Katie Britt: “We want Hamas to be destroyed”
U.S. Senator Katie Britt (R-Alabama) held a bipartisan press conference in Israel, which is entering its third week of war with Hamas. The Sens., led by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Ben Cardin (D-Maryland), discussed what they saw and heard while on the ground in Israel Sunday. The delegation of Senators visited Israel as part of an official trip to the Middle East to meet with key leaders, advocate for regional stability and long-term sustainable peace, and emphasize the United States’ unequivocal support for Israel in the wake of the brutal terrorist attacks by Hamas on October 7. Britt said, “I want to start by thanking Senator Graham. Thank you for getting this group together. You and Senator Cardin put together a group of bipartisan senators – each of us set foot in this country not as a Democrat or a Republican. We set foot here united as Americans, standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel.” The Senators met with the families of Israelis who were taken hostage by Hamas and are being held in Gaza. Israeli authorities say that Hamas has taken 222 hostages. “When we walked in the room today and talked to the families of these hostages, I listened as a mom, I listened as a wife, as a daughter, as a sister,” Sen. Britt said. “Thinking what these families are going through, thinking what each individual hostage is going through is absolutely unbearable.” Over 1,100 people were killed and 2,800 wounded when Hamas fighters came across the Gaza border on a murderous rampage October 7. “When we watched the videos and heard the stories today, the things that happened were unthinkable,” Britt said. “The loss of life – kids having to watch their parents be murdered. Parents having to watch their children be burned to death, women having to be raped, kids decapitated. It’s disgusting, it’s despicable, and it is pure evil.” Britt said that Israel has a right to defend herself. “Make no mistake, I believe that people of all faiths can coexist in peace and prosperity,” said Britt. “But I do not believe that good can coexist with evil. And when evil rears its head, we must look it in the eyes, and we must take it down – and Hamas is pure evil. Israel has every right to defend herself – and not only the right – they have the obligation, the obligation to their children and their children’s children. They have an obligation to the innocent. They have an obligation to the peace-loving people of this world. And that is ultimately what we want. We want Hamas to be destroyed, and we want peace to be restored.” “President Reagan said that ‘evil cannot exist if the good are unafraid,” said Britt. “Iran, Hamas – we stand here today to tell you that we are unafraid. We stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. We will take you down.” In addition to Senators Britt, Graham, and Cardin, the delegation included Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-South Dakota), Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island), and Senators Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Chris Coons (D-Delaware), Cory Booker (D-New Jersey), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut). “Thank you all. Ten percent of the United States Senate is in Israel,” said Sen. Graham. “Ten percent of the United States Senate is in Israel because we care. Five Republicans and five Democrats. If I had a bigger plane, we probably would have brought the entire Senate.” “The goal going forward is to take from this horror and try to make this a better world,” Graham said. “I saw things today that I didn’t think were possible in 2023. I’ve seen grown men who’ve been fighting wars all of their lives be stunned by what they saw. The level of barbaric behavior here is beyond my ability to explain it.” Hamas released two American women, a mother and daughter. Hamas had taken hostages just before the Senators arrived in the war-torn country. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com
Hunter Biden will plead guilty in a deal that likely averts time behind bars in a tax and gun case
President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden will plead guilty to federal tax offenses but avoid full prosecution on a separate gun charge in a deal with the Justice Department that likely spares him time behind bars. Hunter Biden, 53, will plead guilty to the misdemeanor tax offenses as part of an agreement made public Tuesday. The agreement will also avert prosecution on a felony charge of illegally possessing a firearm as a drug user, as long as he adheres to conditions agreed to in court. The deal ends a long-running Justice Department investigation into the taxes and foreign business dealings of President Biden’s second son, who has acknowledged struggling with addiction following the 2015 death of his brother Beau Biden. It also averts a trial that would have generated days or weeks of distracting headlines for a White House that has strenuously sought to keep its distance from the Justice Department. The president, when asked about the development at a meeting on another subject in California, said simply, “I’m very proud of my son.” The White House counsel’s office said in a statement that the president and first lady Jill Biden “love their son and support him as he continues to rebuild his life.” While the agreement requires the younger Biden to admit guilt, the deal is narrowly focused on tax and weapons violations rather than anything broader or tied to the Democratic president. Nonetheless, former President Donald Trump and other Republicans continued to try to use the case to shine an unflattering spotlight on Joe Biden and to raise questions about the independence of the Biden Justice Department. Trump, challenging President Biden in the 2024 presidential race, likened the agreement to a “mere traffic ticket,” adding, “Our system is BROKEN!” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy compared the outcome to the Trump documents case now heading toward federal court and said, “If you are the president’s son, you get a sweetheart deal.” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, another presidential challenger, used the same term. Two people familiar with the investigation said the Justice Department would recommend 24 months of probation for the tax charges, meaning Hunter Biden will not face time in prison. But the decision to go along with any deal is up to the judge. The people were not authorized to speak publicly by name and spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity. He is to plead guilty to failing to pay more than $100,000 in taxes on over $1.5 million in income in both 2017 and 2018, charges that carry a maximum possible penalty of a year in prison. The back taxes have since been paid, according to a person familiar with the investigation. The gun charge states that Hunter Biden possessed a handgun, a Colt Cobra .38 Special, for 11 days in October 2018 despite knowing he was a drug user. The rarely filed count carries a maximum sentence of up to 10 years in prison, but the Justice Department said Hunter Biden had reached a pretrial agreement. This likely means as long as he adheres to the conditions, the case will be wiped from his record. Christopher Clark, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, said in a statement that it was his understanding that the five-year investigation had now been resolved. “I know Hunter believes it is important to take responsibility for these mistakes he made during a period of turmoil and addiction in his life,” Clark said. “He looks forward to continuing his recovery and moving forward.” The agreement comes as the Justice Department pursues perhaps the most consequential case in its history against Trump, the first former president to face federal criminal charges. The resolution of Hunter Biden’s case comes just days after a 37-count indictment against Trump in relation to accusations of mishandling classified documents on his Florida estate. It was filed by a special counsel, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to avoid any potential conflict of interest in the Justice Department. That indictment has nevertheless brought an onslaught of Republican criticism of “politicization” of the Justice Department. Meanwhile, congressional Republicans continue to pursue their own investigations into nearly every facet of Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including foreign payments. Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said the younger Biden is “getting away with a slap on the wrist,” despite investigations in Congress that GOP lawmakers say show — but have not yet provided evidence of — a pattern of corruption involving the family’s financial ties. Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, on the other hand, said the case was thoroughly investigated over five years by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, a Delaware prosecutor appointed by Trump. Resolution of the case, Coons said, “brings to a close a five-year investigation, despite the elaborate conspiracy theories spun by many who believed there would be much more to this.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was scheduled to campaign with the president Tuesday evening, reaffirmed his support for Biden’s reelection. “Hunter changes nothing,” Newsom told the AP on Tuesday. Misdemeanor tax cases aren’t common, and most that are filed end with a sentence that doesn’t include time behind bars, said Caroline Ciraolo, an attorney who served as head of the Justice Department’s tax division from 2015 to 2017. An expected federal conviction “is not a slap on the wrist,” she said. Gun possession charges that aren’t associated with another firearm crime are also uncommon, said Keith Rosen, a past head of the criminal division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware. For people without a significant criminal history, the total number of multiple types of illegal possession cases filed every year in Delaware amounts to a handful, he said. The Justice Department’s investigation into the president’s son burst into public view in December 2020, one month after the 2020 election, when Hunter Biden revealed that he had received a subpoena as part of the department’s scrutiny of his taxes. The subpoena sought information on the younger Biden’s business dealings with a number of entities, including
Joe Biden announces 2024 reelection bid: ‘Let’s finish this job’
President Joe Biden on Tuesday formally announced that he is running for reelection in 2024, asking voters to give him more time to “finish this job” and extend the run of America’s oldest president for another four years. Biden, who would be 86 at the end of a second term, is betting his first-term legislative achievements and more than 50 years of experience in Washington will count for more than concerns over his age. He faces a smooth path to winning his party’s nomination, with no serious Democratic challengers. But he’s still set for a hard-fought struggle to retain the presidency in a bitterly divided nation. In his first public appearance Tuesday since the announcement, Biden offered a preview of how he plans to navigate the dual roles of president and presidential candidate, using a speech to building trades union members to highlight his accomplishments and undercut his GOP rivals, while showing voters he remained focused on his day job. Greeted with chants of “Let’s Go Joe” from a raucous crowd of building trades union members — a key base of Democratic support — Biden showcased the tens of thousands of construction jobs being created since he took office that are supported by legislation he signed into law. “We — you and I — together, we’re turning things around, and we’re doing it in a big way,” Biden said. “It’s time to finish the job. Finish the job.” Biden’s campaign announcement, in a three-minute video, comes on the four-year anniversary of when he declared for the White House in 2019, promising to heal the “soul of the nation” amid the turbulent presidency of Donald Trump — a goal that has remained elusive. “I said we are in a battle for the soul of America, and we still are,” Biden said. “The question we are facing is whether in the years ahead we have more freedom or less freedom. More rights or fewer.” While the prospect of seeking reelection has been a given for most modern presidents, that’s not always been the case for Biden. A notable swath of Democratic voters has indicated they would prefer he not run, in part because of his age. Biden has called those concerns “totally legitimate,” but he did not address the issue head-on in his launch video. Yet few things have unified Democratic voters like the prospect of Trump returning to power. And Biden’s political standing within his party stabilized after Democrats notched a stronger-than-expected performance in last year’s midterm elections. The president is set to run again on the same themes that buoyed his party last fall, particularly on preserving access to abortion. “Freedom. Personal freedom is fundamental to who we are as Americans. There’s nothing more important. Nothing more sacred,” Biden said in the launch video, depicting Republican extremists as trying to roll back access to abortion, cut Social Security, limit voting rights, and ban books they disagree with. “Around the country, MAGA extremists are lining up to take those bedrock freedoms away.” As the contours of the campaign begin to take shape, Biden plans to run on his record. He spent his first two years as president combating the coronavirus pandemic and pushing through major bills such as the bipartisan infrastructure package and legislation to promote high-tech manufacturing and climate measures. The president also has multiple policy goals and unmet promises from his first campaign that he’s asking voters to give him another chance to fulfill. “Let’s finish this job. I know we can,” Biden said in the video, repeating a mantra he said a dozen times during his State of the Union address in February. Vice President Kamala Harris, who was featured prominently alongside Biden in the video, held a political rally at Howard University in Washington on Tuesday evening in support of abortion access, kicking off her own efforts to support the reelection effort. Saying she’s “proud to run for reelection with President Joe Biden,” Harris added, “Our hard-won freedoms are under attack. And this is a moment for us to stand and fight.” In the video, Biden speaks over brief clips and photographs of key moments in his presidency, snapshots of diverse Americans, and flashes of outspoken Republican foes, including Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. He exhorts supporters that “this is our moment” to “defend democracy. Stand up for our personal freedoms. Stand up for the right to vote and our civil rights.” Biden also plans to point to his work over the past two years shoring up American alliances, leading a global coalition to support Ukraine’s defenses against Russia’s invasion and returning the U.S. to the Paris climate accord. But public support in the U.S. for Ukraine has softened in recent months, and some voters question the tens of billions of dollars in military and economic assistance flowing to Kyiv. The president also faces lingering criticism over his administration’s chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan after nearly 20 years of war, which undercut the image of competence he aimed to portray, and he’s the target of GOP attacks over his immigration and economic policies. As a candidate in 2020, Biden pitched voters on his familiarity with the halls of power in Washington and his relationships around the world. But even back then, he was acutely aware of voters’ concerns about his age. “Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” Biden said in March 2020, as he campaigned in Michigan with younger Democrats, including Harris, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.” Three years later, the president now 80, Biden allies say his time in office has demonstrated that he saw himself as more of a transformational than a transitional leader. Still, many Democrats would prefer that Biden didn’t run again. A recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows just 47% of Democrats say they want him to seek a second term, up from 37% in February. And Biden’s verbal — and occasional physical — stumbles have become fodder for critics trying to
Joe Guzzardi: Clock ticking on Alejandro Mayorkas; House files impeachment articles
The 118th Congress had barely convened before the Senate’s amnesty addicts traveled to the border and began pontificating about the bipartisan immigration action they were about to embark upon. Whenever Congress touts bipartisanship as it relates to immigration, the sub rosa message is that amnesty legislation, which Americans have consistently rejected, is percolating. Neither amnesty’s failed history – countless futile efforts since the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act – nor the Republican-controlled House of Representatives stopped determined Senators Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Mark Kelly, (D-Ariz.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.). Tillis tipped off the group’s hand when he said, “It’s not just about border security; it’s not just about a path to citizenship or some certainty for a population.” One of those populations would be the “Dreamers,” with a 20-year-long failed legislative record. Sinema took advantage of the border trip to promote her failed amnesty, her leftovers from the December Lame Duck session, a three-week period when radical immigration legislation usually finds a home. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) tweeted that “our immigration system is badly broken…” drivel that’s been repeated so often it’s lost whatever meaning it once may have had. The immigration system is “badly broken,” to quote Coons, because immigration laws have been ignored for decades. Critics laughingly call the out-of-touch, border-visiting senators the “Sell-Out Safari.” Coons’ tweet is classic duplicity. Coons, Sinema, Kelly, and Murphy have consistently voted against measures to enforce border security and against fortifying the interior by providing more agents and by giving more authority to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Republicans Tillis and Cornyn are also immigration expansionists. Tillis worked with Sinema on her unsuccessful Lame Duck amnesty. Cornyn sponsored, with Sinema and Tillis as cosponsors, the “Bipartisan Border Solutions” bill that would have built more processing centers to expedite migrants’ release and to create a “fairer and more efficient” way to decide asylum cases. The bill, which never got off the ground, would have rolled out the red carpet to more prospective migrants at a time when the border is under siege. The good news is that the border safari, an updated version of the 2013 Gang of Eight that promoted but couldn’t deliver an amnesty, was a cheap photo op that intended to reflect concern about the border crisis when, in fact, the senators’ voting records prove that the invasion doesn’t trouble them in the least. More good news is that Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the new Speaker of the House, represents enforcement proponents’ best chance to move their agenda forward since 2007 when Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) first held the job. Republicans John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) followed Pelosi from 2011 to 2019 when Pelosi returned as Speaker. Although Boehner and Ryan are Republicans, their commitment to higher immigration levels was not much different than Pelosi’s. Boehner and Ryan received 0 percent scores on immigration, meaning that they favor looser immigration enforcement and more employment-based visas for foreign-born workers. Also in McCarthy’s favor is the public support for tightening the border. Polls taken in September 2022 showed that a majority of Americans, including 76 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Independents, thought President Joe Biden should be doing more to ensure border security. Moreover, a plurality of Americans opposes using tax dollars to transport migrants, a common practice in the Biden catch-and-release era. McCarthy must become more proactive and make good on his November call for the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to resign or face impeachment. “He cannot and must not remain in that position,” McCarthy said. “If Secretary [Alejandro] Mayorkas does not resign, House Republicans will investigate every order, every action, and every failure to determine whether we can begin an impeachment inquiry.” McCarthy has the backing of the Chairmen of the Judiciary and Oversight Committees, Jim Jordan and James Comer. On January 9, Pat Fallon (R-Texas) filed articles of impeachment that charged Mayorkas with, among other offenses, “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Mayorkas insists he won’t resign and that he’s prepared for whatever investigations may come his way. Assuming the House presses on, and that the DHS secretary remains committed to keeping his post, Capitol Hill fireworks are assured, the fallout from which could lead to Mayorkas’ departure. Joe Guzzardi is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist who writes about immigration and related social issues. Joe joined Progressives for Immigration Reform in 2018 as an analyst after a ten-year career directing media relations for Californians for Population Stabilization, where he also was a Senior Writing Fellow. A native Californian, Joe now lives in Pennsylvania. Contact him at jguzzardi@pfirdc.org.
Ketanji Brown Jackson seems headed for confirmation, says no ‘agendas’
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson faced a barrage of Republican questioning Wednesday about her sentencing of criminal defendants, as her history-making bid to join the Supreme Court veered from lofty constitutional questions to attacks on her motivations as a judge. She declared she would rule “without any agendas” as the high court’s first Black female justice, rejecting Republican efforts to paint her as soft on crime in her decade on the federal bench. Democrats defended her and heralded the historic nature of her nomination. “America is ready for the Supreme Court glass ceiling to shatter,” Sen. Dick Durbin, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in Jackson’s second and last day answering questions at her confirmation hearings. Though her approval seems all but sure — Democrats are aiming for a vote before Easter — Republicans keep trying to chip away at her record. In more than 12 hours of testimony on Tuesday, and long into the day on Wednesday, GOP senators aggressively questioned her on the sentences she has handed down to child pornography offenders, her legal advocacy on behalf of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, her thoughts on critical race theory and even her religious views. In response to questioning about a case over affirmative action at Harvard University, her alma mater where she now serves on the Board of Overseers, Jackson said she would recuse herself. “That’s my plan,” she responded when Texas Sen. Ted Cruz asked her about it. The court will, in the fall, take up challenges to the consideration of race in college admissions in lawsuits filed by Asian American applicants to Harvard, a private institution, and the University of North Carolina, a state school. The court currently plans to hear the suits against the two schools together but could separate them and give Jackson a chance to take part in what will be one of next term’s biggest issues. Tempers rose at Wednesday’s hearing as the day wore on, with Durbin slamming down his gavel at one point when Cruz refused to yield after his time expired while he was grilling Jackson on the specifics of cases. “You can bang it as long as you want,” Cruz snapped, shouting that he just wanted Jackson to answer his question. “At some point, you have to follow the rules,” Durbin shot back. In another round of tense questioning, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham interrogated Jackson on the punishment she believes appropriate for people convicted of child pornography. Like Cruz and others on the committee, Graham said she had been too lenient on those criminals. Graham frequently interrupted her as she tried to speak; at one point, he said judges should simply “put their a— in jail!” The focus on her sentencing was part of a larger effort by the committee’s Republicans — several of whom are potential presidential candidates — to characterize Jackson’s record and her judicial philosophy as too empathetic and soft on criminals who commit the worst offenses. It was also part of an emerging emphasis on crime in GOP midterm election campaigns. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said she seemed like “a very kind person” — but “there’s at least a level of empathy that enters into your treatment of a defendant that some could view as maybe beyond what some of us would be comfortable with, with respect to administering justice.” The sustained focus on her record suggested that, contrary to Democratic hopes, Jackson’s confirmation vote in the full Senate is unlikely to garner much, if any, Republican support. Still, several Republicans acknowledged that she is likely to be on the court. Democrats can confirm her without any bipartisan support in the 50-50 Senate as Vice President Kamala Harris can cast the tie-breaking vote. Jackson, backed by committee Democrats, forcefully defended her record and said that the Republicans were mischaracterizing her decisions. Asked if her rulings were endangering children, she told the committee on Tuesday: “Nothing could be further from the truth.” She said she bases sentences on many factors, not just federal guidelines. Sentencing is not a “numbers game,” she said, noting that there are no mandatory sentences for sex offenders and that there has been significant debate on the subject. Some of the cases have given her nightmares, she said, and were “among the worst that I have seen.” Jackson said that if she is confirmed, she will do what she has done as a federal judge, “which is to rule from a position of neutrality, to look carefully at the facts and the circumstances of every case without any agendas, without any attempt to push the law in one direction or the other.” She reminded the committee that her brother and two uncles served as police officers and that “crime and the effect on the community, and the need for law enforcement — those are not abstract concepts or political slogans to me.” Defending her, Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware told Jackson that the Republican lines of questioning are “an attempt to distract from your broad support, your deep record, your outstanding intellectual and legal credentials.” President Joe Biden chose Jackson in February, fulfilling a campaign pledge to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court for the first time in American history. She would take the seat of Justice Stephen Breyer, who announced in January that he would retire this summer after 28 years on the court. Jackson would be the third Black justice, after Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas, and the sixth woman. Her confirmation would maintain the current 6-3 conservative majority on the court. Democrats have been full of praise for Jackson, noting that she would not only be the first Black woman but also the first public defender on the court and the first with experience representing indigent criminal defendants since Marshall. Jackson said that having a diverse judicial branch is important because it “bolsters public confidence in our system” and “lends confidence that the rulings that the court is handing down are fair and just.” She spoke of her parents often
William Haupt III: A resolution Congress must make and keep in 2022
“Some friends ask about your new year’s resolutions. Good friends don’t say too much about them. Your best friends don’t mention them at all, since they know you will never keep them.” – Jay Leno Between December 26 and January 2, people make an existential U-turn. The season of goodwill, visiting, and gift-giving morphs into a neurotic self-improvement aeon as we confront our disquieting anxieties. Which of my habits to stop? Who do I want to be? What do I wish to look like and more? It’s a fact; many New Year’s resolutions are outlandish, unattainable, and even ridiculous. Most are frivolously made after over-imbibing on the “bubbly” during celebrations. It’s uncanny that few really expect to keep them. And some people don’t even remember resolutions they made the next day? While “great expectations” have plagued mankind for centuries, since most people are forgiving by nature, we do not normally burn anyone at the stake for not keeping the resolutions that they made on New Year’s. We even tend to forgive those that politicians always make and never plan to keep. “By God, I will govern for everyone in America; even for those who did not vote for me.” – Joe Biden It is daunting when our list of New Year’s resolutions is longer than our holiday shopping lists. And it’s even more frustrating not being able to keep even one resolution by late January. According to Lynn Bufka, Ph.D., “People have a habit of setting overwhelming goals instead of attainable goals.” Each year, every member of Congress and the White House promises to cut our trade deficit with China, yet it continues to grow each year faster than Pinocchio’s nose grows every time he fibs. Is our federal government telling us what they think we want to hear? Or are these half-truths just grandiose New Year’s resolutions? “A lie told often enough becomes the truth.” – Vladimir Lenin If we learned anything from the pandemic, it is how vulnerable our supply chain is to the impulses of Red China. Although recently America has not been acting like a superpower, it is considered a dominant player in global affairs. Isn’t it also the world’s strongest nation with the most influence? If America is “too big to fail” and dictates policy to the world, then why did we allow Red China to maneuver our economy for four decades? Since the 1979 Accord signed by Jimmy Carter and Deng Xiaoping that legitimized Red China, we’ve become dependent on China for economic survival. The 1979 Accord opened the door for manufactures to recover lost profits due to union demands for egregious wages and benefits. Many had closed their doors. Others were merging to survive. Chinese cheap “labor” has fueled innovative product creation at the expense of U.S. engineering and development, utilizing U.S. resources. Since China has no respect for international intellectual property rights, they clone everything they make for us and compete against us in our own nation. “Communists must always put the interests of Communists first in order to survive.” – Mao Zedong A Federal Reserve report shows the U. S. is running a record trade deficit with China. Companies that used to make products in the U.S., from Levi’s to Master Locks, shut down their factories and moved to China. The report noted we buy more clothing and shoes from China than the U.S. A former Perry Ellis plant is now home to a Walmart plant that puts parts into TVs made in China. It’s time Joe Biden quits blaming our supply chain problems and high inflation on the pandemic! We are not only “overly dependent” on imports from countries that don’t share our political beliefs and policies; countries like Red China are competing with us using technology that they stole from us. “When it comes time to hang the capitalists, we will use the rope they sold us.” – Vladimir Lenin It’s scary the U.S. has placed its economic fate in Red China at the expense of democratic nations likes Mexico and India? Although Ford has a plant in Mexico, India’s Sun Pharmaceuticals is the largest generic drug supplier in the world. And India has the ability to do anything that China does. Economist Matt Slaughteg reminds us: for years, we had production contracts with Mexico, India, and Eastern Europe. But when China opened their free markets, American companies flocked to China because they had no unions, no labor laws, low taxes, and fewer government regulations. We are all aware of our dependence on rogue nations for energy and what they’ve done to us for years. Not only are we forced to turn to inferior, costly technology for energy, this threatens our national security. And it is a socioeconomic nightmare for every U.S. citizen and business as well. “Our supply chain is strained because we depend on so many critical imports.” – Jerome Powell Psychologists agree, when people set overwhelming goals on New Year’s, they seldom keep them. This is what Congress and the president vow to do every year with our trade deficit. This year we have an opportunity to hold their feet to the fire and make them do it with midterms coming soon. U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced a bill for government to invest $1 billion to mitigate future supply chain issues. It will identify manufacturing and distribution issues and will strengthen our supply chains, and reduce our reliance on imports, especially from China. The National Manufacturing Guard Act (NMGA) will help the Department of Commerce prepare us for future import crises. Most importantly, this bill will help the DOC identify supply chain problems and manufacturing issues. It also allows the DOC to partner with private industry and promotes the establishment of apprenticeship programs that will help increase US manufacturing and production. “The pandemic showed us how vulnerable our supply chains are; its time to fix them.” – Marco Rubio Ronald Reagan once said, “Capitalism is the most powerful weapon against
Tommy Tuberville joins other leaders to change sexual assault investigations in the military
U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville has joined a bipartisan group of senators to support a bill that will change the way the military conducts sexual assault investigations and prosecutions. Tuberville, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Personnel, joined U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), and 28 other Senators to introduce the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. According to the press release, the legislation “keeps the prosecution of sexual assault crimes within the military but moves the decision to prosecute to independent, trained, professional military prosecutors, and provides for several new prevention provisions such as better training for commanders and increased physical security measures, while ensuring that commanders still have the ability to provide strong leadership and ensure a successful command climate.” Tuberville stated, “Our men and women in uniform sacrifice every day to keep us safe, often working in some pretty unsafe places around the world. The last thing they should be worrying about is whether they’re unsafe within their ranks, and they certainly shouldn’t have to fear retaliation if they report a sexual assault. This bill is what happens when a bipartisan group of senators come together to get something done. I’m thankful that Senator Gillibrand and Senator Ernst have led the charge, and I’m glad to join my colleagues in support of this bill that will help improve the way the military handles sexual assaults so survivors can get the justice they deserve.” The bill was introduced in 2019, but did not receive a vote. Specifically, the legislation would: Move the decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, and professional military prosecutors, while leaving misdemeanors and uniquely military crimes within the chain of command. Ensure the Department of Defense supports criminal investigators and military prosecutors through the development of unique skills needed to properly handle investigations and cases related to sexual assault and domestic violence. Require the Secretary of Defense to survey and improve the physical security of military installations– including locks, security cameras, and other passive security measures – to increase safety in lodging and living spaces for service members. Increase, and improve training and education on military sexual assault throughout our armed services. Kirsten Gillibrand stated on Twitter, “Here’s a bipartisan mission we can all support: Survivors of military sexual assault deserve justice. I’m proud to have @JoniErnst join me this week to introduce our new, improved bill to reform the military justice system and invest in prevention.” Here’s a bipartisan mission we can all support: Survivors of military sexual assault deserve justice. I’m proud to have @joniernst join me this week to introduce our new, improved bill to reform the military justice system and invest in prevention. https://t.co/pYYUL6IRyA — Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) April 27, 2021 The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Angus King (I-ME), Michael Braun (R-IN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Rand Paul (R-KY), Chris Coons (D-DE), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT),Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Gary C. Peters (D-MI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM).
Donald Trump impeachment goes to Senate, testing his sway over GOP
House Democrats delivered the impeachment case against Donald Trump to the Senate late Monday for the start of his historic trial, but Republican senators were easing off their criticism of the former president and shunning calls to convict him over the deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol. It’s an early sign of Trump’s enduring sway over the party. The nine House prosecutors carried the sole impeachment charge of “incitement of insurrection” across the Capitol, making a solemn and ceremonial march to the Senate along the same halls the rioters ransacked just weeks ago. But Republican denunciations of Trump have cooled since the Jan. 6 riot. Instead, Republicans are presenting a tangle of legal arguments against the legitimacy of the trial and questioning whether Trump’s repeated demands to overturn Joe Biden’s election really amounted to incitement. What seemed for some Democrats like an open-and-shut case that played out for the world on live television, as Trump encouraged a rally mob to “fight like hell” for his presidency, is running into a Republican Party that feels very differently. Not only are there legal concerns, but senators are wary of crossing the former president and his legions of followers — who are their voters. Security remains tight at the Capitol. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked if Congress starts holding impeachment trials of former officials, what’s next: “Could we go back and try President Obama?” Besides, he suggested, Trump has already been held to account. “One way in our system you get punished is losing an election.” Arguments in the Senate trial will begin the week of Feb. 8, and the case against Trump, the first former president to face impeachment trial, will test a political party still sorting itself out for the post-Trump era. Republican senators are balancing the demands of deep-pocketed donors who are distancing themselves from Trump and voters who demand loyalty to him. One Republican, Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, announced Monday he would not seek reelection in 2022, citing the polarized political atmosphere. For Democrats the tone, tenor, and length of the upcoming trial, so early in Biden’s presidency, poses its own challenge, forcing them to strike a balance between their vow to hold Trump accountable and their eagerness to deliver on the new administration’s priorities following their sweep of control of the House, Senate, and White House. Biden himself told CNN late Monday that the impeachment trial “has to happen.” While acknowledging the effect it could have on his agenda, he said there would be “a worse effect if it didn’t happen.” Biden said he didn’t think enough Republican senators would vote for impeachment to convict, though he also said the outcome might well have been different if Trump had six months left in his term. In a Monday evening scene reminiscent of just a year ago — Trump is now the first president twice impeached — the lead prosecutor from the House, this time Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, stood before the Senate to read the House resolution charging “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said failing to conduct the trial would amount to a “get-out-jail-free card” for others accused of wrongdoing on their way out the door. Republicans appear more eager to argue over trial process than the substance of the case, he said, perhaps to avoid casting judgment on Trump’s “role in fomenting the despicable attack” on the Capitol. Schumer said there’s only one question “senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States?” On Monday, it was learned that Chief Justice John Roberts is not expected to preside at the trial, as he did during Trump’s first impeachment, potentially affecting the gravitas of the proceedings. The shift is said to be in keeping with protocol because Trump is no longer in office. Instead, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., who serves in the largely ceremonial role of Senate president pro tempore, is set to preside. Leaders in both parties agreed to a short delay in the proceedings that serves their political and practical interests, even as National Guard troops remain at the Capitol amid security threats on lawmakers ahead of the trial. The start date gives Trump’s new legal team time to prepare its case, while also providing more than a month’s distance from the passions of the bloody riot. For the Democratic-led Senate, the intervening weeks provide prime time to confirm some of Biden’s key Cabinet nominees. Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., questioned how his colleagues who were in the Capitol that day could see the insurrection as anything other than a “stunning violation” of the nation’s history of peaceful transfers of power. “It is a critical moment in American history,” Coons said Sunday in an interview. An early vote to dismiss the trial probably would not succeed, given that Democrats now control the Senate. The House approved the charge against Trump on Jan. 13, with 10 Republicans joining the Democrats. Still, the mounting Republican opposition to the proceedings indicates that many GOP senators will eventually vote to acquit Trump. Democrats would need the support of 17 Republicans — a high bar — to convict him. One by one, Republican senators are explaining their objections to the unprecedented trial and scoffing at the idea of trying to convict Trump now that he’s no longer in office. Rand Paul of Kentucky said that without the chief justice presiding the proceedings are a “sham.” Joni Ernst of Iowa said that while Trump “exhibited poor leadership,” it’s those who assaulted the Capitol who “bear the responsibility.” New Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama said Trump is one of the reasons he is in the Senate, so “I’m proud to do everything I can for him.” Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., is among those who say the Senate does not have the constitutional authority to convict a former president. Democrats reject that argument, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of
GOP shows little desire for witnesses ahead of critical vote
“We have heard plenty,” according to the Senate’s No. 3 Republican.
No escape: Senators to be quiet, unplugged for Donald Trump impeachment trial
Senators will begin each day with a proclamation: “All persons are commanded to keep silence, on pain of imprisonment.”
Lawmakers struggling to develop a response to Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin
Congress is producing an unusual outpouring of bills, resolutions and new sanctions proposals to push back at President Donald Trump’s approach to Vladimir Putin, shore up relations with NATO allies and prevent Russian interference in the midterm election. But it remains uncertain if any of their efforts will yield results. Lawmakers are struggling with internal party divisions as well as their own onslaught of proposals as they try to move beyond a symbolic rebuke of Trump’s interactions with the Russian president and exert influence both at home and abroad. And while many Democrats are eager for quick votes, some Republicans prefer none at all. As Trump and Putin weigh another face-to-face meeting, lawmakers in both parties — particularly in the Senate — appear motivated to act. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell issued a rare warning that Russia “better quit messing around” in U.S. elections as he tasked two Senate committees to start working on sanctions-related legislation and other measures to deter Russia. In the House, Speaker Paul Ryan joined McConnell in saying that Putin would not be welcome on Capitol Hill, though he did not push forward any Russia-related legislation before his chamber recessed for August. Still, the past few weeks have been one of the rare moments in the Trump era that Republicans and Democrats have jointly asserted the role of Congress as a counterweight to the administration. “You look at the action of Congress since the summit in Helsinki, you find Democrats and Republicans both standing up and saying no,” said Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., in an interview on C-SPAN with The Associated Press and The Washington Post. For starters, there’s a bipartisan push from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and others to “explicitly prohibit” the president from withdrawing from NATO without Senate approval. Other senators are debating action to prevent meddling in the midterm election. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., call the protection of the election system a “national security priority.” Graham said it’s “extremely important that Congress recognize the threat to our electoral system coming from Russia and act in a decisive way.” In addition, legislation from McCain and Cardin would require approval from Congress before Trump could reverse sanctions issued under the Sergei Magnitsky Act, which bans visas for travel and freezes assets of key Russians involved in alleged human rights abuses. Russia’s displeasure at the 2012 Magnitsky Act played into what Trump initially called an “incredible offer” from Putin at the summit to allow U.S. questioning of Russians indicted by the Justice Department for hacking Democratic emails. In return, Putin requested the ability to investigate Americans involved in the Magnitsky Act. McCain called it a “perverse proposal” and Trump has since backed away from it. With some 100 days before the midterm election, some say Congress is not acting fast enough. One bill that has been given a go-ahead nod from McConnell is legislation from Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., that attempts to warn Putin off more election interference by setting up tough new sanctions on Russia if it does try to intervene. The measure is slowly making its way through the Senate Banking Committee, but some lawmakers in the House and Senate have raised concerns it casts too wide a net and could cause problems for allied nations that do business with Russia. Rubio says he’s willing to adjust the legislation to meet concerns, but says the goal is for Russia to understand there will be a price to pay for further election interference. He adds the legislation was introduced months before the Helsinki summit and isn’t intended to embarrass or attack the president. “I’m deeply concerned about their ability to interfere in our politics,” Rubio said in an interview. “We want them to know what the price is going to be to make that choice.” The legislation would likely see overwhelming support, lawmakers in both parties say. But a vote is not scheduled. Some symbolic measures on Russia have failed to make it out of the starting gate. Already, the Senate has blocked a symbolic resolution from Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., to reaffirm the findings of the American intelligence community that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Twice over the past two weeks, Republicans objected to motions to advance the measure, saying they prefer a more strategic approach that goes beyond symbolic resolutions. House Democrats were similarly thwarted in their attempts to slap new sanctions on anyone who has interfered in U.S. elections and bolster election security funds to the states as Republicans blocked those votes. Key Republicans are panning more federal spending on election security. The GOP chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, said Monday that he worried federal funds would come with “strings attached” that would interfere with elections operations he believes should be left to the states. Ryan says the U.S. has “learned a great deal” about Russian interference. “So, I think we’re far better prepared today than we were just a couple of years ago.” But the Speaker added there’s more for Congress to do. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Donald Trump’s VA choice bows out in latest Cabinet flame-out
President Donald Trump’s White House doctor reluctantly withdrew his nomination to be Veterans Affairs secretary Thursday in the face of accusations of misconduct, the latest embarrassing episode highlighting Trump’s struggles to fill key jobs and the perils of his occasional spur-of-the-moment-decision-making. The weeks-long saga surrounding the nomination of Navy Dr. Ronny Jackson leaves the government’s second-largest agency without a permanent leader while it faces an immediate crisis with its private health care program. And it abruptly tarnished the reputation of a doctor beloved by two presidents and their staffs. White House officials say they are taking a new look at the way nominees’ backgrounds are checked — and they believe they will persuade Trump to take additional time to ensure that a replacement is sufficiently vetted. The leading person now under consideration for the VA post is former Rep. Jeff Miller, who chaired the House Veterans Affairs Committee before retiring last year, according to White House officials. Miller is a strong proponent of expanding private care for veterans, a Trump priority. Trump quickly selected Jackson, a rear admiral in the Navy, to head the VA last month after firing Obama appointee David Shulkin following accusations of ethical problems and a mounting rebellion within the agency. Jackson, a surprise choice who has worked as a White House physician since 2006, faced immediate questions from Republican and Democratic lawmakers as well as veterans groups about whether he had the experience to manage the massive department of 360,000 employees serving 9 million veterans. Then this week’s unconfirmed allegations by current and former colleagues about drunkenness and improper prescribing of controlled substances, compiled and released by Democrats, made the nomination all but unsalvageable. “The allegations against me are completely false and fabricated,” Jackson said in a statement announcing his withdrawal. Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Jackson was back at work at the White House on Thursday. But his future there remains uncertain. He had stepped aside from directing Trump’s medical care and leading the medical unit while his nomination was being considered. “I would hope the White House would closely consider whether he is the best person to provide medical care for the president,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware. Trump himself praised Jackson, saying, “He’s a great man, and he got treated very, very unfairly.” Then the president went after Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, who released a list of allegations against Jackson that was compiled by the Democratic staff of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Trump aides said the president was furious with Tester, who faces a tough re-election fight this fall, and plans to aggressively campaign against him. “I think Jon Tester has to have a big price to pay in Montana,” Trump warned on “Fox & Friends” on TV. Tester, meanwhile, called on Congress to continue its investigation of Jackson. “I want to thank the service members who bravely spoke out over the past week. It is my constitutional responsibility to make sure the veterans of this nation get a strong, thoroughly vetted leader who will fight for them,” he said. Elsewhere in the capital, Congress was questioning another Trump official whose job appears in jeopardy. Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, was questioned closely by House Democrats about revelations of unusual security spending, first-class flights, an advantageous condo lease and more. Even Republicans who support Pruitt’s deregulation efforts, said his conduct needed scrutiny. Tom Price, Trump’s first secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, resigned last year after criticism of his use of private charter flights and military jets. The turmoil at the VA comes as it faces a budget shortfall for its private-sector Veterans Choice program, a campaign priority of Trump’s, with lawmakers deadlocked over a long-term fix due to disagreements over cost and how much access veterans should have to private doctors Veterans are “exhausted by the unnecessary and seemingly never-ending drama,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “VA’s reputation is damaged, staff is demoralized, momentum is stalled and the future is shockingly unclear.” The VA issued a statement late Wednesday that it would push to have Congress move on an expansion of Choice next month. Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia, chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, said Thursday he would “work with the administration to see to it we get a VA secretary for our veterans and their families.” White House officials were visibly dismayed Wednesday and Thursday as they watched Jackson suffer the blows of the allegations. The doctor, who is well-liked by and has personal relationships with many White House staffers, cited the withering pressure for withdrawing from consideration for the post, but maintained he had done nothing wrong. Trump said on Fox that he has an idea for a replacement nominee, adding it will be “someone with political capability.” Miller, the former congressman who was described as the leading candidate, is a strong proponent of expanding private care for veterans, Miller led the push to create Choice in 2014. However, major veterans groups and Democrats stand opposed to an aggressive expansion of Choice, seeing the effort as a potential threat to VA medical centers. Dan Caldwell, executive director of the conservative Concerned Veterans for America, urged the White House to take more time “to carefully select and vet a new nominee” who could head VA. “The VA currently has a competent Acting Secretary in Robert Wilkie who can manage the VA along with the rest of his leadership team,” he said. “Considering the tremendous challenges that the last three VA secretaries have faced, it is important that a capable individual with a high level of integrity is selected.” During the presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly pledged to fix the VA by bringing accountability and expanding access to private doctors, criticizing the department as “the most corrupt.” At an Ohio event last July, Trump promised to triple the number of veterans “seeing the doctor of their choice.” Currently, more than 30
