After the Fed released minutes of its last meeting, the bond market signaled it fears the Fed will not be aggressive enough with its rate cutting.Market Insiderread more
The Fed minutes also note that "a couple" members wanted a 50 basis point cut, based primarily on the weak inflation readings.The Fedread more
The inversion is seen by many veteran traders as an important recession omen, though the timing on the eventual downturn is less predictable.Bondsread more
Here's what Nordstrom reported for its fiscal second-quarter earnings.Retailread more
The sexy image that once boosted Victoria's Secret has been haunting L Brands more recently, as women are steering clear of the brand's hot pink, lacy and bejeweled lingerie.Retailread more
See which stocks are posting big moves after the bell.Market Insiderread more
"I'd love to say that the optimistic universe is most likely to prevail, but the talking heads talk endlessly about how a recession is inevitable," CNBC's Jim Cramer says.Mad Money with Jim Cramerread more
Read the fine print in your Apple Card contract — one clause means you give up your right to be heard in court.Technologyread more
Federal Reserve members worried over future growth are highly concerned about the U.S.-China tariff battleThe Fedread more
President Donald Trump signed a memorandum on Wednesday to automatically cancel the student loan debt of disabled veterans. More than 25,000 service members will have their...Personal Financeread more
President Trump and Apple CEO Tim Cook have had a rocky relationship in recent years, but Trump is now complimenting the executive publicly.Technologyread more
President Donald Trump had senior administration officials sign agreements muzzling them from discussing confidential information even after leaving the White House, the Washington Post reported Sunday.
Transparency watchdogs and civil liberties groups are criticizing the reported NDAs as unconstitutional.
"Public employees can't be gagged by private agreements," said Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, in a statement on Monday.
"These so-called NDAs are unconstitutional and unenforceable."
The Washington post reportedly viewed a draft version of the non-disclosure agreements. The draft would impose crippling $10 million penalties against a signee for each public statement of confidential information uttered, according to the Post. That money would go to the federal government, the Post reported.
"I guess it's like, pick your poison," Wizner said of the various legal problems with the draft agreement in an interview with CNBC. "I don't know which would be more absurd: paying Trump, or paying the U.S. Treasury."
"The fact that the government is listed here makes it even clearer" that the agreement violates the First Amendment, Wizner said.
Non-disclosure agreements in government — even those that extend beyond one's time of service — are not uncommon in certain contexts. Standard Form 312, for instance, is a form of non-disclosure agreement that applies to certain classified information.
But outside of those relatively narrow bounds, Wizner said, "the president has no authority to impose a gag as a requirement of the administration."
The draft reportedly defined "confidential" information as being "all nonpublic information I learn of or gain access to in the course of my official duties in the service of the United States Government on White House staff," including "communications ... with members of the press" and "with employees of federal, state, and local governments."
A person who signed the final version of the agreement told the Post that Trump himself, with support from then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and the White House Counsel's Office, had senior White House staff sign the agreements.
And the non-disclosure agreements reportedly stayed in effect even after these officials left the White House. The newspaper wrote that the agreement would restrict the ability for Trump aides to discuss certain information beyond their White House service "at all times thereafter."
Neither the White House nor the White House Counsel's Office immediately responded to CNBC's requests for comment.
The Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit that advocates for government transparency, condemned the reported use of hush agreements in the White House.
Ian Bassin, founder of the democratic and constitutional advocacy group Protect Democracy and a former member of the White House Counsel's Office under President Barack Obama, claimed that requests to form non-disclosure pacts would have been turned down during his tenure.
Walter Shaub, Obama's director of the Office of Government Ethics, questioned the legality and enforceability of the reported agreements.