ReportWire

Tag: United States House of Representatives

  • House speaker election drags into third day as McCarthy searches for support

    House speaker election drags into third day as McCarthy searches for support

    Washington — The House of Representatives will try again Thursday to elect a speaker after failing on its first six attempts Tuesday and Wednesday.

    GOP Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California fell short in every round, unable to win a majority of the votes cast. The House will reconvene at noon.

    After meeting behind closed doors Wednesday night with some detractors for nearly three hours, McCarthy told reporters he didn’t believe another vote that evening would deliver a different outcome.

    “I think it’s probably best that people work through some more,” he said. “I don’t think a vote tonight does any difference, but I think a vote in the future will.”

    But he said progress had been made in negotiations with the Republicans opposing his bid for speaker.

    Democrats remained united behind Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, who has had the most votes in every round, with the support of all 212 Democratic House lawmakers.

    House Continues Voting For New Speaker After Three Failed Attempts
    GOP Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California listens in the House chamber during the second day of elections for speaker of the House on Jan. 4, 2023, in Washington, D.C. 

    Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images


    The GOP breakaway faction on Wednesday nominated Republican Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida in place of Rep. Jim Jordan, who supports McCarthy and says he isn’t seeking the speakership. With Jeffries as the Democrats’ choice to be speaker, the balloting Wednesday marked the first time two Black men were nominated for the post. 

    Former President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social on Wednesday morning to try to sway the rebel Republicans toward McCarthy, writing that “it’s now time for all of our GREAT Republican House Members to VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL.” Former Vice President Mike Pence also tweeted his support for McCarthy. But no GOP holdouts moved to back McCarthy following the messages from Trump and Pence.

    Source link

  • Watch Live: Kevin McCarthy fails on fourth ballot as House speaker stalemate continues

    Watch Live: Kevin McCarthy fails on fourth ballot as House speaker stalemate continues

    Rep. Kevin McCarthy failed Wednesday on the fourth ballot to win enough votes to become the next speaker of the House, as the Republican stalemate continued into a second day.

    The House took up a fifth ballot less than two hours after the fourth, with McCarthy and Democratic leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries each being nominated for the fifth time.  

    The GOP breakaway faction nominated on the fourth and fifth ballots another Republican, Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, instead of Rep. Jim Jordan – who had voted for McCarthy and has said he wasn’t seeking the speakership. With the Democrats having nominated Jeffries, it marked the first time in history two Black men were nominated to be speaker of the House. 

    Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher made an impassioned plea for McCarthy in his nominating speech, saying he is “proud” to be a member of a party that invites debate and acknowledged the frustrations from a faction of the Republican conference. 

    Former President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social to try to sway the rebel Republicans toward McCarthy, writing that “it’s now time for all of our GREAT Republican House Members to VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL.” Former Vice President Mike Pence also tweeted his support for McCarthy.

    House Continues Voting For New Speaker After Three Failed Attempts
    U.S. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) listens in the House Chamber during the second day of elections for Speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 04, 2023 in Washington, DC. 

    Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images


    But McCarthy not only fell short on the fourth ballot, he lost another Republican, Rep. Victoria Spartz of Indiana, who voted “present.” McCarthy had suggested Tuesday night that he might prevail with a lower majority, and if some of the 19 holdouts were to vote “present,” he could win. However, Spartz was not among the holdouts. She voted for him on Tuesday. 

    Although this was the first time in roughly 100 years it’s taken more than one ballot to vote in a new speaker, this delay is far from unprecedented. In 1855, the House took four months to select a new speaker. 

    The House cannot conduct any business until a new speaker is elected by a majority of members – not even swear in the new members. “There is no House of Representatives as we know it. There is no member of the House currently sworn in,” CBS News senior White House and political correspondent Ed O’Keefe noted on CBS News’ streaming channel Tuesday following the three failed votes. 

    The House speaker is second in line for the U.S. presidency. 

    Source link

  • Biden: GOP speaker drama ’embarrassing,’ ‘not a good look’

    Biden: GOP speaker drama ’embarrassing,’ ‘not a good look’

    President Joe Biden says House Republicans’ inability to unify behind a speaker candidate is “embarrassing” and “not a good look” for the country

    Source link

  • Santos should consider resigning, veteran GOP lawmaker says

    Santos should consider resigning, veteran GOP lawmaker says

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Even as the House GOP leadership keeps silent, a veteran Republican lawmaker said Sunday that George Santos should consider resigning after the congressman-elect from New York admitted to lying about his heritage, education and professional career.

    Texas Rep. Kevin Brady, a former House Ways and Means chairman who has served in Congress for 25 years, told “Fox News Sunday” that Santos would have “to take some huge steps” to regain trust and respect in his district. Santos is set to be sworn in Tuesday when the new Congress begins.

    “This is troubling in so many ways. Certainly, he’s lied repeatedly,” said Brady, who is retiring from the House. “He certainly is going to have to consider resigning.” Brady said a decision about whether Santos steps down is one “to be made between he and the voters who elected him.”

    In November, Santos, 34, was elected in the 3rd Congressional District, which includes some Long Island suburbs and a small part of the New York City borough of Queens. He became the first non-incumbent, openly gay Republican to win a seat to Congress. But weeks after helping Republicans secure their razor-thin House majority, Santos is now under investigation for fabricating large swaths of his biography. His campaign spending is also being scrutinized.

    He has shown no signs of stepping aside. Last week, Santos was asked on Fox News about the “blatant lies” and responded that he had “made a mistake.”

    The top House Republican, Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, who is running to become House speaker now that the GOP will hold the majority, has not said what action, if any, he might take against Santos.

    Brady said if he headed a committee that Santos was set to serve on, “right now, he would not be on the committee.”

    The congressman also said that “we’re a country of second chances. And when people are willing to turn their life around and own up to this and do what it takes and earn respect and trust again, you know, we’re willing to do that.” Brady said he was hopeful that Santos “chooses the right path here.”

    Questions were raised about Santos last month when The New York Times published an investigation into his resume and found a number of major discrepancies. Since then, Santos has admitted lying about having Jewish ancestry, lying about working for Wall Street banks and lying about obtaining a college degree.

    Democrats are expected to pursue several avenues against Santos, including a potential complaint with the Federal Election Commission and introducing a resolution to expel him once he’s a sitting member of Congress.

    Source link

  • Trump’s taxes: Takeaways from release of long-sought returns

    Trump’s taxes: Takeaways from release of long-sought returns

    In one of its last acts under Democratic control, the House of Representatives on Friday released six years of former President Donald Trump’s tax returns, dating to 2015, the year he announced his presidential bid.

    The thousands of pages of financial documents were the subject of a prolonged legal battle after Trump broke precedent in not releasing his tax returns while running for, and then occupying, the highest office in the land.

    Some takeaways from a review of the documents:

    A BANK ACCOUNT IN CHINA

    The longtime real estate and media mogul with business interests on multiple continents was asked during a 2020 presidential debate about having a bank account in China. He said he closed it before he began his 2016 campaign — a statement his tax returns show was not true.

    “The bank account was in 2013. It was closed in 2015, I believe,” Trump said during the debate. “I was thinking about doing a deal in China. Like millions of other people, I was thinking about it. I decided not to do it.”

    The tax returns, however, report that Trump had a bank account in China in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

    The returns show accounts in other foreign countries over the years, including the United Kingdom, southern Ireland and the Caribbean island nation of St. Martin. By 2018, Trump had apparently closed all his overseas accounts other than the one in the U.K., home to one of his flagship golf properties.

    The returns don’t detail the amount of money held in those accounts.

    ———

    MANY FOREIGN INVESTMENTS

    China is one of several countries where Trump reported making money over the years.

    He reported $38 million in overseas gross income in 2016 and $55 million in 2017, from countries including Azerbaijan, India, Indonesia, Panama, the Philippines, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

    This sort of information about potential conflicts of interest for the commander-in-chief of the United States are one reason presidents normally release their tax returns.

    It’s not clear what that overseas money came from. Trump claimed tens of millions of dollars in losses and expenses in his overseas investments as well, but his liabilities there sometimes were greater than those in the U.S. In 2016, for example, Trump told the Internal Revenue Service that he paid $1.2 million in foreign taxes, while he ended up paying only $750 in U.S. income taxes.

    ———

    WORKING THE SYSTEM

    It’s been long known that Trump, like many rich people, has been able to exploit the country’s complex tax code to avoid paying as large a share of his income to the federal government as working families do. When he was pressed on not paying federal taxes in a 2016 debate against Democrat Hillary Clinton, Trump retorted, “That makes me smart.”

    It also highlights the two-tier tax system that allows wealthy people like Trump to take advantage of breaks and loopholes not available to regular households. In 2020, for example, Trump reported owning more than 150 private corporations that claimed losses, sometimes in the millions of dollars. Partly by claiming those losses, Trump reduced his own federal tax income liability to zero that year.

    Some of those losses were real as the coronavirus pandemic battered the economy. But others reflect special deductions that developers like Trump can take on the depreciation of buildings and equipment.

    Some losses Trump claimed may be more questionable — one of the companies he reported owning is called “Unreimbursed expenses.” The Joint Committee on Taxation noted that one of Trump’s firms claimed $438,000 in losses for gift cards redemptions and urged additional investigation of whether the losses were genuine — one of a number of deductions into which the Democratic-controlled committee called for further investigation.

    They’re the sort of deductions the typical American household, which earns $70,000 a year, can’t take.

    ———

    NO REPORTED CHARITABLE GIVING IN 2020

    In the final year of his presidency, Trump reported making no charitable donations.

    That was in contrast to the prior two years, when Trump reported making about $500,000 worth of donations. It’s unclear whether any of the figures include his pledge to donate his $400,000 presidential salary back to the U.S. government.

    Trump, who has bragged of being a billionaire, told The Associated Press in 2015 that he gives “to hundreds of charities and people in need of help.”

    He said, “It is one of the things I most like doing and one of the great reasons to have made a lot of money.”

    He reported larger donations in 2016 and 2017, donating $1.1 million in the year he won the presidency and $1.8 million in his first year in office.

    ———

    MONEY FROM THE ARTS WORLD

    Trump collected a $77,808 annual pension from the Screen Actors Guild, as well as a $6,543 pension in 2017 from another film and TV union, and reported acting residuals as high as $14,141 in 2015, according to the tax returns.

    Trump has made cameo appearances in various movies, notably “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York,” but his biggest on-screen success came with his reality TV shows “The Apprentice” and “The Celebrity Apprentice,” where each episode would end in a boardroom setting with Trump dismissing a contestant with his trademark phrase: “You’re fired!”

    Trump also reported paying a little more than $400,000 from 2015 to 2017 in “book writer” fees. In 2015, Trump published the book, “Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again,” with a ghostwriter.

    In 2015, Trump reporting receiving $750,000 in fees for speaking engagements.

    ———

    TRUMP VOWS PAYBACK

    Trump broke political tradition by not releasing his tax returns as president. Now Republicans warn that Democrats will pay a political price by releasing what is normally confidential tax information.

    Trump himself underscored that in a statement Friday morning after his returns were made public. “The great USA divide will now grow far worse,” Trump said. “The Radical Left Democrats have weaponized everything, but remember, that is a dangerous two-way street!”

    Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over tax matters and released the Trump documents, warned that in the future the committee could release the returns of labor leaders or Supreme Court justices. Democrats countered with a proposal to require the release of tax returns by any presidential candidate — legislation that is unlikely to pass, given that Republicans take control of the House next week.

    Notably, the GOP cannot disclose President Joe Biden’s tax returns because they’re already public. Biden resumed the long-standing bipartisan tradition of releasing his tax records, disclosing 22 years’ worth of his filings during his presidential campaign.

    ———

    Associated Press writers Jill Colvin and Michael R. Sisak in New York and Chris Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Biden signs $1.7 trillion bill funding government operations

    Biden signs $1.7 trillion bill funding government operations

    KINGSHILL, U.S. Virgin Islands (AP) — President Joe Biden on Thursday signed a $1.7 trillion spending bill that will keep the federal government operating through the end of the federal budget year in September 2023, and provide tens of billions of dollars in new aid to Ukraine for its fight against the Russian military.

    Biden had until late Friday to sign the bill to avoid a partial government shutdown.

    The Democratic-controlled House passed the bill 225-201, mostly along party lines, just before Christmas. The House vote came a day after the Senate, also led by Democrats, voted 68-29 to pass the bill with significantly more Republican support.

    Biden had said passage was proof that Republicans and Democrats can work together.

    Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the House Republican leader who hopes to become speaker when a new session Congress opens on Jan. 3, argued during floor debate that the bill spends too much and does too little to curb illegal immigration and the flow of fentanyl into the U.S. from Mexico.

    “This is a monstrosity that is one of the most shameful acts I’ve ever seen in this body,” McCarthy said of the legislation.

    McCarthy is appealing for support from staunch conservatives in the GOP caucus, who have largely blasted the bill for its size and scope. Republicans will have a narrow House majority come Jan. 3 and several conservative members have vowed not to vote for McCarthy to become speaker.

    The funding bill includes a roughly 6% increase in spending for domestic initiatives, to $772.5 billion. Spending on defense programs will increase by about 10%, to $858 billion.

    Passage was achieved hours before financing for federal agencies was set to expire. Lawmakers had approved two short-term spending measures to keep the government operating, and a third, funding the government through Dec. 30, passed last Friday. Biden signed it to ensure services would continue until Congress sent him the full-year measure, called an omnibus bill.

    The massive bill, which topped out at more than 4,000 pages, wraps together 12 appropriations bills, aid to Ukraine and disaster relief for communities recovering from natural disasters. It also contains scores of policy changes that lawmakers worked to include in the final major bill considered by that session of Congress.

    Lawmakers provided roughly $45 billion for Ukraine and NATO allies, more than even Biden had requested, an acknowledgment that future rounds of funding are not guaranteed when Republicans take control of the House next week following the party’s gains in the midterm elections.

    Though support for Ukraine aid has largely been bipartisan, some House Republicans have opposed the spending and argued that the money would be better spent on priorities in the United States.

    McCarthy has warned that Republicans will not write a “blank check” for Ukraine in the future.

    The bill also includes about $40 billion in emergency spending, mostly to help communities across the U.S. as they recover from drought, hurricanes and other natural disasters.

    The White House said it received the bill from Congress late Wednesday afternoon. It was delivered to Biden for his signature by White House staff on a regularly scheduled commercial flight.

    Biden signed the bill Thursday in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where he is spending time with his wife, Jill, and other family members on the island of St. Croix. The Bidens are staying at the home of friends Bill and Connie Neville, the White House said. Bill Neville owns US Viking, maker of ENPS, a news production software system that is sold by The Associated Press.

    Also in the bill are scores of policy changes that are largely unrelated to spending, but lawmakers worked furiously behind the scenes to get the added to the bill, which was the final piece of legislation that came out of that session of Congress. Otherwise, lawmakers sponsoring these changes would have had to start from scratch next year in a politically divided Congress in which Republicans will return to the majority in the House and Democrats will continue to control the Senate.

    One of the most notable examples was a historic revision to federal election law to prevent a future president or presidential candidate from trying to overturn an election.

    The bipartisan overhaul of the Electoral Count Act is a direct response to-then President Donald Trump’s efforts to persuade Republican lawmakers and then-Vice President Mike Pence to object to the certification of Biden’s victory on Jan. 6, 2021, the day of the Trump-inspired insurrection at the Capitol.

    Among the spending increases Democrats emphasized: a $500 increase in the maximum size of Pell grants for low-income college students, a $100 million increase in block grants to states for substance abuse prevention and treatment programs, a 22% increase in spending on veterans’ medical care and $3.7 billion in emergency relief to farmers and ranchers hit by natural disasters.

    The bill also provides roughly $15.3 billion for more than 7,200 projects that lawmakers sought for their home states and districts. Under revamped rules for community project funding, also referred to as earmarks, lawmakers must post their requests online and attest they have no financial interest in the projects. Still, many fiscal conservatives criticize the earmarking as leading to unnecessary spending.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Kevin Freking in Washington contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Time of triumph for GOP turns into ‘distraction’ with Santos

    Time of triumph for GOP turns into ‘distraction’ with Santos

    WASHINGTON (AP) — It should be a time of triumph for Republicans ready to take back control of the House in the new Congress next week, but their leaders are struggling with an embarrassing distraction about one of their own: What to do about George Santos?

    Weeks after winning a district that helped Republicans secure their razor-thin House majority, the congressman-elect is under investigation in New York after acknowledging he lied about his heritage, education and professional pedigree as he campaigned for office.

    The top House Republican Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, and his leadership team have kept silent about Santos, who is set to take the oath of office Tuesday, even after he publicly admitted to fabricating swaths of his biography. The now-embattled Republican has shown no signs of stepping aside, punting the decision to hold him accountable to his party and to the Congress, where he could quickly face a House ethics committee investigation once sworn into office.

    Representatives for McCarthy, who is running to become the next House speaker, did not respond when asked what action he may take relating to Santos. On Tuesday, Santos was asked on Fox News about the “blatant lies” and responded that he had “made a mistake.”

    Democrats, who will be in the minority during the upcoming session, are expected to pursue several avenues against the 34-year-old Santos, including a potential complaint with the Federal Election Commission and introducing a resolution to expel him once he’s a sitting member of Congress, according to a senior Democratic aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

    “We need answers from George Santos. He appears to be a complete and utter fraud. His whole life story is made up,” the incoming House Democratic leader, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, told reporters last week. “He’s gonna have to answer that question: Did you perpetrate a fraud on the voters of the 3rd Congressional District of New York?”

    Questions were first raised about Santos earlier this month when The New York Times published an investigation into his resume and found a number of major discrepancies. Since then, Santos has admitted lying about having Jewish ancestry, lying about working for Wall Street banks and lying about obtaining a college degree.

    Santos has yet to address other lingering questions, including the source of a personal fortune he appears to have amassed quickly despite recent financial problems, including evictions and owing thousands in back rent.

    Santos in November won a seat in the Long Island area represented by Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi, making headlines as the first non-incumbent, openly gay Republican to be elected to Congress.

    If Santos assumes office, he could still face an investigation by the House ethics committee, which is responsible for reviewing allegations of misconduct by lawmakers. The committee, evenly decided between the parties, has the authority under the chamber’s rules to subpoena members for testimony or documents, and lawmakers are required to comply.

    Tom Rust, a committee spokesman, declined to comment this week on whether the committee can or would investigate Santos. Despite his actions occurring before joining the House, the committee has over the years held that it may investigate matters that violated laws, regulations or standards of conduct during an initial campaign for the House.

    But an ethics complaint may end up being the least of Santos’ problems.

    Federal prosecutors in New York have started to examine Santos’ background and his financial dealings, a person familiar with the matter said Thursday. The person, who cautioned the review was in its early stages, said prosecutors were specifically interested in earnings that Santos accrued and are reviewing campaign finance filings.

    The person was not authorized to publicly discuss details of the ongoing review and spoke on condition of anonymity.

    The district attorney in Nassau County, New York, announced on Wednesday an investigation into the fabrications Santos made while campaigning to represent the state’s 3rd district, which includes some Long Island suburbs and a small part of the New York City borough of Queens.

    Nassau County District Attorney Anne T. Donnelly, a Republican, said the fabrications and inconsistencies were “nothing short of stunning.”

    “The residents of Nassau County and other parts of the third district must have an honest and accountable representative in Congress,” she said. “If a crime was committed in this county, we will prosecute it.”

    And on Thursday, the Queens County district attorney’s office said it was looking into whether any laws were broken by Santos.

    “We are reviewing whether Queens County has jurisdiction over any potential criminal offenses,” said a spokesperson for the agency, who did not want to be named because they were speaking about an open investigation.

    Rep.-elect Nick LaLota, a Republican whose district borders Santos’, issued a statement Wednesday calling for an ethics investigation into the allegations. “New Yorkers deserve the truth and House Republicans deserve an opportunity to govern without this distraction.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Bobby Caina Calvan in New York and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Jan. 6 takeaways: Final revelations from investigation

    Jan. 6 takeaways: Final revelations from investigation

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Destroyed documents. Suggestions of pardoning violent rioters. Quiet talks among cabinet officials about whether then-President Donald Trump should be removed from office.

    Interview transcripts released by House investigators in recent days — more than 100 so far — give further insight into the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection and the weeks leading up to it, as Trump tried to overturn his defeat in the presidential election. The nine-member committee conducted more than 1,000 interviews, and the lawmakers are gradually releasing hundreds of transcripts after issuing a final report last week. The panel will dissolve on Tuesday when the new Republican-led House is sworn in.

    While some of the witnesses were more forthcoming than others, the interviews altogether tell the full story of Trump’s unprecedented scheming, the bloody chaos of the attack on the Capitol and the fears of lawmakers and the Republican former president’s own aides as he tried to upend democracy and the popular will.

    Some highlights from the interview transcripts released so far:

    WHITE HOUSE AIDE TELLS ALL

    Previously little-known White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson drew national attention when she testified in a surprise hearing this summer about Trump’s words and actions around the Jan. 6 attack — his rage after security thwarted his efforts to go to the Capitol that day with his supporters and how he knew that some of his supporters were armed.

    The committee has so far released four of her closed-door interviews, revealing new details about what she said she observed in her time as an aide to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among other revelations, Hutchinson told the committee she had seen Meadows burning documents in his office fireplace “roughly a dozen times” after the 2020 election.

    She said she didn’t know what the documents were or whether they were items that legally should have been preserved. A spokesman for Meadows declined to comment.

    Hutchinson also spoke at length about her moral struggles as she decided how much to disclose — even doing research on Watergate figures who similarly testified about working in President Richard Nixon’s White House.

    “My character and my integrity mean more to me than anything,” Hutchinson says she decided, returning to the committee with a new lawyer in June after three previous interviews.

    PARDONS FOR EVERYONE?

    After the insurrection, Trump floated the idea of a blanket pardon for all participants, but the White House counsel at the time, Pat Cipollone, discouraged the idea, according to testimony from Johnny McEntee, an aide who served as director of the presidential personnel office and was interviewed by the panel in March.

    Trump then asked about limiting pardons to only those people who entered the Capitol but who did not engage in violence, but that idea was also met with some pushback, McEntee recalled. He said Trump appeared persuaded by the advice and said he was not aware that the idea ever came up again.

    Separately, McEntee said that Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., told him he was seeking a preemptive pardon from Trump as he faced a federal child sex trafficking investigation. Gaetz did not receive such a pardon and has not faced any charges in connection to the probe.

    Hutchinson testified that Meadows’ office became so inundated with pardon requests at the end of Trump’s term that some turned to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner to help facilitate.

    THE 25TH AMENDMENT

    The panel interviewed several of Trump’s Cabinet secretaries about discussions of invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment — the forceful removal of Trump from power by his own Cabinet. While some acknowledged it had been discussed, it appears that it was never a likely scenario.

    Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says he spoke fleetingly with then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about the idea after the insurrection.

    “It came up very briefly in our conversation,” Mnuchin testified in July. “We both believed that the best outcome was a normal transition of power, which was working, and neither one of us contemplated in any serious format the 25th Amendment.”

    Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the committee he witnessed a brief conversation between the two Cabinet secretaries in the White House and heard the phrase “25th Amendment.” His transcript has not yet been released, but investigators quoted Milley’s interview to both Pompeo and Mnuchin in their interviews.

    Pompeo told the committee he didn’t recall the conversation. “I would have viewed someone speaking about the potential of invoking the 25th Amendment as just absolutely preposterous,” he said.

    Vice President Mike Pence later dismissed the idea in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., saying the mechanism should be reserved for when a president is medically or mentally incapacitated.

    Pence chief of staff Marc Short told the panel he thought the talk was “a political game.” The process would have taken weeks to play out, he said, and Democrat Joe Biden was set to be inaugurated Jan. 20.

    TRUMP FAMILY TESTIFIES

    The committee interviewed two of the former president’s children, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, about their conversations with their father during the Jan. 6 attack and in the days before and after.

    Trump Jr. did not answer many of the committee’s questions, frequently saying he did not recall events or conversations. He did explain why he texted Meadows the afternoon of Jan. 6, as the attack was unfolding, to say that his father needed to “condemn this s—” immediately and that Trump’s tweets had not been strong enough. “My father doesn’t text,” Trump Jr. said.

    Ivanka Trump, who was in the White House with her father on Jan. 6, was also vague in many of her answers. She spoke with the committee about working with her father to write his tweets that day, encouraging him to make a strong statement as the rioters broke into the Capitol. And she testified that she heard Trump’s side of a “heated” phone call with Pence that morning as her father tried to encourage Pence to object to the congressional certification that day. Pence refused to do so.

    She also testified that she received a call and a text from Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who was in the Capitol as it was under siege. Collins told her that “the president needs to put out a very strong tweet telling people to go home and to stop the violence now.”

    ‘GIVE ME FIVE DEAD VOTERS’

    Trump lawyer Christina Bobb testified that Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a top ally of Trump, asked some of the former president’s advisers for evidence of fraud so he could “champion” it after the election. Trump falsely claimed there had been widespread fraud, despite court rulings and election officials in all 50 states who said otherwise.

    Graham told lawyers he would love to support the cause.

    “Don’t tell me everything because it’s too overwhelming,” Bobb quotes Graham as saying. “Just give me five dead voters; give me, you know, an example of illegals voting. Just give me a very small snapshot that I can take and champion.”

    He did nothing with the information he was given, Bobb said. Graham voted on Jan. 6 to certify Biden’s presidential election win.

    NATIONAL GUARD FRUSTRATION

    The mob that stormed the Capitol would have faced a much harsher law enforcement response had it been comprised mostly of African Americans, testified retired Army Maj. Gen. William Walker, who led the D.C. National Guard at the time. Walker is now the House sergeant at arms.

    “I’m African American. Child of the sixties,” Walker testified. “I think it would have been a vastly different response if those were African Americans trying to breach the Capitol. As a career law enforcement officer, part-time soldier … the law enforcement response would have been different.”

    The National Guard didn’t arrive at the Capitol for several hours, leaving overwhelmed police officers at the mercy of the violent mob as Pentagon officials said they were sorting out the necessary approvals. More than 100 officers were injured, many seriously, as Trump’s supporters beat them and ran over them to get inside.

    Walker expressed deep frustration with the delays and says he even considered breaking the chain of command and sending the troops with authorization. Lawyers advised him strongly not to do so, he said.

    He said he didn’t think the holdup was because the insurrectionists were mostly white.

    “I don’t think race was part of the military’s decision paralysis,” he said in his April interview, adding, “I think they just didn’t want to do it.”

    EXTREMIST GROUP LEADERS

    Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio asserted his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to some questions, with his attorney at times telling investigators his client did not belong to the extremist group, whose associates are now facing rare sedition charges in a federal case prosecuted by the Justice Department. But Tarrio himself told investigators he took the title of chairman.

    Tarrio, who had been released from jail on the eve of the insurrection, wasn’t present for the attack. But prosecutors claim he kept command over the Proud Boys who attacked Congress and cheered them on from afar. Proud Boys were some of the first rioters to break through the Capitol perimeter.

    He told the panel that the first degree of membership in the Proud Boys is “that you are a Western chauvinist” and that you “refuse to apologize for creating the modern world.”

    Tarrio met Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the extremist group Oath Keepers, in a garage the night of Jan. 5, ahead of the attack. “I still don’t like Stewart Rhodes,” Tarrio said.

    Rhodes, who was also interviewed by the panel, was convicted in November of seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors said was a plot for an armed rebellion to stop the transfer of presidential power. They said Rhodes rallied his followers to fight to defend Trump and discussed the prospect of a “bloody” civil war.

    In his February testimony to the panel, Rhodes spoke at length about his views of the world but declined to answer any questions about his involvement on Jan. 6 and amassing weapons. He said he feels like a political prisoner.

    “I feel like a Jew in Germany, frankly,” Rhodes told the committee.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Nomaan Merchant, Farnoush Amiri, Lisa Mascaro and Michael Balsamo contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Trump’s tax returns to be released Friday after long fight

    Trump’s tax returns to be released Friday after long fight

    A House committee is set to release six years of Donald Trump’s tax returns on Friday, pulling back the curtain on financial records that the former president fought for years to keep secret.

    The Democratic-controlled House Ways and Means Committee voted last week to release the returns, with some redactions of sensitive information, such as Social Security numbers and contact information. Their dissemination comes in the waning days of Democrats’ control of the House and as Trump’s fellow Republicans prepare to retake power in the chamber.

    The committee obtained six years of Trump’s personal and business tax records, from 2015 to 2020, while investigating what it said in a Dec. 20 report was the Internal Revenue Service’s failure to pursue mandatory audits of Trump on a timely basis during his presidency, as required under the tax agency’s protocol.

    The release raises the potential of new revelations about Trump’s finances, which have been shrouded in mystery and intrigue since his days as an up-and-coming Manhattan real estate developer in the 1980s. The returns could take on added significance now that Trump has launched a third campaign for the White House.

    Trump’s tax returns are likely to offer the clearest picture yet of his finances during his time in office.

    Trump, known for building skyscrapers and hosting a reality TV show before winning the White House, broke political norms by refusing to make public his returns as he sought the presidency — though he did give some limited details about his holdings and income on mandatory disclosure forms.

    Instead, Trump has touted his wealth in the annual financial statements he gives to banks to secure loans and to financial magazines to justify his place on rankings of the world’s billionaires.

    Trump’s longtime accounting firm has since disavowed the statements, and New York Attorney General Letitia James has filed a lawsuit alleging Trump and his Trump Organization inflated asset values on the statements as part of a yearslong fraud. Trump and his company have denied wrongdoing.

    It will not be the first time Trump’s tax returns have been under scrutiny. In October 2018, The New York Times published a Pulitzer Prize-winning series based on leaked tax records that showed that Trump received a modern-day equivalent of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate holdings, with much of that money coming from what the Times called “tax dodges” in the 1990s.

    A second series in 2020 showed that Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes in 2017 and 2018, as well as no income taxes at all in 10 of the past 15 years because he generally lost more money than he made.

    In its report last week, the Ways and Means Committee indicated the Trump administration may have disregarded a post-Watergate requirement mandating audits of a president’s tax filings.

    The IRS only began to audit Trump’s 2016 tax filings on April 3, 2019 — more than two years into his presidency — when Ways and Means chair Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., asked the agency for information related to the tax returns.

    By comparison, there were audits of President Joe Biden for the 2020 and 2021 tax years, said Andrew Bates, a White House spokesperson. A spokesperson for former President Barack Obama said Obama was audited in each of his eight years in office.

    An accompanying report from Congress’ nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation raised multiple red flags about aspects of Trump’s tax filings, including his carryover losses, deductions tied to conservation and charitable donations, and loans to his children that could be taxable gifts.

    The House passed a bill in response that would require audits of any president’s income tax filings. Republicans strongly opposed the legislation, raising concerns that a law requiring audits would infringe on taxpayer privacy and could lead to audits being weaponized for political gain.

    Republicans have argued that Democrats will regret the move once Republicans take power in January, and they warn that the committee’s new GOP chair will be under pressure to seek and make public the tax returns of other prominent people.

    The measure, approved mostly along party lines, has little chance of becoming law in the final days of this Congress. Rather, it is seen as a starting point for future efforts to bolster oversight of the presidency.

    Every president and major-party candidate since Richard Nixon has voluntarily made at least summaries of their tax information available to the public. Trump bucked that trend as a candidate and as president, repeatedly asserting that his taxes were “under audit” and couldn’t be released.

    Trump’s lawyers were repeatedly denied in their quest to keep his tax returns from the Ways and Means Committee. A three-judge federal appeals court panel in August upheld a lower-court ruling granting the committee access.

    Trump’s lawyers also tried and failed to block the Manhattan district attorney’s office from getting Trump’s tax records as part of its investigation into his business practices, losing twice in the Supreme Court.

    Trump’s longtime accountant, Donald Bender, testified at the Trump Organization’s recent Manhattan criminal trial that Trump reported losses on his tax returns every year for a decade, including nearly $700 million in 2009 and $200 million in 2010.

    Bender, a partner at Mazars USA LLP who spent years preparing Trump’s personal tax returns, said Trump’s reported losses from 2009 to 2018 included net operating losses from some of the many businesses he owns through the Trump Organization.

    The Trump Organization was convicted earlier this month on tax fraud charges for helping some executives dodge taxes on company-paid perks such as apartments and luxury cars.

    ———

    Associated Press writer Paul Wiseman in Washington contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Editorial Roundup: United States

    Editorial Roundup: United States

    Excerpts from recent editorials in the United States and abroad:

    Dec. 21

    The Washington Post on Trump’s tax records

    In 2020, President Donald Trump and Melania Trump paid no federal income taxes by claiming millions in dubious deductions and carrying over losses from previous years.

    Somehow, that’s not the most scandalous detail to emerge following the House’s four-year legal brawl to obtain Mr. Trump’s tax returns. It turns out the Internal Revenue Service did not conduct — let alone complete — mandatory examinations of Mr. Trump’s returns while he was president, despite its own internal policy from 1977 requiring such reviews and the White House’s claims that they were happening. A report by the House Ways and Means Committee, released after members voted Tuesday to make Mr. Trump’s filings public, proposes codifying into law the norm that every president since Richard M. Nixon had observed, until Mr. Trump: the routine release of presidential tax returns.

    In April 2019, on the very day the committee inquired about the status of mandatory presidential audits, the IRS notified Mr. Trump that his 2015 return would be examined. But the audit was assigned mainly to one agent, and Mr. Trump threw sand in the gears. The lone IRS employee had to review a return that included over 400 pass-through entities, numerous schedules, foreign tax credits and millions in carried-over losses from previous years.

    An accompanying report from the Joint Committee on Taxation, summarizing Mr. Trump’s returns, raises questions about several deductions he’s claimed. For example, he took a $21.1 million deduction in 2015 for donating 158 acres of real estate but had no qualified appraisal for the land. He also reported making cash donations of more than $500,000 in 2018 and 2019 without substantiation, according to the report.

    An internal IRS memo said Mr. Trump’s taxes were so complicated that “it is not possible to obtain the resources available to examine all potential issues.” In other words, even if the agency wanted, it lacked the resources for a thorough review. The congressional report recommends that the IRS assign two senior agents, as well as specialists on partnerships, foreign transactions and financial products, to ensure all presidential audits are complete and timely. This is a no-brainer.

    Alas, this problem is bigger than Mr. Trump. Former IRS commissioner Charles Rettig has testified the agency lacks the resources to closely scrutinize the filings of many people in Mr. Trump’s stratum. “We get outgunned routinely,” he said. No American should be too big to audit.

    Fortunately, the Inflation Reduction Act provided $79 billion for IRS modernization, including expanded resources to wade through complex returns from high-income taxpayers. Paying taxes is a responsibility of citizenship. Taking steps to ensure presidents pay what they owe, by requiring mandatory audits and returning to the norm of releasing presidential returns, would help restore public confidence that tax laws are administered fairly and applied equally.

    ONLINE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/12/21/trump-tax-records-irs-scandals/

    ———

    Dec. 24

    The New York Times on taking on extremism in the U.S.

    Whoever shot the small steel ball through the front window of the Brewmaster’s Taproom in Renton, Wash., this month wasn’t taking chances. The person wore a mask and removed the front and rear license plates of a silver Chevrolet Cruze. The police still have no leads.

    The bar’s owner, Marley Rall, thought the motivation seemed clear: The attack followed social media posts from conservatives angry about the bar’s Drag Queen Storytime and Bingo, slated for the following weekend.

    The Taproom sits in a two-story office park a 15-minute drive from downtown Seattle. It has a little outside patio and about two dozen local craft beers on tap. Dogs are welcome. A sign on the door reads: “I don’t drink beer with racists. #blacklivesmatter.” Now there’s also a note with an arrow pointing to the hole in the window reading: “What intolerance looks like.”

    Over the past two years, criticism of the bar’s long-running monthly Drag Queen Storytime had been limited to nasty voice mail messages and emails. But talk on right-wing message boards has turned much darker, Ms. Rall said. One post this month about the Taproom event read: “Drag Queen Storytime Protest. STOP Grooming Kids! Bring signs, bullhorns, noisemakers.”

    Ms. Rall knew how protests like this could escalate. There was an incident in 2019 at a library drag queen story hour about 10 minutes from the bar, where members of the Proud Boys and other paramilitary groups got into a shouting match with supporters of the event.

    Was the shot at the Taproom a warning? She had no way to know, so she kept the event on the calendar.

    Sitting in a corner of the Taproom a few hours before her story time was set to begin, Sylvia O’Stayformore said she didn’t care if the Proud Boys showed up to an event that was aimed at teaching children empathy. Protesters or not, she had a show to put on. “I’d never be intimidated by all this,” she said.

    Far-right activists have been waging a nationwide campaign of harassment against L.G.B.T.Q. people and events in which they participate. Drag queen story events are similar to other public readings for children, except that readers dress in a highly stylized and gender-fluid manner and often read books that focus on acceptance and tolerance. This month alone, drag queen events were the target of protests in Grand Prairie, Texas; San Antonio; Fall River, Mass.; Columbus, Ohio; Southern Pines, N.C.; Jacksonville, Fla.; Lakeland, Fla.; Chicago; Long Island; and Staten Island.

    On Monday, protesters vandalized the home of a gay New York City councilor with homophobic graffiti and attacked one of his neighbors in protest of drag queen story hours held at libraries.

    The protests use the language of right-wing media, where demonizing gay and transgender people is profitable and popular. Tucker Carlson, a Fox News host who rails against transgender people and the medical facilities that serve them, has the highest-rated prime-time cable news program in the country. Twitter personalities with millions of followers flag drag events and spread anti-trans rhetoric that can result in in-person demonstrations or threats. Facebook pages of activist groups can mobilize demonstrators with ease.

    Some Republican lawmakers are using the power of the state in service of the same cause. Several states are trying to restrict or ban public drag shows altogether, amid a record number of anti-L.G.B.T.Q. bills introduced this year. Republican politicians also used a barrage of lies about trans people in their campaign ads during the midterm elections, funded to the tune of at least $50 million, according to a report released in October from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.

    This campaign isn’t happening in a vacuum. Levels of political violence are on the rise across the country, and while some of it comes from the left, a majority comes from the right, where violent rhetoric that spurs actual violence is routine and escalating. At anti-L.G.B.T.Q. events, sign-waving protesters are increasingly joined by members of the street-fighting Proud Boys and other right-wing paramilitary groups. Their presence increases the risk of such encounters turning violent.

    In a series of editorials, this board has argued for a concerted national effort against political violence. It would require cracking down on paramilitary groups, tracking extremists in law enforcement, creating a healthier culture around guns and urging the Republican Party to push fringe ideas to the fringes. Every American citizen has a part to play, and the most important thing we all can do is to demand that in every community, we treat our neighbors — and their civil liberties and human rights — with respect.

    One way to do that is to call out and reject the dehumanizing language that has become so pervasive in online discussions, and in real life, about particular groups of people. Calling L.G.B.T.Q. people pedophiles is an old tactic, and it makes ignoring or excusing any violence that may come their way easier. While direct calls for violence are beyond the pale for most Republican politicians, and the causes of specific violent acts are not easily traced, calling transgender people pedophiles or “groomers” is increasingly common and usually goes unchallenged.

    Marco Rubio, a Republican senator from Florida, released a TV ad recently in which he said: “The radical left will destroy America if we don’t stop them. They indoctrinate children and try to turn boys into girls.” A conservative activist group recently ran ads in several states, including one that said, “Transgenderism is killing kids.” This year, as Florida lawmakers debated the so-called Don’t Say Gay bill, a spokeswoman for Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida posted on Twitter: “If you’re against the Anti-Grooming Bill, you are probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children. Silence is complicity.”

    The silence from a great majority of Republicans on the demonization of, and lies about, trans people has indeed meant complicity — complicity in what experts call stochastic terrorism, in which vicious rhetoric increases the likelihood of random violence against the people who are the subject of the abusive language and threats.

    Drag queen story hours aren’t the only current target for right-wing extremists. On Aug. 30, an operator at Boston Children’s Hospital, a pioneer in providing gender-affirming care, answered the telephone at about 7:45 p.m. and received a disturbing threat. “There is a bomb on the way to the hospital,” the caller said. “You better evacuate everyone, you sickos.” It was the first of seven bomb threats the hospital received over several months. The most recent came on Dec. 14.

    After extremists posted online the address of a physician who works with trans children at the hospital, the doctor had to flee the home. “These have been some of the hardest months of my life,” the doctor said.

    Around the country, at least 24 hospitals or medical facilities in 21 states have been harassed or threatened in the wake of right-wing media attacks, according to a tally this month by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation. To protect their employees, some hospitals are stripping information about the transgender services they provide from their websites. The messages that appear to trigger these attacks are often outlandish lies about what care these medical facilities actually provide. As a result, many hospitals feel they have no choice but to protect their staff, even if it means making the care they provide less visible. Removal of official information creates a risk that more disinformation could fill the void.

    Given the transnational nature of extremism, these threats can come from anywhere. The F.B.I. arrested three people in connection with the various threats against Boston doctors. One person lived in Massachusetts, another in Texas and the third in Canada.

    Data collected by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, which tracks political violence, puts the harassment of hospitals into a wider, troubling context. Acts of political violence against the entire L.G.B.T.Q. community have more than tripled since 2021; anti-L.G.B.T.Q. demonstrations have more than doubled in the same period. And the nature of the intimidation is changing: Protesters dressed as civilians have been replaced by men in body armor and fatigues; signs have been replaced by semiautomatic rifles.

    Even dictionary publishers have become targets. This year, a California man was arrested for threatening to shoot up and bomb the offices of Merriam-Webster because he was angry about its definitions related to gender identity.

    ONLINE: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/24/opinion/anti-trans-violence.html

    ———

    Dec. 23

    The Wall Street Journal on Congress on proxy voting:

    The House of Representatives spent Friday passing the $1.65 trillion omnibus spending blowout, and the bill is loaded with earmarks and pet priorities from healthcare to public lands that few Members have bothered to read. This is no way to run a government, and compounding the embarrassment is that half of the lawmakers had already ditched Washington for the holidays.

    The House had roughly 230 “active proxy letters” on Friday. Speaker Nancy Pelosi through a rule change allowed Members to vote by proxy in 2020, a putatively temporary measure to mitigate the risks of Covid-19. But the reprieve has been renewed every 45 days for more than two years and is now an all-purpose excuse to go AWOL.

    Members sign a letter, available on the House clerk’s website, that says they are “unable to physically attend proceedings in the House Chamber due to the ongoing public health emergency,” and designate a colleague to cast their vote. But no one even bothers anymore to fake a cough or pretend the absence has anything to do with Covid-19. Mrs. Pelosi told a CNN reporter on Friday that the mass sick day is “related to the weather more than anything else.”

    Members sometimes missed votes pre-Covid, and voters can judge for themselves whether a snowstorm is a fair reason for their Representative to leave Washington early. But it should give Americans more pause that so many Members of Congress are so cavalier about misrepresenting the reason they won’t be at roll call.

    The abuse is bipartisan, and Members from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene availed themselves of proxy letters this week. Business Insider reports that Ms. Greene is vacationing in Costa Rica.

    An October CQ Roll Call analysis found that a dozen House Democrats cast more than half their votes by proxy. Retiring members are particular offenders, and a joke in the press is that they are “quiet quitting.” The Roll Call report noted that voting by proxy is more common on days Members are showing up or leaving town. Is it easier to get Covid on a Friday?

    GOP leader Kevin McCarthy said on Friday that the Republican House in January would repeal “proxy voting once and for all,” though it may not be easy to herd his colleagues back into the chamber now that they’ve grown accustomed to weighing in from afar.

    But the $1.65 trillion spending bill touches every corner of policy from education to national defense. The least elected officials could do is show up to debate the merits.

    ONLINE: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-house-pretends-to-calls-in-sick-congress-proxy-voting-nancy-pelosi-omnibus-bill-11671833628

    ———

    Dec. 22

    The Los Angeles Times on the U.S. Postal Service:

    It’s the time of year when we see a lot more mail trucks trundling through neighborhoods as letter carriers work hard to deliver everyone’s holiday cards and packages on time.

    But this season we have something new to celebrate: The U.S. Postal Service’s announcement this week that it will spend billions of dollars to buy tens of thousands of electric delivery vehicles over the next few years. It’s a victory in the fight against climate change and a welcome shift by an agency that until recently had intended to update its huge, aging fleet with another generation of gas guzzlers. It’s also a win for public health, as a growing number of zero-emission mail trucks will soon start to deliver not only letters and packages, but cleaner air to every corner of the nation.

    The Postal Service will buy 106,000 delivery vehicles by 2028, of which 66,000 will be electric, and plans to purchase zero-emission delivery trucks exclusively by 2026. The $9.6-billion plan is a dramatic change from earlier this year, when Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed during the Trump administration, planned to make only 10% of the next-generation fleet electric and add as many as 165,000 new gas-guzzling delivery trucks over the next decade that get less than 9 miles per gallon. That would have been a huge mistake considering these vehicles last 30 years and could be on the roads polluting the air and warming the climate into the 2060s.

    The Biden administration, which does not have direct control over the Postal Service, pushed back nonetheless. California, New York and more than a dozen other states filed suit in April to halt the purchase of gas-powered trucks, joining environmental groups in demanding investments in clean, zero-emission vehicles instead.

    California’s intervention “played a big part in stopping USPS from committing to decades of air pollution around the nation,” said Liane Randolph, who chairs the state Air Resources Board.

    While the Postal Service will need to do more to fully electrify its aging fleet of more than 220,000 vehicles, this move helps put us closer to achieving President Biden’s climate goals, including an order he issued last year for the federal government to purchase only zero-emission vehicles by 2035, and to do so by 2027 for light-duty vehicles. The nation’s largest vehicle fleet now has the potential to become its largest electric one too. Instead of lagging behind private-sector companies such as Amazon and FedEx, the Postal Service can help lead the way toward a zero-emission future.

    Mail delivery trucks are especially well-suited for electrification because they run defined, local routes with low daily mileage and have hours of operation that allow them to be easily recharged. Because these vehicles serve virtually every community, electrifying them will bring widespread benefits, curbing air pollution while reducing fuel and maintenance costs and our dependence on oil.

    It seems especially significant that something as ordinary and ubiquitous as the white mail truck will now help the nation blaze a trail toward a fossil-free future through every neighborhood in the country. And we won’t have to wait for years either. The new vehicles are expected to go into service on postal routes in late 2023.

    That’s a gift we should all welcome this holiday season and enjoy for years to come.

    ONLINE: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-12-22/postal-service-electric-vehicles

    ———

    Dec. 22

    The Guardian on Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington:

    President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s highly choreographed visit to Washington was a significant international moment. Not long ago, Mr. Zelenskyy had been adamant that his place was always on the frontline with his people. This week, however, he made a lightning trip in person, via Poland, to Washington itself, meeting President Joe Biden at the White House and delivering a primetime address to the U.S. Congress before heading back into his suffering country less than 24 hours later.

    The visit was much more than a Christmas celebration of Ukraine’s defiance and of Mr. Zelenskyy’s immense role in it. Instead, it was a political event with important future implications for Ukraine, the United States and Russia, and for the conflict more generally. It was clearly focused on what should happen in 2023 rather than what has happened already.

    Mr. Zelenskyy had three principal objectives. The first was to rally American and, by extension, global support. The second was to intervene at a pivotal moment in the war and in U.S. politics to advance that effort. The third was to make an ambitious pitch for even more financial and military support from the only state that is in a position to supply it, and thus to strengthen Ukraine’s resistance during a bitter winter, with the prospect of fresh fighting in the spring.

    In public, Mr. Zelenskyy produced another media-savvy performance, especially in his address to Congress. He spent every hour in Washington in his iconic olive-green fatigues, and emphasized the immediacy of his cause by presenting Congress with a battlefield Ukrainian flag that he had collected from soldiers on the frontline in Bakhmut on Tuesday. He skillfully mixed gratitude with fresh requests for support. U.S. aid and support was not charity, he insisted, but an investment in the “global security and democracy” for which the U.S. and its allies stand.

    It is clear that the Biden administration agrees with that. The deeper questions of the visit, however, are how urgently Washington wants that investment to bear fruit and what price it is willing to pay. Weapons and money are the twin keys to the answer. Mr. Biden and his aides will have assured Mr. Zelenskyy that the U.S. wants Russia to be defeated in Ukraine. But they will also have told him that they do not want a wider conflict and that they may have a different definition of what defeat could look like.

    The toughest arguments behind closed doors will have focused on Ukraine’s demands for more and better weaponry, and on the terms to be set for ending the conflict. At home, though, finance is an even bigger political issue for Mr. Biden. The U.S. has already spent more than $48bn on humanitarian, financial and military support; another $2bn in military aid was announced during the visit. The administration also aims to get another aid package, worth almost $45bn, through Congress before the Republicans take over the House of Representatives in January.

    The US domestic political question is whether bipartisan support continues in January. Mr. Zelenskyy’s visit was in large part directed towards ensuring that it does. But the real issues this week will have been military and strategic. Russia is preparing a fresh ground assault, perhaps during winter. Another Ukrainian counterattack is expected too. Mr. Zelenskyy is the hero of the hour. But Washington is increasingly looking towards an endgame in 2023. The end of the conflict is increasingly in the US’s hands, not just those of Russia and Ukraine.

    Some on both sides of the Atlantic made the comparison between Mr. Zelenskyy’s wartime flight from Kyiv this week and Winston Churchill’s visit to Washington after Pearl Harbor in 1941. For that comparison to be intellectually useful rather than merely sentimental, it is important to remember that Churchill’s visit marked the moment in the second world war when the U.S. began to take charge of the allied cause in Europe. The same thing may be true this time over Ukraine.

    ONLINE: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/22/the-guardian-view-on-zelenskiy-in-washington-a-pivotal-moment

    Source link

  • NY Rep.-elect Santos admits lying about career, college

    NY Rep.-elect Santos admits lying about career, college

    Rep.-elect George Santos, R-N.Y., admitted Monday that he lied about his job experience and college education during his successful campaign for a seat in the U.S. House.

    Scott Olson | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Rep.-elect George Santos, R-N.Y., admitted Monday that he lied about his job experience and college education during his successful campaign for a seat in the U.S. House.

    In an interview with the New York Post, Santos said: “My sins here are embellishing my resume. I’m sorry.”

    He also told the newspaper: “I campaigned talking about the people’s concerns, not my resume” and added, “I intend to deliver on the promises I made during the campaign.”

    The New York Times raised questions last week about the life story that Santos, 34, had presented during his campaign.

    The Queens resident had said he had obtained a degree from Baruch College in New York, but the school said that couldn’t be confirmed.

    On Monday, Santos acknowledged: “I didn’t graduate from any institution of higher learning. I’m embarrassed and sorry for having embellished my resume.”

    He added: “I own up to that. … We do stupid things in life.”

    Santos had also said he had worked for Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, but neither company could find any records verifying that.

    Santos told the Post he had “never worked directly” for either financial firm, saying he had used a “poor choice of words.”

    He told the Post that Link Bridge, an investment company where he was a vice president, did business with both.

    Another news outlet, the Jewish American site The Forward, had questioned a claim on Santos’ campaign website that his grandparents “fled Jewish persecution in Ukraine, settled in Belgium, and again fled persecution during WWII.”

    “I never claimed to be Jewish,” Santos told the Post. “I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was ‘Jew-ish.’”

    Santos first ran for Congress in 2020 and lost. He ran again in 2022 and won in the district that includes some Long Island suburbs and a small part of Queens.

    Source link

  • NY Rep.-elect Santos admits lying about career, college

    NY Rep.-elect Santos admits lying about career, college

    WASHINGTON — Rep.-elect George Santos, R-N.Y., admitted Monday that he lied about his job experience and college education during his successful campaign for a seat in the U.S. House.

    In an interview with the New York Post, Santos said: “My sins here are embellishing my resume. I’m sorry.”

    He also told the newspaper: “I campaigned talking about the people’s concerns, not my resume” and added, “I intend to deliver on the promises I made during the campaign.”

    The New York Times raised questions last week about the life story that Santos, 34, had presented during his campaign.

    The Queens resident had said he had obtained a degree from Baruch College in New York, but the school said that couldn’t be confirmed.

    On Monday, Santos acknowledged: “I didn’t graduate from any institution of higher learning. I’m embarrassed and sorry for having embellished my resume.”

    He added: “I own up to that. … We do stupid things in life.”

    Santos had also said he had worked for Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, but neither company could find any records verifying that.

    Santos told the Post he had “never worked directly” for either financial firm, saying he had used a “poor choice of words.”

    He told the Post that Link Bridge, an investment company where he was a vice president, did business with both.

    Another news outlet, the Jewish American site The Forward, had questioned a claim on Santos’ campaign website that his grandparents “fled Jewish persecution in Ukraine, settled in Belgium, and again fled persecution during WWII.”

    “I never claimed to be Jewish,” Santos told the Post. “I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was ‘Jew-ish.’”

    Santos first ran for Congress in 2020 and lost. He ran again in 2022 and won in the district that includes some Long Island suburbs and a small part of Queens.

    Source link

  • Jan. 6 committee transcripts show link between Trump and Nevada fake electors

    Jan. 6 committee transcripts show link between Trump and Nevada fake electors

    New transcripts of closed-door testimony to the Jan. 6 House committee show Donald Trump and his allies had a direct hand in the Nevada Republican Party’s scheme to send a phony electoral certificate to Congress in 2020 in a last-ditch attempt to keep the former president in power.

    The documents made public Wednesday evening included interviews with state party leader Michael McDonald and Republican National Committeeman Jim DeGraffenreid in February. Both men served as fake electors in Carson City on Dec. 14, 2020.

    That day, six Nevada GOP members signed certificates falsely stating that Trump won Nevada in 2020 and sent them to Congress and the National Archives, where they were ultimately ignored. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol is digging into the role that these fake electors in key battleground states had in Trump’s attempt to cling to power after his 2020 defeat.

    McDonald and DeGraffenreid invoked Fifth Amendment protection hundreds of times in their separate interviews with the Jan. 6 committee, refusing to answer questions about their involvement and the extent to which Trump’s top allies had helped in orchestrating the plot.

    But the transcripts still provide a view into the Trump team’s coordinated efforts in Nevada to overturn the results of the election — efforts that included direct communication between McDonald and the president himself.

    According to the transcript of McDonald’s interview, on Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election, McDonald said in a text exchange, “I have been on the phone this morning with the President (Trump), Eric Trump, Mark Meadows, and Rudy Giuliani. There is a major plan.”

    “They want full attack mode,” McDonald later wrote in another text message describing that call. “We’re gonna have a war room meeting in about an hour.”

    Both McDonald and DeGraffenreid turned over their communications to the Jan. 6 committee related to the fake elector scheme. The FBI also seized McDonald’s cellphone in June as part of an investigation into the scheme.

    Those documents, detailed at length in the transcripts, included text messages, emails and internal memorandums distributed by the national GOP arm; handwritten charts, templates for press releases and the phony certificate itself; and talking points “explaining the rationale for the electors.”

    The planning was extensive, the transcripts show, and began as early as four days before the election, when state party officials began discussing whether Nevada’s Republican secretary of state, Barbara Cegavske, would sign off on the alternate slate of electors.

    DeGraffenreid, in a text conversation with party officials, said Cegavske “might do a lot of things, but sending a slate of Republican electors without them being clearly the winners of the popular vote is not one of them.”

    Cegavske ultimately certified President Joe Biden’s victory in Nevada, defending the results as reliable and accurate despite attacks from Trump and others within her own party, which led the Nevada Republican Party to censure her. She later conducted an investigation that found no credible evidence of widespread voter fraud throughout the state.

    Meanwhile, the day before the slate of fake electors met, the transcripts show McDonald grew increasingly frustrated with the RNC’s direction over how to conduct the certificate signing. It appeared that he had gone back and forth with the RNC about logistics of the ceremony: the location, how they would publicize it and what they would say in their speeches.

    “RNC essentially put us in a box on what we can say, but doesn’t sound too bad,” Shawn Meehan, one of the fake electors, said in a text to DeGraffenreid.

    Meehan also told DeGraffenreid that McDonald wanted a smaller group that would plan the final details over breakfast, and that he is “stressing on the optics.” It was visible to several of the fake electors — that same day, another fake elector had texted DeGraffenreid that McDonald was upset with “mixed messages and direction on publicity for tomorrow.”

    “He’s very concerned RNC will cut cord if it looks bad and steal credit if we do well,” Meehan messaged.

    “I know,” DeGraffenreid responded. “He’s concerned that we look like foolish crybabies.”

    Ultimately, the Nevada Republican Party would press forward, and after nearly two months of planning, McDonald, DeGraffenreid and the other fake electors gathered outside the Capitol building in Carson City for a ceremony.

    “History made today in Carson City, Nevada,” the state party would write on social media after the ceremony, “as @McDonaldNV leads our electors in casting Nevada’s 6 electoral votes for the winner of Nevada, @realDonaldTrump and @Mike_Pence!”

    McDonald did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday evening. A lawyer for DeGraffenreid said he declined to comment.

    The nine-member committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot will dissolve when Republicans take over the House next month. The committee on Thursday released its full 800-plus page report of its 18-month investigation, which they hope will lead to criminal charges against Trump and his key allies.

    Source link

  • Feds: Jan. 6 participant arrested after California standoff

    Feds: Jan. 6 participant arrested after California standoff

    A participant in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol has been taken into custody in Southern California after an hours-long standoff

    LOS ANGELES — A participant in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol was taken into custody Thursday in Southern California after an hours-long standoff, authorities said.

    Eric Christie, 56, was arrested in the Sherman Oaks neighborhood of the San Fernando Valley, according to Laura Eimiller, an FBI spokesperson.

    He initially refused to comply with federal agents’ orders but surrendered without incident after three hours of negotiations, Eimiller said. She would not comment whether he was armed during the standoff.

    Video and photographs from the insurrection, discovered by online sleuths, show Christie at the Capitol last year, wrapped in a rainbow flag with a hammer attached to his belt, court documents state. A video captured Christie yelling “this is our Capitol” into a bullhorn while the crowd rushes into the Capitol as police attempted to keep them back.

    Christie’s arrest came the same day as the House Jan. 6 committee released its final report, concluding an 18-month investigation, asserting that Donald Trump criminally engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election and failed to act to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol.

    Christie faces federal charges of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly weapon, as well as disorderly or disruptive conduct in restricted building or grounds with a deadly weapon, according to court documents.

    It was not immediately clear whether he had an attorney who could speak on his behalf. He is scheduled to appear in court Friday afternoon. NBC News first reported Christie’s arrest.

    Source link

  • House passes $1.7 trillion spending bill in sprint to avert government shutdown

    House passes $1.7 trillion spending bill in sprint to avert government shutdown

    Washington — The House on Friday passed the $1.7 trillion government spending bill a day after the Senate approved it, in their late scramble to clear the package and stave off a partial government shutdown just before the Christmas holiday.

    The vote was 225 to 201, with one Democrat, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, voting present and one Democrat voting against it, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Nine Republicans voted in favor of the bill. 

    Soon after the vote, President Joe Biden released a statement saying he’d sign it “as soon as it reaches my desk.” To allow time for the bill to be enrolled, that is, certified by the clerk of the House or the secretary of the Senate, Congress also passed a continuing resolution to extend funding of the government by a week to prevent a partial shutdown. Mr. Biden signed the short-term extension Friday afternoon.

    Before the vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in what she said was likely her last floor speech as speaker, touted the bill’s spending for veterans, aid to Ukraine and its reforms to the Electoral Count Act. 

    “This is truly a package for the people,” Pelosi said. 

    House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who is running to be speaker when Republicans take control of the House in January, attacked the bill because it “spends too much” and predicted it would “[fuel] inflation.” He called it a “monstrosity” and said it “is one of the most shameful acts I’ve ever seen in this body.”

    Pelosi, in her floor speech, fired back at McCarthy for this remark, saying, “I can’t help but wonder, had he forgotten Jan. 6?”

    U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) leaves the House floor on Capitol Hill
    U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) leaves the House floor amid work on passage of the omnibus spending bill, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., Dec. 23, 2022.

    EVELYN HOCKSTEIN / REUTERS


    The bill passed the Senate on Thursday, 68 to 29, easily clearing the 60-vote threshold with backing from 18 Republicans. If the omnibus bill had not passed, funding for federal agencies would have run out by midnight Friday.

    Final passage in the Senate came hours after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced an agreement to complete work on the package in the coming hours. He urged senators not to stray far from the Senate chamber in order to hasten the process, since they voted first on a slew of amendments.

    “It’s taken a while but it is worth it,” he said. “We know the storm is coming, we want to have people both get the bill done but then be able to go home once we have done our work.”

    The breakthrough came after the sweeping plan to fund federal agencies through Sept. 30 was held up by an issue related to Title 42, the pandemic-era measure that allowed for the expulsion of migrants on public-health grounds. Republicans have sought to extend the measure, which was set to expire Wednesday, before Chief Justice John Roberts granted a temporary pause pending further legal action on ending Title 42. The Department of Justice countered by asking the court to quash the GOP bid to extend the measure. 

    The Senate’s consideration of the mammoth measure began hours after its text, spanning more than 4,100 pages, was unveiled by appropriations leaders in both chambers early Tuesday morning. The culmination of months of bipartisan, bicameral negotiations, the legislation funds federal agencies through fiscal year 2023, which ends Sept. 30.

    President Of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky Addresses Congress
    Antiwar protesters demonstrate outside the U.S. Capitol as President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky is set to deliver an address before a joint meeting of Congress, on December 21, 2022 in Washington, D.C. 

    Drew Angerer/Getty Images


    The spending plan includes $772.5 billion for domestic priorities, and $858 billion for defense. The bill also includes roughly $40 billion in disaster relief for communities recovering from hurricanes, wildfires, drought and other natural disasters, reforms to the Electoral Count Act and a ban on TikTok on federal agencies’ devices, among a slew of other projects for lawmakers. 

    The Senate approved amendments to the spending bill that protect nursing mothers, allow the U.S. to transfer proceeds from seized Russian oligarch assets to Ukraine, and require employers to provide “reasonable accommodations” for pregnant women in the workplace. 

    Crucially, and as Russia continues its attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the package provides an additional $45 billion in emergency assistance for Ukraine in its continued fight against Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed a joint meeting of Congress Wednesday night at the U.S. Capitol, and urged Congress to pass the extra funding.

    “It is in your power really to help us bring to justice everyone who started this unprovoked and criminal war,” Zelenskyy told Congress. “Let’s do it.”

    Zelenskyy’s surprise visit, his first time outside of Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in February, was a daring one, given the multiple attempts on his life since the war began.

    But his appearance also came in the waning days of the current Congress, which has been steadfast in the need for the U.S. to provide military, humanitarian and economic assistance to Ukraine. With Republicans poised to take control of the House next month, and some GOP lawmakers questioning the need for continued funding for Ukraine, it’s uncertain whether another emergency relief package would clear both chambers.

    Ahead of Zelenskyy’s speech, Schumer said that when he met with the Ukrainian president, he “made clear that without this aid package, the Ukrainians will be in trouble and could even lose the war.”

    The upper chamber voted Tuesday night to advance the legislation, with backing from a wide margin of Senate Republicans. Still, GOP senators have objected to the size of the package and speed with which it’s being moved through Congress, arguing they were given little time to read through a bill spanning more than 4,000 pages. 

    Support from at least 10 GOP senators was needed for it to clear the Senate before the plan is taken up by the House, and 21 Republicans voted to begin debate on the measure Tuesday.

    In an 11th-hour attempt to deter Senate Republicans from voting in favor of the legislation, known as an omnibus bill, a group of 31 House Republicans sent a letter to their colleagues threatening to oppose the legislative priorities of any GOP senator who supported the package.

    “Voting in favor of this bill is a dereliction of our duty on all counts,” they warned.

    Still, Senate leaders praised the deal reached by Democratic and Republican appropriations leaders in both chambers, the last brokered by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama before they retire.

    The omnibus spending package was the final bill taken up by the Democrat-controlled Congress, and lawmakers faced a Friday deadline to approve funding for federal agencies or suffer a partial government shutdown. President Biden signed into law last week a short-term extension of government funding, which allowed lawmakers to continue negotiating the details of the $1.7 trillion plan.

    Adding to the urgency for Congress was the approaching winter storm that has begun to snarl holiday travel. Schumer on Wednesday pushed the Senate to move quickly and warned senators against slowing down the process.

    “I urge my colleagues not to stand in the way of moving this process forward,” he said. “Nobody wants a shutdown. Nobody benefits from a shutdown, and so I hope nobody here will delay this process to fund government ASAP.”

    While Republicans in the House and Senate balked at the package’s size and had been pushing for spending talks to be pushed to January, when the party takes control of the House and can demand spending cuts, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called for its approval.

    “This is an impressive outcome for the Republican negotiators, and more importantly, it is the outcome that our country actually needs to keep helping Ukraine and our other friends, to keep out innovating and outcompeting Russia and China and to keep our brave men and women in uniform equipped with the best training, tools, and technologies the world has ever seen,” he said on the Senate floor Tuesday.

    The White House, too, supports the package and said in a statement it includes investments that advance a range of national priorities and advocated its passage.

    “This bipartisan legislation demonstrates once more that both parties can come together to deliver for the American people and make progress on critical priorities for the nation,” it said. “The bill advances cutting-edge research on cancer and other diseases, makes communities safer, delivers for America’s veterans, supports the Ukrainian people, helps communities recovering from devastating natural disasters, invests in child care and education, and more.”

    Source link

  • New details emerge from transcripts of Jan. 6 committee’s witness interviews

    New details emerge from transcripts of Jan. 6 committee’s witness interviews

    New details emerge from transcripts of Jan. 6 committee’s witness interviews – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol is set to release its final report, and has also released transcripts of its interviews with key witnesses. CBS News congressional correspondent Nikole Killion has the latest from Capitol Hill. Then, CBS News chief election and campaign correspondent Robert Costa joined John Dickerson on “Prime Time” to discuss what we’ve learned from the transcripts.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    Source link

  • Today in History: December 20, Louisiana Purchase completed

    Today in History: December 20, Louisiana Purchase completed

    Today in History

    Today is Tuesday, Dec. 20, the 354th day of 2022. There are 11 days left in the year.

    Today’s Highlight in History:

    On Dec. 20, 1803, the Louisiana Purchase was completed as ownership of the territory was formally transferred from France to the United States.

    On this date:

    In 1860, South Carolina became the first state to secede from the Union as all 169 delegates to a special convention in Charleston voted in favor of separation.

    In 1864, Confederate forces evacuated Savannah, Georgia, as Union Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman nearly completed his “March to the Sea.”

    In 1945, the Office of Price Administration announced the end of tire rationing, effective Jan. 1, 1946.

    In 1963, the Berlin Wall was opened for the first time to West Berliners, who were allowed one-day visits to relatives in the Eastern sector for the holidays.

    In 1987, more than 4,300 people were killed when the Dona Paz (DOHN’-yuh pahz), a Philippine passenger ship, collided with the tanker Vector off Mindoro island.

    In 1989, the United States launched Operation Just Cause, sending troops into Panama to topple the government of Gen. Manuel Noriega.

    In 1995, an American Airlines Boeing 757 en route to Cali, Colombia, slammed into a mountain, killing all but four of the 163 people aboard. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, NATO began its peacekeeping mission, taking over from the United Nations.

    In 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that homosexual couples were entitled to the same benefits and protections as wedded heterosexual couples.

    In 2001, the U.N. Security Council authorized a multinational force for Afghanistan.

    In 2002, Trent Lott resigned as Senate Republican leader two weeks after igniting a political firestorm with racially charged remarks.

    In 2005, a federal judge ruled that “intelligent design” could not be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, delivering a stinging attack on the Dover Area School Board.

    In 2016, President Barack Obama designated the bulk of U.S.-owned waters in the Arctic Ocean and certain areas in the Atlantic Ocean as indefinitely off limits to future oil and gas leasing. Two-time Wimbledon champion Petra Kvitova was injured in her playing hand by a knife-wielding attacker at her Czech Republic home and underwent surgery. (The attacker was sentenced to 11 years in prison.)

    Ten years ago: The State Department acknowledged major weaknesses in security and errors in judgment exposed in a scathing independent report on the deadly Sept. 11, 2012 assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya. The National Hockey League, in a labor fight with its players, announced the cancellation of the 2012-13 regular-season schedule through Jan. 14, 2013.

    Five years ago: The House gave final congressional approval to a $1.5 trillion tax overhaul, the biggest package of tax changes in a generation and the first major legislative achievement of President Donald Trump and House and Senate Republicans; some Republicans warned of a potential backlash against an overhaul that offered corporations and wealthy taxpayers the biggest benefits. Cardinal Bernard Law, the disgraced former archbishop of Boston, died in Rome at the age of 86; his failure to stop child molesters in the priesthood had triggered a crisis in American Catholicism.

    One year ago: In a major step to fight climate change, the Biden administration raised vehicle mileage standards to significantly reduce emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases. Warning that extremism in the ranks was increasing, Pentagon officials issued detailed new rules prohibiting service members from actively engaging in extremist activities. Federal health officials said the omicron variant had accounted for an estimated 73% of new U.S. coronavirus infections in the preceding week. CBS and Universal Television said actor Chris Noth would no longer be part of the CBS series “The Equalizer” in the wake of sexual assault allegations against him; Noth had vehemently denied the allegations.

    Today’s Birthdays: Original Mouseketeer Tommy Cole (TV: “The Mickey Mouse Club”) is 81. R&B singer-musician Walter “Wolfman” Washington is 79. Rock musician-music producer Bobby Colomby is 78. Rock musician Peter Criss is 77. Former U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue is 76. Psychic/illusionist Uri Geller is 76. Producer Dick Wolf (“Law & Order”) is 76. Rock musician Alan Parsons is 74. Actor Jenny Agutter is 70. Actor Michael Badalucco is 68. Actor Blanche Baker is 66. Rock singer Billy Bragg is 65. Rock singer-musician Mike Watt (The Secondmen, Minutemen, fIREHOSE) is 65. Actor Joel Gretsch is 59. Country singer Kris Tyler is 58. Rock singer Chris Robinson is 56. Actor Nicole deBoer is 52. Movie director Todd Phillips is 52. Singer David Cook (“American Idol”) is 40. Actor Jonah Hill is 39. Actor Bob Morley is 38. Singer JoJo is 32. Actor Colin Woodell is 31.

    Source link

  • House Democrats introduce bill to bar Trump from office under 14th Amendment

    House Democrats introduce bill to bar Trump from office under 14th Amendment

    Poll shows Trump favorability declining among GOP


    Poll shows Trump favorability declining among GOP

    04:06

    House Democrats on Thursday introduced legislation that would bar former President Donald Trump from holding any federal office in the future, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. 

    The legislation is spearheaded by Democratic Rep. David Cicilline, of Rhode Island, who was a House manager for Trump’s second impeachment, and the bill also has 40 co-sponsors, all Democrats. It cites the provision in the 14th Amendment that says no one who has held government office and who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” shall be able to hold federal office again.

    “Donald Trump very clearly engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 with the intention of overturning the lawful and fair results of the 2020 election,” Cicilline argued in a statement. “You don’t get to lead a government you tried to destroy. Even Mitch McConnell admits that Trump bears responsibility, saying on the Senate floor that ‘[t]here’s no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day.’”

    “The 14th Amendment makes clear that based on his past behavior, Donald Trump is disqualified from ever holding federal office again and, under Section 5, Congress has the power to pass legislation to implement this prohibition,” Cicilline continued. 

    The legislation goes into detail about how Trump pushed then-Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the election results, failed to do anything to denounce the mob assaulting the Capitol for hours, and intervened with government officials who didn’t support his false claims of mass election fraud, among other things.  

    The bill would need to pass both chambers of Congress, with only days before Republicans take control of the House and a substantial end-of-year agenda remaining. The legislation drops as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol prepares to release its final report next week. That committee is only authorized to operation until the end of the year. 

    Source link

  • Short-term government funding bill passes House, heads to Senate

    Short-term government funding bill passes House, heads to Senate

    Washington — The House approved a short-term measure Wednesday night that extends funding for federal agencies for one week, giving Congress additional time to finish crafting a massive longer-term spending package. The vote was 224-201, with nine Republicans joining Democrats. 

    House Democrats unveiled the text of the bill, known as a continuing resolution, on Tuesday, amid bicameral, bipartisan efforts to reach consensus on the broader proposal to fund the U.S. government through most of 2023. House and Senate negotiators had announced Tuesday night that they had agreed to a framework that provides a path to negotiate the final details of the roughly $1.7 trillion omnibus spending package.

    The current stopgap funding measure expires Dec. 16, and lawmakers must act before then to stave off a partial government shutdown. Republican leaders in the House urged their members to vote against the legislation, calling it an “attempt to buy additional time for a massive lame-duck spending bill in which House Republicans have had no seat at the negotiating table.”

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Congress needs to pass the temporary funding bill “ASAP,” and noted the Senate should be prepared to “act quickly” after House passage. 

    Approving legislation that keeps federal agencies operating is one of the must-pass items on Congress’ legislative to-do list before the end of the year. House and Senate Appropriations leaders from both parties have urged the adoption of the package funding the government through the end of the fiscal year, Sept. 30, and have expressed optimism toward reaching a deal on the legislation.

    Schumer cheered the announcement that negotiators coalesced around the framework, saying in remarks on the Senate floor it was “welcome and important news.”

    “Congress now has a roadmap for funding the government before the conclusion of the 117th Congress, something the large majority of us want to see,” he said. “We still have a long way to go, but a framework is a big step in the right direction.”

    Schumer said the year-long package will ensure bills approved by Congress this year, such as a plan to boost domestic production of semiconductor chips and a law that extends health care benefits to veterans who developed illnesses because of their exposure to toxic substances from burn pits on U.S. military bases, are funded and implemented. 

    “A CR will not fund these bills, but an omnibus agreement will, and they were all bipartisan with large support from both sides of the aisle,” he said.

    The details of the framework for the omnibus spending package were not announced, but the two sides have been at odds over domestic spending levels for the next fiscal year. Republicans have been opposed to boosting spending for domestic programs, citing increases through other laws enacted this year such as Democrats’ sweeping climate, health care and tax package. GOP negotiators have also been pushing for defense spending to match the $858 billion set in a defense policy bill approved by the House last week.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell indicated Tuesday the omnibus spending package would meet the funding level set in the defense authorization bill, and said he believed negotiators were getting “very close” to a long-term measure that would be “broadly appealing.”

    Still, he set a deadline of Dec. 22 for Congress to pass the legislative package, as Republicans did not plan on returning to Washington between Christmas and New Year’s. If lawmakers fail to pass the sweeping plan, McConnell said Republicans would be “happy” to pass another short-term bill that funds the government into early 2023.

    McConnell also warned Democrats on Wednesday not to stray from the framework and add provisions to the omnibus package that would drive away Republican support.

    “It will take seriousness and good faith on both sides to produce actual legislation that follows the framework,” he said on the Senate floor. “Poison pills, especially far-left demands to overturn longstanding and commonsense policy riders, will need to stay away from the process. And even then the calendar will still make this a challenging sprint.”

    With Republicans poised to take over the House in the next Congress, Democrats are working to get the omnibus plan across the finish line to avoid GOP lawmakers cutting some of President Biden’s priorities from a package.

    The president has asked lawmakers to provide nearly $40 billion for Ukraine in the war against Russia and $10 billion to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and other infectious diseases. Schumer has pledged to include emergency aid to Ukraine in an omnibus package, as well as legislation reforming the Electoral Count Act.

    “If we can come to an agreement on an omnibus, I am optimistic that these bills, which are so important to Democrats and Republicans alike — the ECA and funding for Ukraine — can become law,” he said.

    But some House Republicans have expressed opposition to approving more money for Ukraine, making it uncertain whether a GOP-led House would pass a funding bill that included emergency assistance for the country. GOP lawmakers have also long been opposed to more pandemic-related funding.

    Still, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican appropriator in the Senate, suggested in a statement he believes the framework agreement reached Tuesday night would allow Congress to meet McConnell’s timeline.

    “If all goes well, we should be able to finish an omnibus appropriations package by December 23rd,” he said.

    Source link

  • Lawmakers announce ‘framework’ on bill to keep gov’t open

    Lawmakers announce ‘framework’ on bill to keep gov’t open

    WASHINGTON — Lawmakers leading the negotiations on a bill to fund the federal government for the current fiscal year announced late Tuesday they’ve reached agreement on a “framework” that should allow them to complete work on the bill over the next week and avoid a government shutdown.

    Congress faces a midnight Friday deadline to pass a spending bill to prevent a partial government shutdown. The two chambers are expected to pass another short-term measure before then to keep the government running through Dec. 23, which will allow negotiators time to complete work on the full-year bill.

    “Now, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees will work around the clock to negotiate the details of final 2023 spending bills that can be supported by the House and Senate and receive President Biden’s signature,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the Democratic chair of the House Appropriations Committee.

    Earlier in the day, Senate leaders said lawmakers from the two parties were nearing an agreement, but Republicans warned Democrats that lawmakers would need to complete their work by Dec. 22 or they would only support a short-term extension into early next year. That would give House Republicans more leverage over what’s in the legislation, since they will be in the majority then.

    “We intend to be on the road going home on the 23rd. We intend not to be back here between Christmas and New Year’s, and if we can’t meet that deadline, we would be happy to pass a short-term (resolution) into early next year,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader in the Senate.

    McConnell voiced confidence Republicans would be able to meet their priorities of increasing spending on defense without “having to pay a bonus above what President Biden asked for” on non-defense priorities. He said Democrats were willing to accept that because they had previously passed two bills on a party-line basis that allow for more government spending on various domestic priorities.

    Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said last week that the two parties were about $25 billion apart in what is expected to be about a $1.65 trillion package, not including mandatory spending on programs such as Social Security and Medicare. However, Democrats in their statements did not indicate what topline spending number had been reached in the framework announced Tuesday.

    Source link