Tommy Tuberville and colleagues concerned about government using corporations to censor Americans
U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Alabama) joined Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) and Congressman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) in introducing the Free Speech Protection Act to prohibit federal employees and contractors from using their positions to censor and otherwise attack speech protected by the First Amendment. The bill will impose severe penalties for individuals violating this rule. “Our government should actively protect our First Amendment rights, not promote censorship,” Tuberville said on Twitter. “I am proud to join @SenRandPaul in the Free Speech Protection Act.” Sen. Paul is the Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. “Americans are free people and we do not take infringements upon our liberties lightly. The time has come for resistance and to reclaim our God-given right to free expression,” said Dr. Paul. “Under my Free Speech Protection Act the government will no longer be able to cloak itself in secrecy to undermine the First Amendment rights of Americans.” Rep. Jordan is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “Censorship is a major threat to freedom today,” said Chairman Jim Jordan. “It is clear that Big Government must be more transparent and that bureaucrats must be held accountable for censorship. The Free Speech Protection Act accomplishes that and gives individuals remedies for censorship to protect vital First Amendment freedoms.” The bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Eric Schmitt (R-Missouri), J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming), and Mike Braun (R-Indiana). In addition to protecting Americans’ First Amendment rights, the bill would mandate frequent publicly accessible reports from the heads of executive branch agencies detailing the communications between an executive branch agency and a content provider, as well as prevent agencies from employing any FOIA exemption to prevent disclosure of prohibited communications. The legislation also ensures that federal grant money is not received by any entity that seeks to label media organizations as sources of misinformation or disinformation. The legislation has been endorsed by the Heritage Foundation. “Recent revelations have exposed the lengths to which the Biden administration continues to take to censor the online speech of Americans who speak out against the Left’s agenda,” said Acting Director of Heritage Action Ryan Walker. “When federal employees make content moderation requests, the administration is effectively using the coercive power of the federal government to turn Big Tech companies into enforcement arms of their censorship policies. While the courts may eventually rule that this type of behavior is unconstitutional, Congress should codify these prohibitions into federal law by passing legislation like Senator Paul’s to ensure the long-term protection of Americans’ right to free speech online.” U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty ruled that the federal government was using its relationships with private corporations, including Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, to censor Americans who hold views that the government does not like. Judge Doughty also issued a sweeping preliminary injunction barring numerous federal officials and agencies — including Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and all employees of the Justice Department and FBI — from having any contact with social media firms for the purpose of discouraging or removing First Amendment-protected speech. The Biden Administration is appealing the ruling. Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans Affairs, and HELP Committees. Tuberville was elected in 2020 after a successful forty-year career as an educator, coach, and sports broadcaster. A native of Arkansas, Tuberville was the head football coach at Ole Miss, Auburn, Texas Tech, and Cincinnati. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com
Republicans expand their Hunter Biden investigation by seeking an interview with the lead prosecutor
House Republicans on Thursday requested voluntary testimony from nearly a dozen Justice Department officials involved in the investigation of President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden as GOP lawmakers widen their scrutiny into what they claim is improper interference by the agency. Leaders of the Republican-controlled House Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability, and Ways and Means committees asked in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland for nine officials from the Justice Department and two from the FBI to appear for the interviews to address recent allegations made by two IRS employees who worked on the federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s taxes and foreign business dealings. “Recent startling testimony from Internal Revenue Services whistleblowers raises serious questions about the Department’s commitment to evenhanded justice and the veracity of assertions made to the Committee on the Judiciary,” Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, James Comer of Kentucky, and Jason Smith of Missouri wrote in the letter obtained by The Associated Press. The individuals named in the letter include David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware in charge of the investigation, as well Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf of Delaware and the top federal prosecutor for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves. Garland said last week that the Justice Department will not object to Weiss testifying to Congress. A department spokesperson confirmed receipt of the letter but declined further comment. The request comes about a week after Biden, 53, reached an agreement with the government to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax offenses. The plea deal would also avert prosecution on a felony charge of illegally possessing a firearm as a drug user, as long as Biden adheres to conditions agreed to in court. Days later, the House Ways and Means Committee, led by Smith, voted to publicly disclose congressional testimony from the IRS employees. The testimony from Greg Shapley and an unidentified agent detailed what they called a pattern of “slow-walking investigative steps” and delaying enforcement actions in the months before the 2020 election won by Joe Biden. It is unclear whether the conflict they describe amounts to internal disagreement about how to pursue the investigation or a pattern of interference and preferential treatment. Department policy has long warned prosecutors to take care in charging cases with potential political overtones around the time of an election, to avoid influencing the outcome. The Justice Department has denied the claims and said Weiss, appointed to his job when Donald Trump was president, had full authority over the case. The letter provided a deadline of July 13 for the department to begin scheduling the individuals for transcribed interviews. It said that if the deadline is not met, the committee chairmen will resort to using a congressional subpoena to force cooperation. Beyond Hunter Biden, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee led by Comer has undertaken a broader review of the Biden family’s finances and foreign dealings, issuing dozens of subpoenas to business associates and financial institutions. Republicans have focused much attention on an unverified tip to the FBI that alleged a bribery scheme involving Joe Biden when he was vice president. The unsubstantiated claim, which first emerged in 2019, was that Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor in order to stop an investigation into Burisma, an oil-and-gas company where Hunter Biden was on the board. Democrats said in a letter Thursday to Comer that the Justice Department investigated the claim when Trump was president and closed the matter after eight months, finding “insufficient evidence” that it was true. Democrats highlighted the transcript of an interview with Mykola Zlochevsky, Burisma’s co-founder, in which he denied having any contact with Joe Biden while Hunter Biden worked for the company. “Mr. Zlochevsky’s statements are just one of the many that have debunked the corruption allegations,” said the committee’s top Democrat, Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Barry Moore visits Yuma, Arizona to learn about the southern border crisis first hand
U.S. Congressman Barry Moore participated in the House Judiciary Committee’s first field hearing of the 118th Congress dealing with the border situation. The hearing was held in Yuma, Arizona, where Moore and his Republican colleagues were able to observe the border situation firsthand. The hearing featured three witnesses: Jonathan Lines, a county supervisor in Yuma County; Sheriff Leon Wilmot; and Dr. Robert Trenschel, president and CEO of Yuma Regional Medical Center. Moore’s questions focused on the humanitarian crisis created by the flood of humanity crossing the U.S. southern border. 107,000 Americans died of drug overdoses – most of them from drugs that were smuggled across the U.S. southern border with Mexico. “In Alabama recently, I was told that in Birmingham we seized enough fentanyl to kill every man, woman, and child in my entire state, so this may be affecting border communities, but it’s a crisis for our entire nation,” Moore said of the fentanyl crossing the border in large quantities. Moore discussed the high costs that some traffickers have charged people worldwide to cross the U.S. southern border. “We actually seized some Chinese nationals, [said] a Sheriff’s Department in Texas, and it was $80,000 each,” Moore said. “Folks, they’re not coming here to do us any favors, just so you know.” Moore discussed the benefits, including cell phones, being issued to migrants paid for by American taxpayers. “We are actually, with taxpayer dollars, trafficking children, and we’re paying to get them here on American taxpayer dollars, and putting them in God knows what and God knows where,” Moore said. Moore expressed his concerns about the vast numbers of unaccompanied minor children our government has lost after transporting them to unverified and unvetted people and places throughout our country. “We’ve lost 20,000 children. [Alejandro] Mayorkas said himself in a hearing he does not know where 20,000 of these children are, and that’s just staggering to me,” Moore said. Moore appeared Thursday on Newsmax’s National Report with Shaun Kraisman and Emma Rechenberg live from the southern border near Yuma, Arizona. “The people of Yuma have a story to tell,” Moore said. “The number of encounters they’ve had over the last three years, the difference in what the Trump administration was doing for this community and what’s going on now under the current administration is a remarkable difference. It’s a stark difference in how we handle the southern border.” Moore said that President Joe Biden should visit Yuma. “If nothing else, it would show he actually puts America first. We have a president who globe-trots around the world trying to solve other nations’ problems and denies and ignores the problems right here in our very own country, whether it’s East Palestine or the U.S. southern border,” Moore said. “These are things that this administration could lead on, and they’ve turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to the American people and the crises we face here in this country.” Moore said that if the American people knew what was happening at the border, they would be upset. “A closed border is a compassionate border,” Moore said. “We cannot address immigration reform in this country until we close this southern border and get a handle on what’s going on down here.” Moore is a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has ordered the Committee to hold hearings on the border crisis to draw attention to the problem. Moore said that Democrats were invited to attend the field hearing; but chose not to. Barry Moore is in his first term representing Alabama’s Second Congressional District. Moore previously served in the Alabama House of Representatives from 2010 to 2018. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Debt ceiling sets up major battle in Congress
U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen sent a letter to Congressional leaders Thursday notifying them that the agency has begun taking “extraordinary measures” as the federal government bumps up against its debt limit of just over $31 trillion. That means Congress has until about June to raise the debt ceiling or potentially default on the U.S. debt obligations for the first time ever. “First, I have determined that, by reason of the statutory debt limit, I will be unable to fully invest the portion of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF) not immediately required to pay beneficiaries, and that a ‘debt issuance suspension period’ will begin on Thursday, January 19, 2023, and last through Monday, June 5, 2023,” the letter said. “I respectfully urge Congress to act promptly to protect the full faith and credit of the United States,” she added. The Congressional Budget Office recently released budget figures showing that the federal government borrowed $4 billion per day in 2022, which is more than $10,000 per household and on overall deficit of about $1.4 trillion. Pre-pandemic deficits were less than $1 trillion. Lawmakers can raise the debt limit, but they were hardly able to agree on who should serve as Speaker of the House, raising serious questions about whether they can come together on this issue. Many want to use the opportunity to implement fiscal reforms. “The debate over our debt ceiling is the perfect example of Washington elites refusing to prioritize your best interests,” said U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla. “We can’t keep rubber-stamping reckless spending. I’m fighting every day to stop it.” Republicans also blasted the Biden administration and the recent omnibus spending bill. The White House said earlier this week there will be no negotiations with Republicans on the debt limit. “Just a few weeks ago, Joe Biden signed a $1.7 trillion spending monstrosity,” said U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. “And now the White House says it will not negotiate with Republicans over the debt ceiling. They created the problem!” Experts raised the alarm, arguing this need for yet another debt ceiling increase shows the current unsustainable trajectory of federal debt spending. “America will hit the $31 trillion debt ceiling today,” said economic expert Stephen Moore. “That’s 120% of our GDP and $246,876 per taxpayer. How can anyone believe this is sustainable?” Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, cautioned about the consequences of going too far with using the debt ceiling for political purposes. “The debt ceiling is too important to turn into a game of chicken, and default should never be suggested by those with a fiduciary responsibility to govern the nation,” she said. “Politicians who are rightly worried about the nation’s unsustainable borrowing path should take a hard stance against new borrowing and oppose legislation that would add to the debt while offering specific solutions to control the debt already on the books, rather than threatening not to pay the bills on borrowing that has already been incurred.” MacGuineas also argued that the debt problem is only going to get worse. “The debt ceiling does offer the opportunity for all lawmakers to pause, assess the fiscal situation of the nation, and take action as necessary. And it is necessary. The debt as a share of GDP is at near record levels,” she said. “We are on track to begin adding $2 trillion per year to the debt by the end of the decade. Interest payments are the fastest-growing part of the budget and are projected to start costing $1 trillion annually in only a few years. The Social Security and Medicare Hospital Insurance trust funds are headed toward insolvency. And last year alone, Congress and the President passed bipartisan legislation that added nearly $2 trillion to the projected national debt. This is an urgent problem that is not getting the attention it needs.” Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Barry Moore appointed to House Judiciary Committee
Congressman Barry Moore was appointed to the House Judiciary Committee. Moore said that it was an “honor” to be appointed to serve on the “prestigious” committee. “It is a great and humbling honor to be appointed to serve on the prestigious House Judiciary Committee and serve alongside my friend and our chairman, Jim Jordan, to defend our foundational American freedoms,” said Rep. Moore. “The Judiciary Committee will be the tip of the spear this Congress fighting to ensure that the American people’s government works to protect their civil liberties, not undermine them to advance a political agenda. With President Biden in the White House, we have a big task ahead, but I’m ready to get to work.” Congressman Jordan is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “We’re excited to welcome all new and returning members of the House Judiciary Committee to the 118th Congress,” Chairman Jordan said in a statement. “House Judiciary Republicans are ready to get to work on the important issues facing the American people by passing legislation that will secure the southern border, investigating the weaponization of the federal government against the American people, and reining in Big Tech’s censorship of free speech.” Chairman Jordan sent letters on Tuesday to White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain, Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, ATF Director Steve Dettelbach, and DEA Administrator Anne Milgram renewing outstanding requests for communications and documents. Jordan claimed that for two years, the Biden Administration has stonewalled Congress, refused to comply with basic document requests and avoided transparency and accountability for its failures. Jordan said that House Judiciary Republicans are committed to holding each agency accountable under the new majority and will use compulsory processes, if necessary, to get answers for the American people. “Since the beginning of the Biden Administration, we have made several requests for information and documents concerning the operations and actions of the Department of Homeland Security,” Jordan wrote in the letter to Mayorkas. “These requests remain outstanding. As we begin the 118th Congress, we write again to reiterate our outstanding requests and ask that you immediately comply in full.” Mayorkas faces heavy criticism from House Republicans for his handling of the southern border situation and the documented chaos there. “Mayorkas swore an oath to “well and faithfully discharge the duties of [his] office.” Look at the border and the terrible numbers on his watch,” Moore said on social media. “Can anyone make the argument he is discharging the duties of his office well? He has to go, and if Biden won’t hold him accountable, House Republicans must.” Moore was just re-elected to his second term representing Alabama’s Second Congressional District. Moore previously served in the Alabama House of Representatives from 2010 to 2018. He was elected to Congress in 2020, after his second run for office. Moore is a veteran. He owns a garbage collection business in Enterprise. He is a graduate of Auburn University. To connect with the author of this story, or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
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.
Kevin McCarthy makes big gains for speaker, but still falls short
Republican leader Kevin McCarthy flipped 15 colleagues to support him in dramatic votes for House speaker on Friday, making extraordinary gains on the fourth day and the 12th and 13th ballots of a grueling standoff that was testing American democracy and the Republicans’ ability to govern. The changed votes from conservative holdouts, including the chairman of the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, put McCarthy closer to seizing the gavel for the new Congress — but not yet able. The stunning turnaround came after McCarthy agreed to many of the detractors’ demands — including the reinstatement of a longstanding House rule that would allow any single member to call a vote to oust him from office. That change and others mean the job he has fought so hard to gain will be weakened. After McCarthy won the most votes for the first time on the 12th ballot, a 13th was swiftly launched, this time just between McCarthy and the Democratic leader, with no nominated Republican challenger to siphon GOP votes away. But six GOP holdouts still cast their ballots for unnominated others, denying him the majority needed. The showdown that has stymied the new Congress came against the backdrop of the second anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, which shook the country when a mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters tried to stop Congress from certifying the Republican’s 2020 election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden. A few minutes before voting began in the House chamber, Republicans tiring of the spectacle walked out when one of McCarthy’s most ardent challengers railed against the GOP leader. “We do not trust Mr. McCarthy with power,” said Republican Matt Gaetz of Florida as colleagues streamed out of the chamber in protest of his remarks. Contours of a deal with conservative holdouts who have been blocking McCarthy’s rise emerged, but an agreement had seemed still out of reach after three dismal days and 11 failed votes in a political spectacle unseen in a century. But an upbeat McCarthy told reporters as he arrived at the Capitol Friday morning, “We’re going to make progress. We’re going to shock you.” One significant former holdout, Republican Scott Perry, chairman of the conservative Freedom Caucus, tweeted after his switched vote for McCarthy: “We’re at a turning point.” But several holdouts remained. The final 12th vote tally: McCarthy, 213 votes; Democrat Hakeem Jeffries 211. Other Republicans Jim Jordan and Kevin Hern picked up protest votes. With 431 members voting, McCarthy was still a few votes short of a majority. When Rep. Mike Garcia nominated McCarthy for a 12th time, he also thanked the U.S. Capitol Police who were given a standing ovation for protecting lawmakers and the legislative seat of democracy on January 6. The agreement McCarthy presented to the holdouts from the Freedom Caucus and others centers around rules changes they have been seeking for months. Those changes would shrink the power of the speaker’s office and give rank-and-file lawmakers more influence in drafting and passing legislation. Even if McCarthy is able to secure the votes he needs, he will emerge as a weakened speaker, having given away some powers, leaving him constantly under threat of being voted out by his detractors. But he would also be potentially emboldened as a survivor of one of the more brutal fights for the gavel in U.S. history. At the core of the emerging deal is the reinstatement of a House rule that would allow a single lawmaker to make a motion to “vacate the chair,” essentially calling a vote to oust the speaker. McCarthy had resisted allowing a return to the longstanding rule that former Speaker Nancy Pelosi had done away with, because it had been held over the head of past Republican Speaker John Boehner, chasing him to early retirement. But it appears he had no other choice. The chairman of the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, who had been a leader in Trump’s efforts to challenge his presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, appeared receptive to the proposed package, tweeting an adage from Ronald Reagan, “Trust but verify.” Other wins for the holdouts include provisions in the proposed deal to expand the number of seats available on the House Rules Committee, to mandate 72 hours for bills to be posted before votes, and to promise to try for a constitutional amendment that would impose federal limits on the number of terms a person could serve in the House and Senate. Lest hopes get ahead of reality, conservative holdout Ralph Norman of South Carolina said: “This is round one.” It could be the makings of a deal to end a standoff that has left the House unable to fully function. Members have not been sworn in, and almost no other business can happen. A memo sent out by the House’s chief administrative officer Thursday evening said that committees “shall only carry out core Constitutional responsibilities.” Payroll cannot be processed if the House isn’t functioning by January 13. After a long week of failed votes, Thursday’s tally was dismal: McCarthy lost seventh, eighth, and then historic ninth, 10th, and 11th rounds of voting, surpassing the number from 100 years ago in the last drawn-out fight to choose a speaker. The California Republican exited the chamber and quipped about the moment: “Apparently, I like to make history.” Feelings of boredom, desperation, and annoyance seemed increasingly evident. Democrats said it was time to get serious. “This sacred House of Representatives needs a leader,” said Democrat Joe Neguse of Colorado, nominating his own party’s leader, Hakeem Jeffries, as speaker. What started as a political novelty, the first time since 1923 a nominee had not won the gavel on the first vote, has devolved into a bitter Republican Party feud and deepening potential crisis. Democratic leader Jeffries of New York won the most votes on every ballot but also remained short of a majority. McCarthy ran second, gaining no ground. Pressure has grown with each passing day for McCarthy to somehow find the votes he needs or
January 6 panel urges Donald Trump prosecution with criminal referral
The House January 6 committee urged the Justice Department on Monday to bring criminal charges against Donald Trump for the violent 2021 Capitol insurrection, calling for accountability for the former president and “a time of reflection and reckoning.” After one of the most exhaustive and aggressive congressional probes in memory, the panel’s seven Democrats and two Republicans are recommending criminal charges against Trump and associates who helped him launch a wide-ranging pressure campaign to try to overturn his 2020 election loss. The panel also released a lengthy summary of its final report, with findings that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to thwart the will of voters. At a final meeting Monday, the committee alleged violations of four criminal statutes by Trump, in both the run-up to the riot and during the insurrection itself, as it recommended the former president for prosecution to the Justice Department. Among the charges they recommend for prosecution is aiding an insurrection — an effort to hold him directly accountable for his supporters who stormed the Capitol that day. The committee also voted to refer conservative lawyer John Eastman, who devised dubious legal maneuvers aimed at keeping Trump in power, for prosecution on two of the same statutes as Trump: conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstructing an official proceeding. While a criminal referral is mostly symbolic, with the Justice Department ultimately deciding whether to prosecute Trump or others, it is a decisive end to a probe that had an almost singular focus from the start. Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said Trump “broke the faith” that people have when they cast ballots in a democracy and that the criminal referrals could provide a “roadmap to justice” by using the committee’s work. “I believe nearly two years later, this is still a time of reflection and reckoning,” Thompson said. “If we are to survive as a nation of laws and democracy, this can never happen again.” Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel’s Republican vice chairwoman, said in her opening remarks that every president in American history has defended the orderly transfer of power, “except one.” The committee also voted 9-0 to approve its final report, which will include findings, interview transcripts, and legislative recommendations. The full report is expected to be released on Wednesday. The report’s 154-page summary, made public as the hearing ended, found that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the election. While the majority of the report’s main findings are not new, it altogether represents one of the most damning portraits of an American president in recent history, laying out in great detail Trump’s broad effort to overturn his own defeat and what the lawmakers say is his direct responsibility for the insurrection of his supporters. The panel, which will dissolve on January 3 with the new Republican-led House, has conducted more than 1,000 interviews, held ten well-watched public hearings, and collected more than a million documents since it launched in July 2021. As it has gathered the massive trove of evidence, the members have become emboldened in declaring that Trump, a Republican, is to blame for the violent attack on the Capitol by his supporters almost two years ago. After beating their way past police, injuring many of them, the January 6 rioters stormed the Capitol and interrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election win, echoing Trump’s lies about widespread election fraud and sending lawmakers and others running for their lives. The attack came after weeks of Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat — a campaign that was extensively detailed by the committee in its multiple public hearings and laid out again by lawmakers on the panel at Monday’s meeting. Many of Trump’s former aides testified about his unprecedented pressure on states, federal officials, and Mike Pence to object to Biden’s win. The committee has also described in great detail how Trump riled up the crowd at a rally that morning and then did little to stop his supporters for several hours as he watched the violence unfold on television. The panel aired some new evidence at the meeting, including a recent interview with longtime Trump aide Hope Hicks. Describing a conversation she had with Trump around that time, she said he told her that no one would care about his legacy if he lost the election. Hicks told the committee that Trump told her, “The only thing that matters is winning.” Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but the former president slammed members of the committee Sunday as “thugs and scoundrels” as he has continued to falsely dispute his 2020 loss. While a so-called criminal referral has no real legal standing, it is a forceful statement by the committee and adds to political pressure already on Attorney General Merrick Garland and special counsel Jack Smith, who is conducting an investigation into January 6 and Trump’s actions. On the recommendation to charge Trump with aiding an insurrection, the committee said in the report’s summary that the former president “was directly responsible for summoning what became a violent mob” and refused repeated entreaties from his aides to condemn the rioters or to encourage them to leave. For obstructing an official proceeding, the committee cites Trump’s relentless badgering of Vice President Mike Pence and others to prevent the certification of the election results on January 6. And his repeated lies about the election and efforts to undo the results open him up to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States, the panel said. The final charge recommended by the panel is conspiracy to make a false statement, citing the scheme by Trump and his allies to put forward slates of fake electors in battleground states won by President Joe Biden. Among the other charges contemplated but not approved by the committee was seditious conspiracy, the same allegation Justice Department prosecutors have used to target a subset of rioters belonging to far-right groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Thompson said after the hearing that the seditious conspiracy charge is “something that the committee didn’t come to agreement on.” The panel was formed in the summer
House Republicans pledge to use majority to investigate Hunter Biden and the president
House Republican lawmakers are doubling down on investigations into the Biden family’s foreign business dealings and how President Joe Biden may have been involved. Lawmakers at a Thursday news conference argued that Hunter Biden, in particular, used his father’s influence to negotiate business deals overseas that may have used federal resources and even compromised the Biden family. “Evidence obtained by Committee Republicans reveals Joe Biden lied to the American people about his involvement in his family’s business schemes,” House Oversight Committee Ranking Member James Comer, R-Ky., said. “The Biden family business model is built on Joe Biden’s political career and connections with Joe Biden as the ‘chairman of the board.’ Biden family members sold access for profit around the world to the detriment of American interests. If President Biden is compromised by deals with foreign adversaries and they are impacting his decision making, this is a threat to national security.” This is the latest in a string of inquiries and investigations into Hunter Biden, the president, the president’s brother James, and who else may have benefited or been “compromised” in these dealings. “Hunter Biden and James Biden have racked up at least 150 suspicious activity reports for their business transactions,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. said. “How many involved Joe Biden?” The announcement came just hours after Republicans officially learned they claimed a majority in the House, offering a glimpse of how they hope to use their two years in power, especially since they will be unlikely to have any partisan legislative wins. President Joe Biden has repeatedly deflected accusations and defended his son, who is currently under federal investigation. Jordan also raised questions about how tech companies and federal agencies have worked together to suppress information that could have damaged the Biden campaign, as reporting has shown. “I think there are all kinds of questions that need to be answered, and we are determined to get there,” Jordan said. Republicans on the House Oversight Committee have sent letters to six top Biden administration officials requesting documents, communications, records, and other information. Those inquiries have been sent to U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen requesting Suspicious Activity Reports, a letter to Acting Archivist Debra Steidel Wall seeking information about the potential use of Air Force Two for family business during the Obama administration. The lawmakers also have reached out to Hunter’s associate Eric Schwerin and financial advisor Edward Prewitt. They are also requesting information from FBI Director Christopher Wray about Hunter Biden’s assistant and alleged connections to the Chinese Communist Party. The lawmakers were likely emboldened by the GOP taking control of the House, meaning Republicans will have the committee chairmanships and greater teeth to their investigations. “The American people deserve transparency and accountability about the Biden family’s influence peddling,” Comer said. “With the new Republican majority, Oversight Committee Republicans will continue pressing for answers to inform legislative solutions to prevent this abuse of power.” Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
House passes same-sex marriage bill in retort to high court
The U.S. House overwhelmingly approved legislation Tuesday to protect same-sex and interracial marriages amid concerns that the Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade abortion access could jeopardize other rights criticized by many conservatives. In a robust but lopsided debate, Democrats argued intensely and often personally in favor of enshrining marriage equality in federal law, while Republicans steered clear of openly rejecting gay marriage. Instead, leading Republicans portrayed the bill as unnecessary amid other issues facing the nation. Tuesday’s election-year roll call, 267-157, was partly political strategy, forcing all House members, Republicans, and Democrats, to go on the record. It also reflected the legislative branch pushing back against an aggressive court that has raised questions about revisiting other apparently settled U.S. laws. Wary of political fallout, GOP leaders did not press their members to hold the party line against the bill, aides said. In all, 47 Republicans joined all Democrats in voting for passage. “For me, this is personal,” said Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., who said he was among the openly gay members of the House. “Imagine telling the next generation of Americans, my generation, we no longer have the right to marry who we love,” he said. “Congress can’t allow that to happen.” While the Respect for Marriage Act easily passed the House with a Democratic majority, it is likely to stall in the evenly split Senate, where most Republicans would probably join a filibuster to block it. It’s one of several bills, including those enshrining abortion access, that Democrats are proposing to confront the court’s conservative majority. Another bill guaranteeing access to contraceptive services is set for a vote later this week. House GOP leaders split over the issue, with Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Whip Rep. Steve Scalise voting against the marriage rights bill, but the No. 3 Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York voting in favor. In a notable silence, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declined to express his view on the bill, leaving an open question over how strongly his party would fight it if it should come up for a vote in the upper chamber. Key Republicans in the House have shifted in recent years on the same-sex marriage issue, including Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, who joined those voting in favor on Tuesday. Said another Republican, Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, in a statement about her yes vote: “If gay couples want to be as happily or miserably married as straight couples, more power to them.” Polling shows a majority of Americans favor preserving rights to marry, regardless of sex, gender, race, or ethnicity, a long-building shift in modern mores toward inclusion. A Gallup poll in June showed broad and increasing support for same-sex marriage, with 70% of U.S. adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law as valid. The poll showed majority support among both Democrats (83%) and Republicans (55%). Approval of interracial marriage in the U.S. hit a six-decade high at 94% in September, according to Gallup. Ahead of Tuesday’s voting, a number of lawmakers joined protesters demonstrating against the abortion ruling outside the Supreme Court, which sits across from the Capitol and remains fenced off for security during tumultuous political times. Capitol Police said among those arrested were 16 members of Congress. “The extremist right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has put our country down a perilous path,” said Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa., in a floor speech setting Tuesday’s debate in motion. “It’s time for our colleagues across the aisle to stand up and be counted. Will they vote to protect these fundamental freedoms? Or will they vote to let states take those freedoms away?” But Republicans insisted the court was only focused on abortion access in June when it struck down the nearly 50-year-old Roe v. Wade ruling, and they argued that same-sex marriage and other rights were not threatened. In fact, almost none of the Republicans who rose to speak during the debate directly broached the subject of same-sex or interracial marriage. “We are here for a political charade; we are here for political messaging,” said Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee. That same tack could be expected in the Senate. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said, “The predicate of this is just wrong. I don’t think the Supreme Court is going to overturn any of that stuff.” As several Democrats spoke of inequalities they said they or their loved ones had faced in same-sex marriages, the Republicans talked about rising gas prices, inflation, and crime, including recent threats to justices in connection with the abortion ruling. For Republicans in Congress, the Trump-era confirmation of conservative justices to the Supreme Court has fulfilled a long-term GOP goal of revisiting many social, environmental, and regulatory issues the party has been unable to tackle on its own by passing bills that could be signed into law. The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal a law from the Clinton era that defines marriage as a heterogeneous relationship between a man and a woman. It would also provide legal protections for interracial marriages by prohibiting any state from denying out-of-state marriage licenses and benefits on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. The 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, had basically been sidelined by Obama-era court rulings, including Obergefell v. Hodges, which established the rights of same-sex couples to marry nationwide, a landmark case for gay rights. But last month, writing for the majority in overturning Roe v. Wade, Justice Samuel Alito argued for a more narrow interpretation of the rights guaranteed to Americans, noting that the right to an abortion was not spelled out in the Constitution. In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas went further, saying other rulings similar to Roe, including those around same-sex marriage and the right for couples to use contraception, should be reconsidered. While Alito insisted in the majority opinion that “this decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” others have taken notice. “The MAGA
House passes gun control bill after Buffalo, Uvalde attacks
The House passed a wide-ranging gun control bill Wednesday in response to recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, that would raise the age limit for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle and prohibit the sale of ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 15 rounds. The legislation passed by a mostly party-line vote of 223-204. It has almost no chance of becoming law as the Senate pursues negotiations focused on improving mental health programs, bolstering school security, and enhancing background checks. But the House bill does allow Democratic lawmakers a chance to frame for voters in November where they stand on policies that polls show are widely supported. “We can’t save every life, but my God, shouldn’t we try? America, we hear you, and today in the House, we are taking the action you are demanding,” said Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas. “Take note of who is with you and who is not.” The push comes after a House committee heard wrenching testimony from recent shooting victims and family members, including from 11-year-old girl Miah Cerrillo, who covered herself with a dead classmate’s blood to avoid being shot at the Uvalde elementary school. The seemingly never-ending cycle of mass shootings in the United States has rarely stirred Congress to act. But the shooting of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde has revived efforts in a way that has lawmakers from both parties talking about the need to respond. “It’s sickening, it’s sickening that our children are forced to live in this constant fear,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Pelosi said the House vote would “make history by making progress.” But it’s unclear where the House measure will go after Wednesday’s vote, given that Republicans were adamant in their opposition. “The answer is not to destroy the Second Amendment, but that is exactly where the Democrats want to go,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. The work to find common ground is mostly taking place in the Senate, where support from 10 Republicans will be needed to get a bill signed into law. Nearly a dozen Democratic and Republican senators met privately for an hour Wednesday in hopes of reaching a framework for compromise legislation by week’s end. Participants said more conversations were needed about a plan that is expected to propose modest steps. In a measure of the political peril that efforts to curb guns pose for Republicans, five of the six lead Senate GOP negotiators do not face reelection until 2026. They are Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. The sixth, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, is retiring in January. It’s also notable that none of the six is seeking the Republican presidential nomination. While Cornyn has said the talks are serious, he has not joined the chorus of Democrats saying the outlines of a deal could be reached by the end of this week. He told reporters Wednesday that he considers having an agreement before Congress begins a recess in late June to be “an aspirational goal.” The House bill stitches together a variety of proposals Democrats had introduced before the recent shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde. The suspects in the shootings at the Uvalde elementary school and Buffalo supermarket were both just 18, authorities say, when they bought the semi-automatic weapons used in the attacks. The bill would increase the minimum age to buy such weapons to 21. “A person under 21 cannot buy a Budweiser. We should not let a person under 21 buy an AR-15 weapon of war,” said Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif. Republicans have noted that a U.S. appeals court ruling last month found California’s ban on the sale of semi-automatic weapons to adults under 21 was unconstitutional. “This is unconstitutional, and it’s immoral. Why is it immoral? Because we’re telling 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to register for the draft. You can go die for your country. We expect you to defend us, but we’re not going to give you the tools to defend yourself and your family,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. The House bill also includes incentives designed to increase the use of safe gun storage devices and creates penalties for violating safe storage requirements, providing for a fine and imprisonment of up to five years if a gun is not properly stored and is subsequently used by a minor to injure or kill themselves or another individual. It also builds on the Biden administration’s executive action banning fast-action “bump-stock” devices and “ghost guns” that are assembled without serial numbers. The House is also expected to approve a bill Thursday that would allow families, police, and others to ask federal courts to order the removal of firearms from people who are believed to be at extreme risk of harming themselves or others. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia currently have such “red flag laws.” Under the House bill, a judge could issue an order to temporarily remove and store the firearms until a hearing can be held no longer than two weeks later to determine whether the firearms should be returned or kept for a specific period. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
House panel taking up gun bill in wake of mass shootings
The House is beginning to put its stamp on gun legislation in response to mass shootings in Texas and New York by 18-year-old assailants who used semi-automatic rifles to kill 31 people, including 19 children. The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing Thursday to advance legislation that would raise the age limit for purchasing a semi-automatic centerfire rifle from 18 to 21. The bill would make it a federal offense to import, manufacture or possess large-capacity magazines and would create a grant program to buy back such magazines. It also builds on the executive branch’s ban on bump-stock devices and so-called ghost guns that are privately made without serial numbers. The Democratic legislation, called the Protecting Our Kids Act, was quickly added to the legislative docket after last week’s school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. A vote by the full House could come as early as next week.ADVERTISEMENT With Republicans nearly in lockstep in their opposition, the House action will mostly be symbolic, serving to put lawmakers on record about gun control ahead of this year’s elections. The Senate is taking a different course, with a bipartisan group striving toward a compromise on gun safety legislation that can win enough GOP support to become law. But Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, defends the proposals as being popular with Americans. He says it’s time for Congress to act. “You say that it is too soon to take action? That we are ‘politicizing’ these tragedies to enact new policies?” Nadler said in prepared remarks for Thursday’s hearing obtained by The Associated Press. “It has been 23 years since Columbine. Fifteen years since Virginia Tech. Ten years since Sandy Hook. Seven years since Charleston. Four years since Parkland and Santa Fe and Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh.” He added: “Too soon? My friends, what the hell are you waiting for?” Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the ranking Republican on the committee, told Fox News he’ll press his GOP colleagues to oppose the bill. “I’m going to do everything I can to encourage my colleagues to oppose this … hodgepodge of bills that I don’t think would have made one difference in tragedies that we’ve seen recently,” Jordan said. Any legislative response to the Uvalde and Buffalo, New York shootings will have to get through the evenly divided Senate, where support from at least 10 Republicans would be needed to advance the measure to a final vote. A group of senators has been working behind the scenes this week in hopes of finding a consensus. Ideas under discussion include expanded background checks for gun purchases and incentivizing red-flag laws that allow family members, school officials, and others to go into court and secure an order requiring the police to seize guns from people considered a threat to themselves or others. The broader bipartisan group of almost ten senators met again Wednesday — “a very productive call,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., in an interview. “There’s a tenor and tone, as well as real substantive discussion that seems different,” he said. Blumenthal has been working with a Republican member of the group, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, on a proposal to send resources to the states for red-flag laws. He said he was “excited and encouraged” by the response from the group. “It really is time for our Republican colleagues to put up or shut up,” Blumenthal said. “We’ve been down this road before.” President Joe Biden was asked Wednesday if he was confident Congress would take action on gun legislation. “I served in Congress for 36 years. I’m never confident, totally,” Biden said. “It depends, and I don’t know. I’ve not been in on the negotiations as they’re going on right now.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
