Chris Bergin / Reuters

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts — Every four years, the Harvard Institute of Politics puts on a campaign conference for the purpose of recording history.

So we’re all up here on campus, essentially in a conference room, followed by a dinner like you’ve been to in a hotel ballroom, and expecting something within the realm of a Harvard panel about journalism.

But then.

Moderator Sasha Issenberg Wednesday night at the Charles Hotel opened by reading off Les Moonves' infamous quote — the Donald Trump phenomenon “may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS” — and asking each of his panelists how Trump was for business.

First, Facebook’s vice president of global communications Elliot Schrage. Then, Washington Post executive editor Marty Baron (good for traffic, “invigorating,” “challenging,” “trying” for reporters) and Associated Press executive editor Kathleen Carroll (“it was a challenge,” though the global audience was interested).

Then, Issenberg turned and said, “So, Jeff, how good was Donald Trump for CNN?”

And then the audience actually laughed.

So that’s where things started.

From there, the panel winded through everything from fake news to regrets to blacklists to how investigations were performed to how cable news covered rallies. All of it, however, especially from the dinner floor, carried through the anger — inside and outside the media, from both liberals and conservatives, from Trump fans and Clinton fans — at the media for doing this, for not doing that, for allowing this to happen. Afterward, I heard at least four people walk up to someone and go, “That was...interesting,” the way you feel out how game your semi-distant cousin is for talking about a wedding toast. Basically: The media panel was lit.

And at the end — as serious as Baron and Carroll were — the core of the panel revolved around CNN, Zucker, and Trump, one of the dominating media stories of the campaign.

“We’re living American history right now, we’ve been living American history for the last 18 months,” he said. “It has been a roller-coaster experience for CNN with Trump. It’s day-to-day whether he’s going to go after us.”

Zucker conceded as he has in recent months that the network and others aired too many Trump rallies early in the campaign, but also contended the last few months of the campaign — when “CNN sucks” became an extremely intense chant at rallies — indicated that CNN had provided both sides in its reporting and ultimately commentary. He noted that they paid contributors with campaign relationships on both sides.

But the issue of the primary coverage caused the biggest blowup.

“I would say in defense of the cable networks… This was early on, within a month, he was the frontrunner on the Republican side … and he was often making news at those rallies,” Zucker said. “Did we probably take too many of them live? Yes, I think we did.” (Zucker also drew laughs a number of times, joking that he’d come to the realization that they’d aired too many rallies when he spoke at Harvard the last time.)

“But I want to address something that I do know came up earlier, which is that many of the campaign managers said that they thought that it was unfair the amount of coverage and attention that Trump was getting,” Zucker said. “And I would respectfully push back on the campaign managers who spoke here earlier today, because, frankly, respectfully, I think that’s bullshit.”

He said many of the same opportunities for interviews had been extended to other campaigns. And that’s when Republican campaign advisers, including Rubio adviser Todd Harris, started heckling Zucker from the dinner floor.

“I don’t remember getting invited to call in, though!” called out Carly Fiorina adviser Sarah Isgur Flores.

After some back and forth and a discussion and joke, it again came back to this issue. “My point is this: Cable news in general, and CNN in particular, should not be held responsible for the fact that Donald Trump said yes to those interviews,” Zucker said.

Again the heckling started.

“It’s not the interviews! This is, you know what, this is—”

“You showed empty podiums!”

“You showed hour upon hour of unfiltered, unscrutinized footage of Trump. It’s not about the interviews.”

Again, more back and forth. “These other candidates were asked to come on and declined.”

“That’s not true! That’s not true!” chanted (other) people in the back corner.

Even when they opened it up for questions, a student tried to get one over on Zucker by asking about the ethics of employing operatives as commentators, given the issues the network faced with, for instance, DNC interim chair Donna Brazile providing the Clinton campaign with primary town hall questions — then, at the end of the question, announced he’d give the mic to former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.

That punchline didn’t totally land, since when he handed over the mic, a grinning Lewandowski answered the question himself.

Manuel Balce Ceneta / ASSOCIATED PRESS

President-elect Donald Trump announced at a rally Thursday that he has tapped retired Marine Gen. James Mattis to become his secretary of defense, a pick that will require an act of Congress to allow him to take up the post.

"We are going to appoint 'Mad Dog' Mattis as our secretary of defense. But we're not announcing it until Monday so don't tell anybody," Trump said to applause in Cincinnati.

View Video ›

CNN

"They say he's the closest thing to Gen. George Patton that we have and it's about time," Trump later added.

The four-star general would join a team that includes retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser and Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kansas) as CIA director.

Known as "Mad Dog," he was praised for his leadership in the 2004 Battle of Fallujah in Iraq, and Trump has described him as "strong" and "highly dignified."

However, Congress will need to pass legislation to bypass a federal law requiring defense secretaries to have ended their service seven years prior to taking the position. Mattis, 66, retired as head of US Central Command less than four years ago.

U.S. Marine Maj. Gen. (Select) James Mattis, second right, confers with his staff on the USS Peleliu in the northern Arabian Sea on Nov. 24, 2001.

Jim Hollander / AP

Before resigning, he went against President Obama's national security team in pushing for a more hardline approach with Iran as they began work on the nuclear agreement — a deal Trump has blasted repeatedly on the campaign trail.

He has also spoken against "short-sighted" social programs in the military, chalking them up to political appeasements for a public that knows little about combat readiness.

In a video interview with the Military Times, he warned against using the military "to lead social change in this country, especially social change that the country itself is not unified on."

"There is no God-given right to victory on the battlefield," he said. "You win that through the skill, and the devotion, the valor, the veracity of the troops. And you have to to be very very careful…that we don’t undercut the military’s battlefield effectiveness with short-sighted social programs."

Mike Segar / Reuters

President-elect Donald Trump’s anti-illegal immigration agenda, which helped launch his campaign, flared again at his Thursday night “Thank You” rally.

“We will restore the sovereignty of the United States. We will finally end illegal immigration, have to,” Trump told a crowd of supporters in Cincinnati, Ohio. “We will construct a great wall at the border.”

Trump said the beefed up border would “dismantle” cartels and stop the flow of drugs into the United States. He also pledged to stop the immigration of people from regions who can’t be “safely processed.”

He wasn’t the only one at the rally talking about undocumented immigrants, all of the speakers before him also mentioned the issue that was a cornerstone of Trump’s successful campaign.

Vice president-elect Mike Pence also promised to end illegal immigration, which set off chants of “Build the wall” from the crowd.

Mike Segar / Reuters

Josh Mandel, state treasurer for Ohio, said people have been asking him to make cities sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants.

"Over my dead body" will a city in Ohio become a sanctuary city, Mandel said, referring to jurisdictions pledging not to work with federal immigration officials on deportations.

The call for sanctuary cities has reemerged after Trump’s victory because immigrants and their advocates fear he will make good on campaign promises to deport millions.

Since being elected, Trump said he would deport up to 3 million undocumented immigrants with criminal records.

Trump’s senior policy adviser, Stephen Miller, said Thursday that the US-Mexico border has been left open for too long.

"After all these years, after all this waiting, the prayers of Ohio and this country have been answered," Miller said. "Starting in January 2017 illegal immigration will be a thing of the past and change is going to happen across the boarder."

LINK: More Than 100 Colleges Push To Keep Deportation Protections For Undocumented Students

LINK: Students Walkout To Demand Sanctuary Campuses For Undocumented Immigrants

LINK: Sanctuary Cities Double Down Ahead Of Trump’s Immigration Agenda

(Texas Department of Criminal Justice via AP)

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals halted another execution on Friday — one that had been scheduled to take place next week — making it the seventh Texas execution stayed or delayed in recent months.

The inmate, John Battaglia, has claimed that he is mentally unfit to be executed. As with some of the other called-off executions, the court's ruling was brief and asked for more briefing on the matter.

His attorneys say that even before his original trial there were questions about his mental deficiencies. Three experts examined Battaglia, who was eventually sentenced to death for killing his two daughters.

"All three experts diagnosed Mr. Battaglia with bipolar disorder, a severe mental illness that can include psychotic elements," his attorneys wrote earlier this year. "One expert opined that Mr. Battaglia exhibited psychosis with his other bipolar symptoms."

Battaglia was originally scheduled to be executed in March, but a federal appeals court stayed it to allow him more time to develop his claims.

This marks the seventh Texas execution that has been halted since late April, around the time when the state was due to perform more testing on the lethal drugs.

Attorneys representing death row inmates argue it implies there is a problem with the state's drug supply.

The state called off inmate Perry Williams' July execution after it said it didn't have enough time to perform testing on the drugs it would use on him. The inmates provided evidence that the testing takes just a few days to do, and allege the state may have instead received testing that was not favorable.

"There is a strong inference that the State obtained tests results that indicated that its inventory of compounded pentobarbital had degraded or was contaminated," attorney Michael Biles wrote in an October court filing.

"This is not idle speculation; the State had the opportunity to explain why it could not obtain the test results ... or why it will not test the drugs prior to Plaintiffs’ executions, but the State refused to answer because it was 'confidential.'"

In response to an open records request by BuzzFeed News, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice provided successful testing results on the drugs intended for Williams' execution, roughly a week after he was scheduled to be executed. The TDCJ insisted they were not withholding any other lab results.

In a court filing this past week, Attorney General Ken Paxton's office argued that claims about the drug, which is mixed by an anonymous compounding pharmacy, amounts to "baseless speculation."

The inmates "cannot demonstrate that the pentobarbital being used is any less potent or sterile than what was used in the prior thirty-two executions using the compounded form of the drug," his office wrote.

Texas currently has no other executions scheduled. If that holds true for the rest of the year, Texas will have carried out just seven executions this year: the fewest executions in the state in 20 years.

LINK: Read the order:

LINK: Lengthy Gap In Texas Executions To Continue As State Court Halts Yet Another

John Minchillo / AP

President-elect Donald Trump took the highly unusual step Friday of speaking directly with the president of Taiwan in a phone call, a move that prompted reassurances from the White House because it is likely to anger China.

According to a readout of the call provided by Trump's transition team, the president-elect spoke with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and noted the two nation's "close economic, political and security ties."

"President-elect Trump also congratulated President Tsai on becoming President of Taiwan earlier this year," the statement added.

Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen.

Chiang Ying-ying / AP

The US cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 1979, adopting a "one China" policy, which gave recognition instead to communist Beijing. However, China-US relations have remained strained since the United States maintains a close, albeit unofficial, relationship with the self-governing island.

Since then, it's been a complicated international relationship that has been traversed for more than three decades by six US presidents.

Last year, for example, the US sold nearly $2 billion-worth of weapons to Taiwan despite strong opposition from the Chinese government.

That controversial sale of weapons was quickly pointed out by Trump on Twitter, who pushed back against criticism about taking the call from the Taiwan leader.

The South China Sea, where the Chinese government has laid claim to waters also claimed by Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei, has also been a point of contention.

The region has seen a flurry of military action, with China increasing naval patrols and building islands there to strengthen their claims. The US has also sent military ships for what it calls "freedom of navigation" operations, the BBC reported.

A readout of the Trump call issued by the Taiwan president's office stated the call was about 10 minutes long, during which developing closer economic and "national defense" ties was discussed.

China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a statement that the phone call between Trump and Taiwan's president was "only a small move by the Taiwan side."

"It is impossible to change the one-China pattern already formed by the international community," he said. "The one-China principle is the cornerstone of the healthy development of the Sino-US relations, and we do not want any interference or destruction of this political foundation."

China "firmly" opposes any interaction between the US and Taiwan, the ministry of foreign affairs office said.

Wang went further in remarks to Hong Kong-based Phoenix Television, saying it was "just the Taiwan side engaging in a little trick."

The US has no embassy in Taipei, but Taiwan keeps government representatives in Washington, DC, and other cities.

Still, there hasn't been direct contact between the leaders of Taiwan and the US since 1979 for fear that it could be seen as legitimizing the political leadership of an island that China has said it would take back by force.

Taiwan split from the mainland during a civil war in 1949.

The call was first reported by the Financial Times, which noted that it was not clear whether the phone call was part of a broader strategy and change the US policy toward Taiwan and China, or if the call was made without consideration of the possible political blowback.

In a tweet Friday, Trump insisted that Tsai was the one who made the call.

Trump has repeatedly blasted China on the campaign trail, accusing it of currency manipulation and criticizing the Obama administration for not being "tough enough" in dealing with the country.

Speaking to CNN's Anderson Cooper, Trump senior advisor Kellyanne Conway defended the call as one of dozens he's taken from world leaders since his election victory.

"He's having these private conversations, giving a read-out here and there about them, but he's not trying to make policy and not trying to make waves until he's actually the president in six-and-a-half weeks," Conway said.

She also pushed back on questions on whether Trump had been briefed on US relations with China and Taiwan before the call. And she would not confirm whether Trump and his advisors had consulted with the State Department.

"I can't imagine if (President Obama) was asked here or elsewhere if he had been property or fully briefed considering he had very little experience himself," Conway said.

China regularly reacts with anger to any official recognition of Taiwan's government, especially from the US. In Beijing, where any discussion of Taiwanese independence is considered a political third rail, the foreign policy community was swift to condemn the call.

"(It) stepped on a diplomatic red line," said an researcher on China-US relations at a top government think tank via a private social media account. "Before he even takes office, this person, who doesn't play cards according to the rules, has set up obstacles for China-US relations."

"The coming four years of Sino-US relations will be like treading on thin ice,” added the researcher, who asked BuzzFeed News not to use his name because he is not authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

Wang Wen, an executive dean at Renmin University, one of the country's top schools, said via his microblog late on Friday he had dispatched a warning to Trump's team during a recent dinner in Washington.

"In order to make America great again, China's help is a must," he said he told them. "Don't offend China, otherwise there is no 'great again.' They noted it with seriousness."

After the phone call, the White House National Security Council released a statement to several news outlets stating that there was no change to its "one China" policy, which recognizes the mainland government.

"There is no change to our longstanding policy to cross-Strait issues," National Security Council spokesman Ned Price said in the statement. "Our fundamental interest is in peaceful and stable cross-Strait relations."

The Los Angeles Times reported that despite Trump's continuous contact with foreign leaders, the White House has not been getting direct reports from his team about the details of the communications. At times, the paper reported, the White House has learned about the contact from statements made by the foreign governments.

The phone call was lauded, however, both within Taiwan and by some in the defense policy community in the US as a signal the incoming administration will take a tougher stance on China.

"This is a small but positive step forward in giving Taiwan's democracy the legitimacy it deserves," said Mark Stokes, a former Pentagon official and the executive director of the Project 2049 Institute said.

Ty Wright / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — A Pennsylvania court on Saturday accepted the Green Party's request to end its case seeking a statewide recount. Then, late Saturday night, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein tweeted out that her campaign would continue to seek a statewide recount — but would be going to federal court to do so.

"Make no mistake – the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania," Jonathan Abady, Stein's lead recount lawyer, said in a statement.

"[O]n Monday the Stein campaign will escalate our campaign in Pennsylvania and file for emergency relief in federal court, demanding a statewide recount on constitutional grounds," he continued.

Most — including Hillary Clinton's campaign — expect Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein's recount efforts in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin not to change the ultimate result in any of those states. The reality, however, is that the election results would not change unless the recounts shift all of those states to Clinton.

If the Pennsylvania efforts don't move forward, even a flip in the Michigan and Wisconsin results would still leave Trump at 280 electoral votes — 10 above the 270 necessary to become the next president.

Lawyers for the Green Party told the Associated Press on Saturday afternoon that they would not be able to meet the Monday deadline for a $1 million bond that the Pennsylvania court had ordered in the case. Additionally, on Dec. 2, the court had issued an order suggesting skepticism as to whether the Green Party's complaint seeking a statewide recount would succeed. That order came in the wake of the Trump campaign's motion to dismiss the complaint.

On Saturday afternoon, the Green Party filed a motion to withdraw their statewide recount request — which the court granted in an order later Saturday — although individual precinct-based recount requests will continue, in an attempt to force an automatic statewide recount, and a lawyer familiar with ongoing efforts noted that an appeal seeking a forensic audit of the Philadelphia voting machines remains pending.

Earlier, Stein stated on her recount fundraising page that Wisconsin officials initially had estimated $1.1 million would be needed for the Wisconsin part of the recount — but officials later required $3.5 million. That change led her to increase the amount she was seeking in donations from $6.5 million to $9.5 million. As of Saturday evening, she had not yet hit $7 million in donations.

Then, a little before midnight, Stein announced the federal court plans.

Explaining the move to federal court further, Abady said in the statement, "We are committed to this fight to protect the civil and voting rights of all Americans. Over the past several days, it has become clear that the barriers to verifying the vote in Pennsylvania are so pervasive and that the state court system is so ill-equipped to address this problem that we must seek federal court intervention."

Later, Stein suggested the legal path her team plans to pursue in a tweet early Sunday morning.

This is a developing story. Please check back at BuzzFeed News for more information as it becomes available.

Read the Green Party's motion to withdraw their statewide recount request:

Read the court's order closing the statewide recount matter:

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Almost a month after the voters went to the polls, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory on Monday conceded the gubernatorial race to his rival, Democrat candidate Attorney General Roy Cooper.

McCrory, a Republican, has been alleging voter fraud since Election Day and called for a state-wide recount.

But on Monday the governor released, saying, "I personally believe the the majority of our citizens have spoken, and we now should do now do everything we can to support the 75th governor of North Carolina, Roy Cooper."

"It's also time to respect the democratic process and respect what I see to be the ultimate outcome of the closest North Carolina Governor's race in modern history," McCrory said, "despite continued questions that should be answered about the voting process."

In the days leading up to the concession by McCrory, Cooper's lead in the recount remained above 10,000 votes, according to the Durham County Board of Elections.

"It will be the honor of my life to serve this great state," Governor-elect Cooper said in a statement.

Cooper also thanked McCrory for his service, adding that he looks "forward to working with them and their staff in what I expect will be a smooth transition."

Cooper and his staff had been calling on McCrory to concede for weeks, while the Republican continued to suggest large-scale voter fraud had robbed him of a win.

“Governor McCrory has no legitimate path to victory, so he has resorted to attacking legitimate North Carolina voters in a shameful attempt to delay the process and undermine the results of an election he lost,” Ford Porter, a spokesperson for Cooper’s campaign, told BuzzFeed News in November.

Cooper's election win is one of the few notable 2016 victories for the Democrats, in a state where President-elect Trump beat Hillary Clinton by a comfortable margin.

But McCrory's defeat is also a symbolic win for the LGBT community.

McCrory and Cooper have traded jabs all year over a law that prohibits transgender people from using bathroom of their identifying gender. McCrory was a staunch supporter of House Bill 2, which also overturned a local anti-discrimination ordinance, singing it into law earlier this year. The law applies to government buildings and schools.

US Attorney General Loretta Lynch compared the North Carolina law to Jim Crow laws that ensured racial segregation in states and localities. McCrory said her comparison was an "insult" and "a political statement instead of a legal statement."

Transgender activists from around the country came to North Carolina in an effort to ensure that McCrory did not win re-election.

A day before the election, Sarah McBride, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Human Rights Campaign, told BuzzFeed News that the desire to defeat McCrory was "unprecedented," adding that "attacking transgender people is bad policy and bad politics.”

"This is one of the biggest battlegrounds in the country,” said McBride.

This is a developing news story. Check back for updates or follow BuzzFeed News on Twitter.

BuzzFeed News / Getty Images

Fake news headlines fool American adults about 75% of the time, according to a large-scale new survey conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs for BuzzFeed News.

The survey also found that people who cite Facebook as a major source of news are more likely to view fake news headlines as accurate than those who rely less on the platform for news.

This survey is the first large-scale public opinion research study into the fake news phenomenon that has had a sweeping effect on global politics, and that recently caused a gunman to threaten a DC pizza place. The results paint a picture of news consumers with little ability to evaluate the headlines that often fly toward them without context on social media platforms. They also — surprisingly — suggest that consumers are likely to believe even false stories that don't fit their ideological bias. And the survey calls into question the notion — which Facebook has reportedly begun testing — that consumers themselves can do the work of distinguishing between real and fake news.

The new data comes from an online survey of 3,015 US adults conducted between Nov. 28 and Dec. 1. For more on the methodology, see the bottom of this article. A detailed summary of results to all questions can be found here. Additional calculations can be found here.

“The 2016 election may mark the point in modern political history when information and disinformation became a dominant electoral currency,” said Chris Jackson of Ipsos Public Affairs, which conducted the survey on behalf of BuzzFeed News. “Public opinion, as reflected in this survey, showed that ‘fake news’ was remembered by a significant portion of the electorate and those stories were seen as credible.”

The survey found that those who identify as Republican are more likely to view fake election news stories as very or somewhat accurate. Roughly 84% of the time, Republicans rated fake news headlines as accurate (among those they recognized), compared to a rate of 71% among Democrats. The survey also found that Trump voters are more likely to rate familiar fake news headlines as accurate than Clinton voters.

Top Fake News Headlines

In the survey, respondents were shown a random selection of six headlines — three true and three false — related to the election. Those six were drawn from a list of 11 headlines gathered largely from a BuzzFeed News analysis that compared the top-performing fake election news articles on Facebook to the the top-performing real election news articles on Facebook. Of the 11 headlines tested, five were false and six were true.

Respondents who said they recalled the story in question were then asked to rate the claim in the headline as "very accurate," "somewhat accurate," "not very accurate," or "not at all accurate."

Real news headlines received a higher overall accuracy rating than fake news. The respondents made 1,516 judgments about fake news headlines they’d recalled seeing or hearing about; 75% of the time, they thought those headlines were “somewhat” or “very” accurate. By comparison, they considered 83% of real news headlines to be accurate, based on 2,619 judgments.

Of the people surveyed, nearly 33% recalled seeing at least one of a selection of fake news headlines from the election. That compared to 57% of respondents who recalled seeing at least one of the real news headlines tested in the survey.

The fake news headline recalled by the largest number of respondents is the story from hoax website the Denver Guardian, “FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead in Apparent Murder-Suicide.” Twenty-two percent of respondents people said they recalled seeing it.

BuzzFeed News

The real news headline with the highest recall is a post-election CBS News story about Donald Trump saying he will not accept a presidential salary, “Donald Trump on Refusing Presidential Salary: ‘I'm Not Taking It.’” It was recalled by 57% of the 1,507 people shown the headline in the survey.

BuzzFeed News

The fake news headline with the highest overall accuracy rating from respondents is “FBI Director Comey Just Put a Trump Sign on His Front Lawn.” Of the 186 people who recalled seeing it, 81% said it was very or somewhat accurate. (Go here to read a debunking of that claim.)

A false headline claiming a man was paid $3,500 to protest at a Trump rally also received a high accuracy rating, with 79% of the 348 respondents who recalled seeing it saying it was very or somewhat accurate.

One contributing factor to its spread is that the story was tweeted by Eric Trump, by former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, and even by Kellyanne Conway, the Trump campaign manager who led him to victory. (Conway later deleted her tweet.)

BuzzFeed News

The two real headlines with the highest accuracy ratings from those who recalled seeing them were the the New York Times op-ed “I Ran the CIA. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton” with a 90% accuracy rating (among the 157 respondents who recognized the headline). A CBS News story about Donald Trump saying he will not accept a salary as president was also rated as very or somewhat accurate by 90% of the 860 respondents who recognized it.

BuzzFeed News

Clinton Versus Trump Voters

People who say they voted for Hillary Clinton were less likely than Trump voters to view the claims made in these fake headlines as accurate, according to the survey. This may be partly due to the fact that the majority of top-performing fake news stories about the election on Facebook had a decidedly pro-Trump or anti-Clinton bent. However, it’s notable that a majority of Clinton voters still believed the fake news stories to be very or somewhat accurate.

On average, Clinton voters judged 58% of familiar fake news headlines as accurate, versus 86% for Trump voters. (These percentages are based on 434 judgments by Clinton voters and 634 judgments by Trump voters.)

A fake story about the pope endorsing Trump was seen as accurate by 46% of Clinton voters compared to 75% of Trump voters. The hoax about an FBI agent connected to a Clinton investigation being found dead was seen as accurate by 52% of Clinton voters and 85% of Trump voters.

BuzzFeed News

Brendan Nyhan, a political science professor at Dartmouth college who conducts research into political misinformation, reviewed the data and said he is surprised by the high percentage of Democrats who rated the pro-Trump stories as very or somewhat accurate.

“It’s especially striking that both Democrats and Republicans think the stories are accurate in many cases,” said Nyhan. "Even partisan-motivated reasoning — which we might expect to make people question fake news that is harmful to their candidate — does not appear to protect people from believing in it."

Trump voters in particular gave a high accuracy rating to a story that falsely claimed he had sent his own plane to fly 200 US Marines home. That claim, which was debunked by the Washington Post, was given a boost in awareness when the website of Fox News host Sean Hannity reported it and Trump's campaign said it was true.

Facebook’s Role in Exposing People to Fake News

Though the survey does not prove a direct link between Facebook use and exposure to and belief of fake election news, it offers new data about the relationship between the platform and election misinformation.

People who said they rely on Facebook as a “major” source of news appeared to be disproportionately susceptible to fake news headlines. In the course of 553 judgments about fake news headlines they recognized, these respondents deemed the information to be somewhat or very accurate 83% of the time.

By comparison, fake news headlines were deemed accurate 76% of the time by people who consider Facebook to be a “minor” source of news (465 judgments), and 64% of the time by people who rarely or never use Facebook for news (498 judgments).

However, these percentages came from small groups of respondents and should be read cautiously.

“We have a lot more to learn about this topic, but it’s clear that Facebook in particular needs to take fake news much more seriously going forward,” said Nyhan.

BuzzFeed News

The survey also reinforces how important Facebook has become as a source of news for Americans. A total of 23% of the more than 3,000 respondents list Facebook as a major source of news for them, with another 27% citing it as a minor source. Only CNN and Fox News had higher percentages of people who said they view those outlets as major or minor sources of news. (Both saw 27% of respondents list them as major sources of news.)

Of those surveyed, 47% say they visit Facebook multiple times per day, with another 15% saying they visit it once a day. YouTube was the second most popular social platform, with 20% saying they visit it multiple times per day, and 11% visiting it once per day.

“I don’t want Facebook deciding which legitimate political content appears in the News Feed, but I do hope the company can prevent 100% fake news from being such an attractive business opportunity to entrepreneurs and scam artists alike,” Nyhan said.

Notes and Methodology

Here’s the list of 11 election headlines tested in the survey:

• Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement (Fake)

• Donald Trump Sent His Own Plane to Transport 200 Stranded Marines (Fake)

• FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead in Apparent Murder-Suicide (Fake)

• Donald Trump Protester Speaks Out: “I Was Paid $3,500 to Protest Trump’s Rally” (Fake)

• FBI Director Comey Just Put a Trump Sign on His Front Lawn (Fake)

• Melania Trump’s Girl-on-Girl Photos From Racy Shoot Revealed (True)

• Barbara Bush: “I Don’t Know How Women Can Vote” for Trump (True)

• Donald Trump Says He’d "Absolutely" Require Muslims to Register (True)

• Trump: “I Will Protect Our LGBTQ Citizens” (True)

• I Ran the CIA. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton (True)

• Donald Trump on Refusing Presidential Salary: “I’m Not Taking It” (True)

Respondents were shown a random selection of six headlines, of which three were real and three were fake. If they said they recalled seeing or hearing about the headline, they were then asked to rate its accuracy as Very Accurate, Somewhat Accurate, Not Very Accurate, or Not At All Accurate. This was to ensure that the survey captured the overall awareness of real and fake headlines, and that it only tested perceptions of accuracy with people who said they were familiar with the headlines in question. As with any survey that relies on human memory, it’s important to note that some people may be mistaken as to whether they saw the headline or not.

Of the more than 3,000 people who completed the survey, 50% said they voted for Hillary Clinton, and 41% said they voted for Donald Trump. (The rest said either that they voted for another candidate or didn’t vote.) Thirty-nine percent said they are Democrats, 29% said they are Republicans, 28% said they were Independents, and 3% considered themselves to be “Other.”

For the more standard survey questions related to demographics and media consumption, we used questions developed by Ipsos and those previously used by BuzzFeed Research.

For survey results representing all respondents, the poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 2 percentage points for all respondents. For more information about Ipsos Public Opinion’s online polling methodology, please go here.

Alabama executed Ronald Smith Jr. late Thursday for the 1994 murder of a convenience store clerk — a death sentence imposed by a judge despite the jury's recommendation of a life sentence.

Smith's execution lasted more than 30 minutes, and he "heaved and coughed through about 13 minutes," according to two press witnesses. An Associated Press witness noted Smith "clenched his fists and raised his head during the early part of the procedure."

Alabama, like some other death penalty states, uses a controversial sedative called midazolam as its first drug. It is not approved to maintain anesthesia, and has no pain-relieving abilities. The state then follows it up with a drug that paralyzes the inmate, and then a painful drug that stops the heart.

"A prison guard performed two consciousness checks before administering the lethal drugs," the Associated Press reported. "During the first one, Smith moved his arm."

A request to halt the execution based on alleged constitutional flaws with the state's death sentencing law was denied by the US Supreme Court on Thursday night a little before 8:30 p.m.

The denial came hours after Justice Clarence Thomas, who handles requests out of Alabama, issued a temporary stay of execution so the court could consider the request. Alabama Department of Corrections spokesperson Bob Horton had told BuzzFeed News that the department would have proceeded at the scheduled execution time if the court did not explicitly issue a stay.

The court denied the stay four to four. It takes five justices to grant a stay, although it takes only four to decide to hear a case. Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor noted that they would have granted the stay — but no information was provided about whether they would have voted to hear the underlying case itself.

Soon thereafter, Smith's attorneys asked the court to reconsider denying the stay, noting that typically there is a "courtesy fifth" vote provided when it comes to stays of execution when four other justices would hear the defendant's underlying appeal.

"The Court released an order earlier today from which it appears that four Justices favor review of Mr. Smith’s petition for writ of certiorari, but he did not receive five votes to stay of Mr. Smith’s impending execution," his attorneys wrote. "Because the Court’s inconsistent practices respecting 5-4 stay denials in capital cases clash with the appearance and reality both of equal justice under law and of sound judicial decision-making, Mr. Smith asks this Court to reconsider the Court’s denial of his application for a stay of execution."

Although Thomas granted a second temporary stay of execution while the court considered whether to grant a stay of execution based on the motion for reconsideration, the court denied that second stay request about 10 p.m. — with no noted dissents.

Moments later, Smith's attorneys filed a final request, asking the court to grant him a stay of execution to allow him time to file another appeal in a separate case — one related to the state's chosen method of execution. Smith attorneys wrote that they were "not anticipating filing certiorari on his lethal injection lawsuit" — but apparently changed course when his other request was denied. Thomas denied that stay request less than 20 minutes later, without referring the matter to the full court.

Smith Jr., 45, a former Eagle Scout and Army reservist, shot and killed 26-year-old Casey Wilson while robbing a Huntsville convenience store in 1994. The jury had recommended a life sentence without parole for Smith, but a judge overrode the decision — as is allowed under the state’s death sentencing law — and imposed the death penalty.

The judge had sentenced Smith to death based on his determination that the murder was "an execution-style slaying” during which the store clerk was “pistol-whipped and beaten into helpless submission, but Smith nevertheless killed him to avoid later identification and that Smith was indifferent to or enjoyed the clerk’s suffering, bragging and smiling or laughing about the killing when he described it," according to court documents.

Smith's attorneys asked the US Supreme Court to hear his case and stop his execution on the grounds that Alabama’s death penalty sentencing law is unconstitutional based on its similarities to Florida’s sentencing law, which was struck down by the US Supreme Court in January. The state has opposed the request.

In the case of Hurst v. Florida, the Supreme Court held that Florida’s death sentencing law violated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial by permitting a judge to enter a sentence of death.

On Thursday, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Smith's request to stop his execution. In that appeal, Smith Jr. had challenged the constitutionality of Alabama’s three-drug lethal injection protocol, saying that midazolam — a controversial sedative at the center of several botched executions — would not sufficiently anesthetize him from the painful effects of the other two drugs used in the protocol. His appeal also argued that the state's refusal to allow counsel witnessing his execution access to a cell or landline phone unconstitutionally restricted his access to the courts.

As part of his legal challenge, Alabama offered to execute Smith with a large dose of only midazolam — a lethal injection never before done. Smith consented, but only if the state greatly increased the dose and its three-drug method was declared unconstitutional. The two sides could not agree, and the state intends to use its three drug method of midazolam, followed by a paralytic and a painful drug that stops the heart.

Alabama has executed one inmate so far in 2016. In that execution, one of the inmate's eyes were open during the lethal injection. The courts have halted the executions of two other Alabama inmates this year.

A month ago, the US Supreme Court granted a stay of execution to Tommy Arthur while the justices consider whether to hear either of his cases. Similar to Smith, one of Arthur's challenges relates to Alabama's death sentencing laws and the other to the state's method of execution. Chief Justice John Roberts granted a so-called "courtesy fifth" vote to allow for the stay of Arthur's execution. The court is scheduled to consider whether to take either of his cases on Friday.

Evan Vucci / AP

Kellyanne Conway, the senior adviser to Donald Trump, on Friday defended the president-elect's continued role of executive producer on NBC’s The Celebrity Apprentice, arguing that presidents are allowed to pursue other interests and this is a reasonable thing for him to do in his "spare time."

Trump hosted the show for seven seasons, until NBC cut ties with him in June 2015 after he made racist comments about Mexicans. Despite the controversy, many have argued that the show boosted Trump's visibility and legitimized his shot at the presidency.

Conway called Trump a “very transparent guy” when CNN’s Alisyn Camerota asked her why Trump would stay on with The Celebrity Apprentice.

“Everyone can see what he's doing, and the fact is that he is conferring with all types of experts to tell him what he is allowed to do and not to do as the president of the United States, and if this is one of the approved activities, then perhaps he'll consider staying on,” Conway added.

Camerota pressed on, saying that the time Trump spends working on The Celebrity Apprentice would be time he could not spend on national issues like jobs or national security.

“Were we so concerned about the hours and hours and hours spent on the golf course of the current president?” Conway asked.

“Presidents have a right to do things in their spare time or their leisure time,” she said. “Nobody objects to that.”

When asked if Trump would collect any royalties or a salary from The Celebrity Apprentice, Conway said that she hadn’t discussed that with him directly, but that he had the option of donating it to charity or refusing it altogether.

The Trump campaign did not offer comment during Friday morning's transition call on his remaining on the show.

Watch the full exchange here:

View Video ›

video-cdn.buzzfeed.com

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

If President-elect Donald Trump goes ahead with his reported plans to nominate the CEO of ExxonMobil as his secretary of state, he may face staunch opposition from senior members of his own party.

Multiple media reports indicated Trump was set to nominate oilman Rex Tillerson for the role of top US diplomat, which would need to be approved by the Senate.

The 64-year-old Texan has extensive business experience in Russia and a working relationship with President Vladimir Putin. Tillerson has also spoken out against US sanctions on Moscow, imposed after the annexation of Crimea, and was awarded the Order of Friendship medal by the Kremlin.

Trump's transition team tweeted Sunday that there would be no formal announcement about the position "until next week at the earliest," but speaking on Fox News Sunday, Trump praised Tillerson as a “world class player" and said his experience in Russia was a plus.

Tillerson and Putin.

Pool / AFP / Getty Images

“To me, a great advantage is he knows many of the players, and he knows them well,” Trump said. “He does massive deals in Russia.”

Other Republicans apparently aren't so sure.

Sen. John McCain told Fox News on Saturday that Tillerson's relationship with Putin was "a matter of concern."

"You want to give the president of the United States the benefit of the doubt because the people have spoken. But Vladimir Putin is a thug, a bully, and a murderer, and anybody else who describes him as anything else is lying," McCain said.

On Sunday, McCain vowed on CBS's Face The Nation to give Tillerson "a fair hearing" but repeated his qualms.

"It is a matter of concern to me that he has such a close personal relationship with Vladimir Putin," he said. "And, obviously, they have done enormous deals together, that that would color his approach to Vladimir Putin and the Russian threat. But that is a matter of concern. We will give him his chance. That's what the confirmation process, that is what advise and consent is all about."

The Arizona senator's former chief of staff, Mark Salter, on Friday shared similar concerns. "Tillerson would sell out NATO for Sakhalin oil and his pal, Vlad," Salter tweeted. "Should be a rough confirmation hearing, and a no vote on the Senate floor."

Politico reported McCain would be joined by Sen. Lindsey Graham in opposing Tillerson's nomination. The two senators on Sunday also called for a bipartisan congressional inquiry of Russian interference in the US election.

“I don’t know the man much at all, but let’s put it this way: If you received an award from the Kremlin, [an] Order of Friendship, then we’re gonna have some talkin’,” Graham told the Washington Post. “We’ll have some questions. I don’t want to prejudge the guy, but that’s a bit unnerving.”

On Sunday, Sen. Marco Rubio, who unsuccessfully battled Trump for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, also tweeted his disapproval of Tillerson.

Tillerson found some Republican support in former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a top member of Trump's transition team who described the ExxonMobil CEO as a great choice for the role.

"Tillerson will be a great Secretary of State," Gingrich tweeted Sunday. "It was worth the weeks long process to recruit [a] leader with this level of talent and experience."

Trump also defended Tillerson on Sunday, but did not confirm whether he would put him forward for the role.

LINK: Trump Will Nominate ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson As Secretary Of State: Reports

LINK: Trump’s Most Progressive Pick On Climate Change Is Exxon’s CEO

LINK: How Can Trump Cozy Up To Putin? Ask Exxon

James Clapper

Alex Wong / Getty Images

A group of 10 electors, set to cast their vote for president in one week, sent a letter demanding an intelligence briefing on any ongoing investigations linking Donald Trump's presidential campaign to Russian government interference in the election.

The letter, signed by electors including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi's daughter, Christine, was sent to the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, on Monday.

"The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations," the letter reads. "We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States."

Intelligence agencies did not detect cyberactivity "that interfered with the casing and counting of ballots" on election day, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said, according to the Washington Post.

Earnest did suggest that the president-elect benefited from the Russian hacking, adding that it was Trump "who over the course of the campaign indicated that he thought that President Putin was a strong leader."

The electors wrote that they will also require evidence from Trump that he and his staff did not accept Russian interference or collaborate during the campaign.

The letter states that it's the electors' constitutional role to "investigate, discuss, and deliberate with our colleagues," to ensure they select a president who would be "endowed with the requisite qualifications."

On Friday, media reports suggested Russia engaged in hacking to help Trump win the election. The Washington Post reported the CIA believes Russian spies hacked and then published emails from top Democrats. The New York Times reported Russian spies also hacked the Republican National Committee emails as well, but they were "conspicuously" not made public.

Trump dismissed reports that Russia interfered with the election and urged people to "move on."

"Trump’s willingness to disregard conclusions made by the intelligence community and his continuing defense of Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin demand close scrutiny and deliberation from the Electoral College," the electors' letter reads.

In a statement Monday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair, John Podesta, said the campaign supports the letter calling for an intelligence briefing.

“Each day that month, our campaign decried the interference of Russia in our campaign and its evident goal of hurting our campaign to aid Donald Trump,” he said in a statement. “Despite our protestations, this matter did not receive the attention it deserved by the media in the campaign. We now know that the CIA has determined Russia's interference in our elections was for the purpose of electing Donald Trump. This should distress every American.”

Podesta added that the administration "owes it to the American people" to explain what they know about Russia's interference as soon as possible.

The letter was signed by nine Democrats and one Republican representing five states and the District of Columbia.

Drew Angerer / Getty Images

John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the United Nations, who was photographed Dec. 2 leaving Trump Tower, publicly questioned reports that Russia was behind the hacking attacks during the election.

Bolton, who is possibly being considered for a position in President-elect Donald Trump's cabinet, was referring to a report on Friday that President Obama had ordered a "full review" into hacking activity during the 2016 election, after the president had previously said he was confident that the Russian government sought to interfere with the US election. Obama said he wanted a review into foreign interference finished before he leaves office on Jan. 20.

Citing no evidence, Bolton appeared on Fox News with Eric Shawn on Sunday night and said “it is not at all clear to me just viewing this from the outside, that this hacking into the DNC and the RNC computers was not a false flag operation."

Bolton said it was suspicious that the data led back to Russia, saying they would be too "sophisticated" to leave a paper trail.

"Let’s remember what FBI Director James Comey said dealing with Hillary’s home-brewed server," Bolton continued. "He said we found no direct evidence of foreign intelligence service penetration, but given the nature of this we didn’t expect to, meaning a really sophisticated foreign intelligence service would not leave any cyber fingerprints, and yet people say they did leave fingerprints in the hacks regarding our election. So the question has to be asked, why did the Russians run their smart intelligence service against Hillary’s server, but their dumb intelligence service against the election."

But Bolton added if it was found that Russia was behind the cyber attacks "I think if the facts prove out that Russia did try to influence our election, they should face very grave consequences both so that they don’t think about it again and nobody else thinks about it again."

He added that we should consider "who else might want to influence the election and why they would leave fingerprints that point to the Russians. That is why I say until we know more about how the intelligence community came to this conclusion, we don’t whether it is Russian inspired or a false flag."

Shawn questioned Bolton's remarks, asking who had planted the false flag.

"But when you say false flag, that is a very serious charge, false flag by whom?...are you actually accusing someone here in the administration or in the intelligence community of trying to throw something?"

Bolton responded by saying "We just don't know. But I believe that intelligence has been politicized in the Obama administration to a very significant degree."

“We would want to know who else might want to influence the election and why they would leave fingerprints that point to the Russians," Bolton added. "That is why I say until we know more about how the intelligence community came to this conclusion, we don’t whether it is Russian inspired or a false flag.”

Drew Angerer / Getty Images

After a campaign to recount ballots in key swing states went viral last month, the efforts ended on Monday with little change to the official results.

Election officials in Wisconsin on Monday announced Donald Trump's victory margin over Hillary Clinton increased by 131 votes following a recount. Pennsylvania's recount effort was stopped Monday by a federal judge for a number of reasons, including that there was no credible evidence of a hack of election systems.

Michigan's recount had already ended last week after decisions by state and federal courts. A recount in Nevada also ended last week after elections officials found no signs of problems in a sample of precincts.

"This recount was never about changing the outcome; it was about validating the vote and restoring confidence in our voting system to Americans across the country who have doubts," Green Party candidate Jill Stein said in a statement on Monday.

Stein raised $7.3 million from donors to fund recounts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan after some elections experts said it was possible presidential election results could have been manipulated or hacked. Filing fees alone for the recounts topped $5 million, and her campaign said other money would cover legal costs and the recount campaign's operational costs.

"These recounts are part of an election integrity movement to attempt to shine a light on just how untrustworthy the US election system is," Stein's campaign said.

The recount in Nevada was requested and paid for by independent candidate Rocky De La Fuente.

Paul Sancya / AP

Critics of the recount effort described it as frivolous. Michigan's attorney general, Bill Schuette, filed a lawsuit to block Stein's recount, describing it as a waste of taxpayer money. The state's court of appeals found Stein unqualified to file for a recount in the first place, since she was not an "aggrieved candidate" who could have won if not for problems with the vote count. A federal judge agreed the recount had no basis to proceed — there was simply no evidence of significant fraud or mistakes, he said.

In Pennsylvania, a federal judge on Monday stopped Stein's request for a recount from going further for a variety of reasons.

"Most importantly, there is no credible evidence that any 'hack' occurred, and compelling evidence that Pennsylvania's voting system was not in any way compromised," Judge Paul Diamond wrote.

In a statement, Stein said she was disappointed by the decision to forego a hand recount of paper ballots and a forensic audit of voting machines.

"PA voters have no way to find out if their votes count," she wrote on Twitter. "We can't hide democracy inside a black box."

Wisconsin completed its recount and certified results on Monday, showing little change to original counts — which should give voters confidence, officials said.

“Completing this recount was a challenge, but the real winners are the voters,” Wisconsin Elections Commission Chair Mark Thomsen said in a statement. “Based on the recount, they can have confidence that Wisconsin’s election results accurately reflect the will of the people, regardless of whether they are counted by hand or by machine.

The recount awarded Trump 1,405,284 votes instead of his original 1,404,440. Clinton earned 1,382,536 instead of the original 1,381,823.

Stein applauded the work of the Wisconsin recount, but she also said she was disappointed not every county had used a full hand recount.

"The recount in Wisconsin raised a number of important election integrity issues that bear further assessment and serious action to ensure we have integrity and confidence in our electoral system," she said.

Meanwhile, Trump wrote on Twitter that the recount campaign was a scam.

LINK: Michigan’s Vote Recount Is Off After Successful Lawsuits By Trump Supporters

LINK: Jill Stein’s Fundraiser For Voting Recounts Surges To $4.5 Million

Nicholas Kamm / AFP / Getty Images

President-elect Donald Trump plans to nominate Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be his secretary of state, sources told NBC News and the New York Times, a decision that caps off a highly publicized search for the next top US diplomat but will immediately draw close scrutiny because of the businessman's close ties to Russia.

The 64-year-old Texan oilman only emerged as a leading contender to head the State Department in recent days, after meeting with the president-elect at Trump Tower in New York City earlier this week. If confirmed as a nominee, he will join a potential cabinet list comprised mostly of military generals and wealthy business figures.

Representatives from the Trump campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment, but spokesman Jason Miller tweeted that no official announcement was expected until at least next week.

The Associated Press reported Trump was yet to formally offer Tillerson the role, but had privately indicated that he would do so.

However, in a preview of an interview set to air on Sunday, the president-elect told Fox News that Tillerson was "much more than a business executive," and described him as a "world class player."

"To me, a great advantage is he knows many of the players, and he knows them well," Trump said. "He does massive deals in Russia."

View Video ›

Facebook: video.php

Tillerson’s current position as the president and CEO of Exxon Mobil requires him to maintain international contacts with several countries, but his ties to Russia have been particularly noteworthy.

In 2011, Tillerson company signed a deal with Rosneft, a state-owned Russian oil business, to drill for oil in the Russian Arctic. In 2014, he then spoke out against sanctions after the Obama administration imposed them on Russia, following the annexation of Crimea. After Rosneft was added to the sanctions list in September 2014, the Exxon Mobil deal has been on hold ever since.

The Kremlin has previously bestowed upon Tillerson the Order of Friendship medal, a prestigious decoration awarded to non-Russians.

"The only [government experience] Rex Tillerson has was receiving the Kremlin's Order of Friendship," Rep. Steve Israel, a Democrat, tweeted on Saturday.

Trump, who has argued Vladimir Putin has been a better leader than Barack Obama, has made building better diplomatic relations with Russia a central goal of his foreign policy plans.

“If you are trying to lift sanctions on Russia and get back to business with Vladimir Putin, Rex Tillerson would be an excellent choice," Michael McFaul, President Obama’s ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, told BuzzFeed News this week."

Senator John McCain on Saturday told NBC that he had concerns over Tillerson's relationship with Russia, though he would not say whether or not he would vote against the nomination.

Pool / AFP / Getty Images

Exxon Mobil has in the past acknowledged the science behind climate change and has gone on record saying it supports a carbon tax.

“We believe that addressing the risk of climate change is a global issue,” Tillerson said in May, according to the New York Times.

But environmental activists have viewed the company's statements with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Jamie Henn, co-founder of climate action organization 350.org, told the Times that "a read of their public energy assessments make it clear they have no intention of helping the world meet that target or adjust their business plans in that direction.”

Annie Leonard, the executive director of Greenpeace USA, urged the Senate not to confirm Tillerson's nomination. "In this position, Tillerson will try his hardest to silence global initiatives and the right of state attorney generals to hold fossil fuel companies legally accountable for climate change," Leonard said. "We will not be silenced, and we will not allow this cabinet of billionaires to steamroll the people."

Unlike the president-elect, Tillerson is also a strong proponent of free trade. At an event for energy company IHS in 2012, he said that "free trade in energy will lead to increased investment, job creation, and energy production."

"Whether we are talking about the export of LNG or lifting a ban on crude oil, the economist and leaders from across the global spectrum agree that free trade in energy will lead to increased investment, increased jobs creation, and increased production," he added.

The news of Tillerson's nomination comes after Trump blasted the CIA over reports that intelligence officials have determined Russian hackers worked to help him get elected.

President Obama on Friday ordered a full review of the hacking activity related to the election, but there are growing calls among Democrats for a congressional inquiry into Russian influence in the election.

Anticipation around Trump's secretary of state pick has been high since the election, with a list of candidates, including Mitt Romney and former CIA director Gen. David Petraeus, having to parade before the press in Trump Tower.

The consideration of Romney, in particular, had drawn highly unusual public condemnation from Trump loyalists, including campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, because of the former Massachusetts governor's previous fierce criticism of the businessman-turned-politician.

The president-elect announced on Friday that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a strong campaign supporter, was no longer under consideration for the top diplomat position. Guiliani later said that he withdrew from the running on Nov. 29, but his resignation was not accepted at the time.

This is a developing news story. Check back for updates or follow BuzzFeed News on Twitter.

LINK: How Can Trump Cozy Up To Putin? Ask Exxon

LINK: Here Are Donald Trump’s Cabinet Picks So Far

Don Emmert/AFP / Getty Images

In an interview that aired Sunday, President-elect Donald Trump falsely asserted “nobody really knows” what is causing climate change.

Speaking with Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday, Trump said he said he was “open minded” about the science behind climate change, despite previously calling it a "big scam" and "hoax" perpetrated by China.

"I'm very open-minded. I'm still open-minded. Nobody really knows," Trump told Wallace, before continuing: “Look, I'm somebody that gets it and nobody really knows. It's not something that's so hard and fast.”

In fact, the overwhelming majority of reputable climate scientists (at least 97%, according to one 2009 study) say human-made climate change is real and dangerous — a view supported even by figures like ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson, Trump's reported choice for secretary of state.

Trump told Wallace he was certain that countries like China and Mexico, who he said aren’t hampered by environmental regulations, are more productive than the US. (Both China and Mexico have ratified the UN's Paris Agreement on climate change).

“I do know this: other countries are eating our lunch,” said Trump. “If you look at what China's doing. If you look at what — I could name country after country. You look at what's happening in Mexico where our people are just — plants are being built and they don’t wait 10 years to get an approval to build a plant, okay? They build it like the following day or the following week.”

"We can't let all of these permits that take forever to get stop our jobs," he said.

While Trump would not say exactly what he do with regard to the controversial Keystone pipeline or the Paris Climate Agreement, he did tell Wallace that he planned to take action very quickly when he takes office.

"Now, Paris, I'm studying," he said. "I do say this. I don't want that agreement to put us at a competitive disadvantage with other countries. And as you know, there are different times and different time limits on that agreement. I don't want that to give China, or other countries signing agreements an advantage over us."

LINK: Trump’s Most Progressive Pick On Climate Change Is Exxon’s CEO

LINK: ExxonMobil Should Have Considered Climate Change Before Polluting River In Boston, Lawsuit Claims

Facebook

A post on the official Facebook page of Allen West — a former Republican congressman, Army lieutenant colonel, and conservative political pundit — stated that President-elect Donald Trump chose Gen. James "Mad Dog" Mattis to serve as defense secretary in order to "exterminate Muslims."

The meme-style post on West's page, which has over 2.5 million followers, included a picture of Mattis with the words "FIRED BY OBAMA TO PLEASE THE MUSLIMS. HIRED BY TRUMP TO EXTERMINATE THEM."

Mattis, who was announced earlier this month as Trump's nominee to head the Pentagon, retired from the US Central Command in 2013. He was not fired.

The post, which was uploaded Saturday, was shared by at least 10,000 people before being taken down.

West visited Trump Tower in New York City on Dec. 5 and reportedly met with members of Trump's transition team, including Vice President-elect Mike Pence and former US Army General Michael Flynn, Trump's pick for national security adviser.

West told reporters that national security issues were discussed at the meeting.

Andrew Harnik / AP

On Saturday afternoon, another post appeared on West's Facebook by Michele Hickford, editor-in-chief of West's website, claiming that the offensive image was not posted by either herself or West. Hickford called the meme "reprehensible."

"Furthermore, it does not reflect Col. West's beliefs, principles, and values," Hickford wrote.

She did not state who posted the meme, or why and how a meme calling for the "extermination" 1.6 billion people was posted.

View Video ›

Facebook: AllenBWest

The meme was condemned by the Council on American–Islamic Relations' Florida chapter, which called for West to be disqualified from further government appointments, describing him as "well-known Islamophobe."

"The former congressman's irresponsible and openly xenophobic Facebook's posting insinuating that Trump nominated Gen. Mattis to exterminate Muslims should be taken serious by President-elect Trump," CAIR-Florida CEO Hassan Shibly said in a statement.

West did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The former congressman is no stranger to controversy, often releasing provocative statements to the media since his retirement from the Army in 2004.

In 2011, West said Joseph Goebbels, a Nazi propagandist and close adviser of Hitler, would be proud of the Democratic Party.

West also once said that Walmart was "caving to Muslims demands" by having an employee who he said appeared to be Muslim refrain from selling alcohol to customers. The store later told him the employee was underage.

LINK: Trump Picks Retired Gen. James Mattis For Defense Secretary

Nezar Balout / AFP / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump’s nomination of Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson as secretary of state could hit a significant roadblock in the Senate, with top Republicans already expressing concern over Tillerson's close ties to Russia.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has 10 Republicans and nine Democrats, meaning that under regular way the Senate does business, all the Republicans would need to approve Tillerson before he can go before the full Senate for confirmation.

Florida GOP Sen. Marco Rubio, who serves on the committee, said Sunday in a Twitter post: “Being a ‘friend of Vladimir’ is not an attribute I am hoping for from a #SecretaryOfState.”

Rubio included his initials in the tweet. Of the other nine GOP members on the narrowly split committee, which will have jurisdiction over the nomination, Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul — both of whom are outspoken, independent-minded Republicans — could also oppose the nomination (though Paul has said he will "reserve judgement" on Tillerson). Since there are nine Democrats on the committee who will presumably grill Tillerson on Russia during confirmation hearings, every single Republican vote will count.

In a press conference on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declined to talk about any potential troubles with Tillerson’s confirmation.

"Yeah, let's wait until we get nominees,” he said. "I think of the nominees that we're already aware of, I think I'm optimistic that they'll all be confirmed. But I don't want to comment on a kind of phantom nominee today."

"I've been very impressed with the nominations so far and we'll have to wait and see who is nominated for secretary of state, and we'll obviously treat whoever that is with respect. They will go through the regular process and respond to questions and we'll see where it comes out."

Typically, if a cabinet nomination fails to get enough support in the committee with jurisdiction, it dies without getting a full vote in the Senate.

But technically, it is up to McConnell's discretion if he wants to bring Tillerson up for a full Senate vote, even if the committee doesn't approve him. When asked if McConnell would bring up a nominee who fails out of committee to floor, the Kentucky Republican’s office referred BuzzFeed News to excerpts from the press conference.

Asked if McConnell's use of “regular process” would mean him sticking to the traditional process of bringing up non-judicial nominees only if they make it out committee, his spokesperson said he hasn’t addressed that scenario.

Tillerson, who was awarded the Order of Friendship — one of the highest honors Russia given to foreigners — in 2013 by Vladimir Putin, is known for cutting deals with oil-rich Russia. A Kremlin spokesman even praised Tillerson recently as “highly professional.”

His close ties with Russia — especially at a time when a bipartisan group of lawmakers is calling for an investigation into the alleged Russian hacking of Democratic committees during the election — will undoubtedly be closely scrutinized.

Although they’re not on the committee, influential lawmakers including Arizona GOP Sen John McCain, chairman of the Armed Services committee, have also said Tillerson’s relationship with Vladimir Putin "is a matter of concern.”

“You want to give the president of the United States the benefit of the doubt because the people have spoken,” McCain said on Fox News Sunday. "But Vladimir Putin is a thug, a bully and a murderer, and anybody else who describes him as anything else is lying.”

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Amid the contentious race for the DNC chair, as Rep. Keith Ellison continues to hold support, two top candidates met with the Congressional Black Caucus leaders in closed-door sessions last week.

Ellison, who recently promised to resign from his seat if he's elected, made a presentation to members of the CBC, of which he is a member. Ellison gave a version of his stump speech he's given, according to those familiar with the meeting, highlighting the need for Democrats to be on the front lines, and touting a 3,143-county strategy.

A spokesperson for Ellison confirmed his attendance but declined to discuss his remarks.

In his meeting, South Carolina Democratic Party chair Jaime Harrison made a deeply personal appeal to members of the Congressional Black Caucus last week, laying out his vision as a potential leader of the Democratic Party.

Harrison spoke emotionally about his beginnings in politics as a Congressional Black Caucus Foundation intern, a beneficiary of the Congressional Black Caucus Institute, to rising to become executive director of the House Democratic Caucus. One top Democrat in the room said he was "well-received."

In a telephone interview with BuzzFeed News, Harrison confirmed the meeting, saying he was comfortable with the status of his dark horse candidacy, and that he had petitioned CBC chair G.K. Butterfield for the meeting.

"In essence I told them that I stood on their shoulders, and that I would be proud to represent them as chair of the party," he said.

Although the voting body that elects the new DNC chair is made up of state party chairs, vice chairs, and committee members, the support of the CBC is widely viewed as critical to any candidate seeking a coalition of support — and the courting of the CBC as a natural move for candidates who will look to the body to help mobilize the black vote in 2018 and beyond.

The state of the race for DNC chair will likely change with the expected entry of Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who had been considered for the vice presidential nomination and served in the Obama administration.

Already, Harrison scooped up one of the most important endorsements, that of Rep. Jim Clyburn, an influential member of the CBC who is also in House leadership.

Two Democrats supporting Harrison who asked for anonymity to speak openly about Harrison's candidacy, said although he worked on the Hill, there's a general consensus among the chairs and vice chairs that people don't want someone seen as a Washington insider.

Another sentiment about Harrison's candidacy is the resonance of his personal story — Harrison has spoken publicly about his rise from extreme poverty to Yale and Georgetown, which another Democrat described as "the epitome of the American Dream." The hope for Harrison's supporters is that his story would resonate with white rural workers and black working class alike.

The death chamber at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, Aug. 29, 2001.

Mike Simons / Getty

WASHINGTON — A federal judge overseeing a death penalty trial in Vermont on Tuesday ruled that only the US Supreme Court can declare the death penalty to be unconstitutional — but nonetheless issued a strong critique of what he found to be an arbitrarily imposed punishment "in which chance and bias play leading roles."

US District Court Judge Geoffrey Crawford issued the 57-page decision in Donald Fell's challenge to the constitutionality of the federal death penalty statute. Fell faces a second federal trial over a 2000 killing, after his first conviction was tossed out due to juror misconduct.

The judge found that there is not a consensus across the country in opposition to the death penalty — a key question in addressing the "proportionality" challenge raised by Fell's lawyers.

Crawford did, however, find that reforms aimed at making the penalty more fairly imposed — the "arbitrariness" argument — over the past 40 years have "largely failed" to address the problems identified by the US Supreme Court in a 1972 decision that had led to a four-year national moratorium on the death penalty.

"Gregg is still the law of the land," Crawford wrote about the 1976 decision ending that moratorium. It is, he continued, the Supreme Court's "prerogative alone to overrule one of its precedents."

Crawford held a hearing this summer — largely tracking the questions about the death penalty raised by Justice Stephen Breyer in a 2015 Supreme Court dissent, in which he called for a full Supreme Court review of the death penalty's constitutionality.

Noting the fact that he is required to follow existing Supreme Court majority decisions — and not dissenting opinions like Breyer's in 2015 — Crawford made clear his aim: "The trial court can respond by conducting an inquiry and setting the table for further review."

That meant, Crawford detailed, holding an extensive hearing regarding the unreliability and arbitrariness of the death penalty system, the excessive delay involved in executions, and the growing decline in the use of the death penalty.

The judge, in the wake of that hearing, issued detailed factual findings on Tuesday regarding many aspects of the imposition of the death penalty in America.

Among the areas specifically highlighted for criticism in Crawford's opinion in light of the evidence received was the system of "death qualification" in capital cases, under which those opposed to the death penalty are dismissed from serving on those juries.

"The exclusion of many people opposed to the death penalty on religious or moral grounds and the implicit process of persuasion at voir dire that death is the likely outcome create jury populations which stack the deck against defendants," Crawford wrote. "The studies brought to the court's attention supported the position of the defense that jury selection since Gregg is not the solution to inherent jury bias but rather a substantial part of the problem."

Regarding the arbitrariness of the imposition of the death penalty — even just looking at the federal system alone — Crawford concluded based on the evidence presented, "The more carefully one reviews ... the underlying case summaries, the more arbitrary the distinctions between cases become."

After reviewing those and other findings, Crawford posed the question: "Has actual experience borne out the promise for a more reliable system of capital punishment expressed in the Gregg decision? The evidence produced for the court answers the question in the negative."

Nonetheless, Crawford found that, for the most part, his hands were tied.

"Institutional authority to change this body of law is reserved to the Supreme Court," he wrote. "For this reason, the trial court is required to deny the defense motions related to the constitutionality of the death penalty."