said Wednesday.

 The rules on endorsements by public officials exempt the president and vice president.

 Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, defended the president's use of the @POTUS handle to discuss his daughter's business.

 "This was less about his family's business and an attack on his daughter," he told reporters on Wednesday.

 --CNNMoney's Cristina Alesci and CNN's Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report. ||||| poster="http://v.politico.com/images/1155968404/201702/2333/1155968404_5317511643001_5317498399001-vs.jpg?pubId=1155968404" true Kellyanne Conway under fire for promoting Ivanka's brand White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Conway had 'been counseled on that subject, and that's it.'

 Kellyanne Conway used her platform Thursday to urge Americans to “go buy Ivanka’s stuff,” prompting a wave of backlash for potentially violating ethics rules governing the executive branch.

 Standing in the White House press briefing room, Conway, a counselor to the president, encouraged Americans to purchase Ivanka Trump’s products, one day after President Donald Trump himself lashed out at the luxury retailer Nordstrom for dropping his daughter’s clothing line.

 Story Continued Below

 “It’s a wonderful line. I own some of it,” Conway told “Fox & Friends.” “I fully — I’m going to give a free commercial here. Go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online.”

 Conway’s remark appears to violate the executive branch’s ban on staff endorsing products or companies. The regulation, from the Office of Government Ethics, also prohibits using public office for private gain of oneself or friends or relatives.

 Under the regulation, OGE’s director can notify the employee of the violation and ask the agency to investigate. The director can recommend discipline, including suspension, loss of pay or termination, but would probably just issue a warning for a first offense.

 Conway said Thursday night on Fox News that she had spoken with the president about the controversy and said it was a “very heartening moment.”

 “I am just really happy that I spent an awful lot of time of the president of the United States this afternoon and that he supports me 100 percent,” she said.

 At his daily briefing, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Conway had "been counseled on that subject, and that's it," declining to further elaborate on whether the White House believed the counselor to the president had crossed a line.

 But lawmakers suggested that it did. Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the chairman and ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, respectively, wrote in a letter to OGE Director Walter Shaub that Conway’s interview “raised extremely serious concerns.”

 “As the director of OGE, you have authority to review potential ethics violations and notify the employee’s agency, which in this case is the White House,” they said. “In this case, there is an additional challenge, which is that the President, as the ultimate disciplinary authority for White House employees, has an inherent conflict of interest since Conway’s statements relate to his daughter’s private business.”

 They asked that OGE “review Conway’s statement and act promptly on the basis of your findings,” as well as report back to the House panel with a recommendation for disciplinary action, if necessary.

 Cummings earlier Thursday had said in a letter to Chaffetz, “This appears to be a textbook violation of government ethics laws and regulations enacted to prevent the abuse of an employee’s government position,” and asked for a committee “review and potential disciplinary action.”

 Chaffetz seemed to agree, telling The Associated Press that Conway’s remark was “wrong, wrong, wrong, clearly over the line, unacceptable.”

 "It needs to be dealt with," Chaffetz had said. "There's no ifs, ands or buts about it."

 A host of liberal, progressive and nonpartisan advocacy groups filed complaints against Conway, including the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed its complaint with both OGE and the White House Counsel’s Office.

 “Ms. Conway appears to have violated both the letter and the spirit of these rules when she used her position to endorse the accessories and clothing line of Ms. Trump, the daughter of the president,” the CREW complaint says. “Furthermore, we are concerned about what appears to be a pattern developing of the use of official offices, particularly the White House and the Executive Office of the President, to benefit business interests of relatives and supporters of the president; Ms. Conway’s comments appear to be just the latest example of this trend.”

 Ordinarily, a violation in the White House would be dealt with by the White House counsel. But it’s not clear how the regulation will be enforced under a president who, based on his own statement Wednesday, seems likely to approve of what Conway said. (The president himself is technically exempt from the regulation, but White House policy has long applied it to him.)

 Likely sparked by Conway's remark, web traffic to the OGE's website surged Thursday to the point that it became inaccessible for much of the day. On Twitter, the office wrote that "OGE’s website, phone system and email system are receiving an extraordinary volume of contacts from citizens about recent events.” The office later added that it "does not have investigative or enforcement authority.”

 An OGE spokesman said the agency was "looking at ways to redirect traffic and add capacity" to make its website accessible again.

 Citing declining sales for Ivanka Trump’s label, Nordstrom announced earlier this month that it would no longer carry her line, a move that sparked anger from Donald Trump, who tweeted Wednesday that his daughter had “been treated so unfairly” by the department store.

 Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, have been highly visible members of the administration since Donald Trump took office just under three weeks ago. The president’s daughter accompanied him to Dover Air Force Base last week for the return of the remains of a Navy SEAL killed during a raid in Yemen and has advised him on policy issues, including the environment and parental leave.

 Conway told Fox News she found it “ironic that you’ve got some executives all over the internet bragging about what they’ve done to [Ivanka] and her line.”

 “Yet, they’re using the most prominent woman in Donald Trump’s — you know, most prominent — she’s his daughter, and they’re using her, who has been a champion for women empowerment, women in the workplace, to get to him,” she continued. “I think people could see through that. Go buy Ivanka's stuff is what I would tell you. I hate shopping. I’m going to go get some myself today.”

 While Nordstrom claimed that the decision to drop Ivanka Trump’s line of clothing and shoes was based solely on business, at least some of the decline in sales of her products could be attributed to the #GrabYourWallet campaign urging consumers to boycott Trump products.

 Nordstrom also hasn’t shied away from voicing opposition to Trump’s policies, releasing a statement in support of immigrants in the wake of the president’s executive order temporarily banning individuals from certain Muslim-majority nations from entering the U.S. in the name of national security. The retailer announced its decision to drop Ivanka Trump’s line three days after releasing that statement.

 On Fox News, Conway called Ivanka Trump a “very successful businesswoman” and an “incredibly confident, creative, talented woman” and indicated that should be welcomed into a role at the White House to work on women's empowerment issues, if she so chooses.

 “Obviously, she’s stepped away from it now, but in the past she’s helped to run her family’s real estate empire, and on the side she developed another fully, unbelievably, entrepreneurial, wildly successful business that bears her name,” Conway added. “And I think she’s gone from 800 stores to 1,000 stores or 1,000 places where you can buy — you can certainly buy her goods online. She’s just at a very good place.”

 Kyle Cheney contributed to this report. ||||| Tweet with a location

 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more ||||| The White House on Thursday said that a top adviser to President Trump had been “counseled” after using a television appearance from the West Wing to promote the clothing and jewelry line sold under the brand of Trump’s daughter.

 The endorsement, in which Kellyanne Conway told Fox News Channel viewers to “go buy Ivanka’s stuff,” appeared to violate a key ethics rule barring federal employees from using their public office to endorse products. The White House reaction was a rare acknowledgment of an ethical misstep.

 Conway’s remarks drew a sharp and unusual rebuke from a top Republican lawmaker, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who said that Conway’s comments were “absolutely wrong, wrong, wrong” and “clearly over the line.”

 Chaffetz, who has resisted calls by Democrats to investigate potential conflicts related to President Trump’s businesses, joined with the Oversight Committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), in sending a letter to the Office of Government Ethics calling Conway’s comments “unacceptable.” The letter asked the agency to recommend discipline given that Trump, who is Conway’s “agency head,” holds an “inherent conflict of interest” due to the involvement of his daughter’s business.

 In a terse comment to reporters Thursday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said that Conway had been “counseled on the subject” but did not say whether she would be disciplined. Spicer did not say why Conway’s statements had required the intervention, and the White House declined to answer further questions.

 President Trump’s counselor Kellyanne Conway at the White House on Jan .24. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)

 Speaking on Fox News Thursday evening, Conway declined to comment but said Trump supports her “100 percent.”

 Conway said she advised all women to, at some point in their life, have a boss who treats them “the way the president of the United States treated me today.”

 The incident was the latest illustration of how the Trump White House has struggled to grapple with long-established ethics rules as the president has attempted to balance the potentially competing interests of his new public position and his family’s vast business holdings.

 The matter has grown politically thorny in recent weeks as many opponents of Trump’s policies have waged a campaign to boycott the family’s brands and protest at its properties. The tensions underscore the difficulty Trump faces in carrying through on his vow to separate his presidency from his businesses — particularly given that he and his daughter have refused to divest their ownership stakes.

 The president has faced criticism from ethics experts and Democratic lawmakers who have warned that his public power could be misused to enrich him and his family. Trump has turned over the management of his businesses to his two adult sons and a longtime executive.

 Although Trump has said that most ethics laws and rules do not apply to the president, Conway’s stumble Thursday served as a reminder that staffers are nonetheless subject to those provisions.

 The Conway episode followed other instances in which Trump’s political rise and his presidency have provided a promotional platform for the family businesses.

 1 of 10 Full Screen Autoplay Close Skip Ad × Controversial comments from Kellyanne Conway that made headlines View Photos Conway, counselor to President Trump, coined the term “alternative facts” and referred to a “Bowling Green massacre” that never happened. Caption Conway, counselor to President Trump, coined the term “alternative facts” and referred to a “Bowling Green massacre” that never happened. The government has many ways to surveil “What I can say is there are many ways to surveil each other now, unfortunately,” including “microwaves that turn into cameras, et cetera,” Conway told the Bergen Record in an interview Sunday. “So we know that that is just a fact of modern life,”Conway told ABC’s “Good Morning America.” READ THE STORY Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post Buy Photo Wait 1 second to continue.

 On Monday, first lady Melania Trump filed a lawsuit accusing a British news company of publishing an inaccurate story that hurt her ability to take advantage of a “once in a lifetime opportunity” to build her brand of jewelry and accessories. The lawsuit said that the August 2016 article, which falsely suggested that Melania Trump had once worked for an escort service, damaged her ability to build “multimillion dollar business relationships for a multi-year term” and damaged her brand during a time when Trump “is one of the most photographed women in the world.”

 A day later, after ethics experts criticized the notion of Melania Trump attempting to make money from her public role, her attorney and a spokeswoman issued statements saying that the first lady “has no intention” of using her position for profit.

 The first family has struggled to cleanse its public appearances of private entanglements.

 In his official biography on the White House website, Donald Trump boasts of the success of the business he still owns and cites his book “The Art of the Deal,” which remains for sale.

 Melania Trump’s initial online biography referenced her jewelry line, once sold on the cable television channel QVC, and noted its trademark, a registration now overseen by a federal office led by her husband.

 Ivanka Trump, whose brand includes dresses, shoes, skirts, handbags, jewelry and accessories, much of which is sold online and at dozens of the United States’ largest retailers and department-store chains, mixed her business and newly elevated political profile shortly after the election.

 Hours after she was interviewed by CBS’s “60 Minutes” about her father’s victory, her jewelry line alerted journalists to the fact that she was wearing an Ivanka-brand diamond bracelet, which viewers could buy for $10,800.

 Conway’s endorsement of Ivanka Trump’s brand followed a tweet Wednesday by President Trump complaining that his daughter had “been treated so unfairly” by the department store Nordstrom, which dropped her clothing line, citing slow sales.

 Conway touted Ivanka Trump’s “wonderful line” of clothing and shoes during an interview Thursday morning with “Fox & Friends” from the White House briefing room.

 Responding to national boycotts of Ivanka Trump merchandise, Conway said, “Go buy Ivanka’s stuff is what I would tell you.”

 “I’m going to give a free commercial here,” she added. “Go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online.”

 Experts quickly seized on Conway’s remarks as a direct violation of Office of Government Ethics rules. Don W. Fox, a former OGE acting director and general counsel, said Conway’s statements were “jaw-dropping” and “a clear violation of rules prohibiting misuse of public office for anyone’s private gain.”

 Peter Schweizer, who has worked closely with Trump chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and wrote a book, “Clinton Cash,” that was critical of donations to the Clinton Foundation, said, “They’ve crossed a very, very important, bright line, and it’s not good.”

 “To encourage Americans to buy goods from companies owned by the first family is totally out of bounds and needs to stop,” Schweizer added. “Clearly, the Trumps feel some of this is related to politics. But whether that’s true or not, these marketing battles need to be fought by Ivanka and her company. They cannot and should not be fought by government employees and the White House.”

 Schweizer said that it was time for Trump “to move beyond the mind-set and the role of a businessman and assume the mantle of commander in chief.”

 Federal law states that the director of the Office of Government Ethics can advise the White House and Conway of the violation and recommend disciplinary action. But the OGE’s recommendations are nonbinding, and the ultimate decision resides with the White House.

 OGE officials did not respond to requests for comment. By midmorning, the agency’s website had crashed, and the OGE’s official Twitter account said that the office’s phone and email systems were receiving “an extraordinary volume” of citizen input about “recent events.”

 The office tweeted that its role is to help prevent ethics violations but not to investigate allegations that rules have been broken — a job reserved for the FBI, inspectors general and other watchdogs. Still, the OGE notifies agencies of possible ethics violations and asks for reports on any action taken, a process the office indicated it is “actively following,” according to the OGE’s tweets.

 Experts said that a typical executive-branch employee who violated the endorsement rule could face significant disciplinary action, including a multi-day suspension and loss of pay. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service employees, for instance, face a five-day suspension or termination for using public office for private gain.

 But enforcement measures are largely left to the head of the federal agency — in Conway’s case, the White House. Conway’s counseling, independent lawyers said, could have included a meeting with members of the White House counsel’s office, but it remained unclear what disciplinary steps would be taken.

 Independent ethics groups and Trump critics targeted the endorsement as a make-or-break moment for how the White House will address future ethical concerns.

 Noah Bookbinder, director of the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed an official ethics complaint, called Conway’s comments “just another example of what looks like a disturbing pattern of this administration acting to benefit the businesses of the president’s family and supporters.”

 Conway’s endorsement of Ivanka Trump’s business also highlighted an awkward reality for a White House threatening U.S. companies seeking to move jobs or operations overseas. Nearly all Ivanka-brand merchandise is manufactured in low-cost-labor countries, including China, Indonesia and Vietnam.

 The president and his daughter have taken steps to put distance between their private companies and public ambitions. Both resigned their official leadership roles in the Trump Organization.

 Ivanka Trump retains a financial interest in her separate business. The Trump company says the president does not have a financial interest or ownership stake in the Ivanka brand.

 [Fact Checker: Trump’s claim Ivanka is being ‘treated so unfairly’ by Nordstrom] |||||
What is a summary?

– "Go buy Ivanka's stuff." That was Kellyanne Conway's message to viewers during an interview with Fox & Friends on Thursday after Nordstrom pulled Ivanka Trump's clothing line from its stores. The problem? She might have violated federal ethics rules with the plug. Government workers aren't supposed to endorse products, and Conway not only did so, she wasn't shy about it: "I'm going to give a free commercial here," she said. "Go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online.” Per the Hill, this is the rule from the Office of Government Ethics she appears to have run afoul of: "An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service, or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives." It's not clear whether the OGE will investigate, but someone who violates this rule can be suspended or even fired, though the person is likely to receive only a warning for a first offense, reports Politico. "This is jaw-dropping to me," a former acting director of the office tells the Washington Post. It "would seem to be a clear violation." President Trump, of course, has also addressed Nordstrom's move, tweeting, "Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom." White House spokesman Sean Spicer says Trump's tweet "was less about his family's business and an attack on his daughter," per CNNMoney. Nordstrom has said the decision was about declining sales, not politics.