Ugggghhh. No fun commentary this week. The guesses were as bad as the game. @jcbraam gets the win with a 14 (but that's like being the best looking corpse) and @jerrybed shows up for the first time in the two year history of GTS to post a 15 and second place. No one else was within 20 points. Bloodbath on the field and on the screen. Don't go Helton and review the film. Just put a bullet in it and move on.

@cramwetzel maintains first overall, but everyone's season score takes a beating.

12 receptions...124 yards...1 TD.

A big reason the Lions are in 1st place...along with the play of Goff.

There Is Still No Freeze on the $6B Biden Transferred to Iran, via Qatar​

Andrew C. McCarthyOctober 16, 2023 2:09 PM
Qatar's prime minister and foreign minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, right, and U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken make statements in Doha, Qatar, October 13, 2023. (Jacquelyn Martin/Pool via Reuters)none

Contrary to Biden-administration spin, to media repetition of same, and thus to popular belief, the $6 billion as to which President Biden waived sanctions — on September 11 of all days— so that it could be transferred to Qatar for Iran’s benefit has not been “refrozen.”

Commentators should stop saying that the Biden administration, under pressure from Republicans and other critics, got Qatar to accept a rescission of the waiver and deny Iran access to the funds. It’s not true.

To recap, the $6 billion was generated by Iranian oil sales to South Korea. Biden’s ability to freeze the money so it would be inaccessible to Iran ended when he formally waived the sanctions. At that point, the $6 billion was transferred from South Korea, which had been honoring the sanctions, to Iran’s close ally, Qatar — with the explicit understanding that the sanctions were no longer applicable.

The new arrangement was that Qatar would possess the funds and manage their disbursement. Iran would not have access to the money in the sense of possessing it. Instead, Tehran would ask Doha to draw on the funds to make direct payments to third-party (non–Iranian government) suppliers of humanitarian goods and services. The United States would monitor these transactions to satisfy itself that the disbursements were for legitimate, humanitarian purposes and that Iran was not redirecting the funds to unapproved or nefarious purposes. But this was a political arrangement: The Biden administration could protest if it disapproved of a disbursement, but there is no indication that the U.S. had the authority to halt any disbursement that Qatar decided to make on Iran’s behalf.

To summarize again: Biden had the authority to halt disbursements by keeping the $6 billion frozen in South Korea; he forfeited that authority when he ceded control to Qatar.

Judge Tanya Chutkan forbade Trump from making statements about potential witnesses or making disparaging comments about the prosecutors.


By Ryan J. Reilly and Daniel Barnes

WASHINGTON — The judge overseeing the federal election interference case on Monday issued a partial gag order on former President Donald Trump, forbidding him from making statements about potential witnesses or making disparaging comments about the prosecutors.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan said she would not impose restrictions on Trump's statements about Washington, D.C., and its residence, nor on statements criticizing the government or the Justice Department generally. But she imposed a restriction on all parties, including Trump, that banned them from making or reposting any statements publicly targeting the special counsel, his staff, as well as court staff or personnel.

"I cannot imagine any other criminal case" in which a criminal defendant could call prosecutors deranged or a thug, Chutkan said. “No other defendant would be allowed to do so and I’m not going to allow it in this case."

Chutkan said Trump could make statements about one of his Republican rivals, Mike Pence, but could not speak about his role in the case. Chutkan said Trump did not have a right to launch a smear campaign against witnesses, prosecutors, and court staff.

Special counsel Jack Smith, who brought the federal election interference case against Trump in August, was seeking a narrow gag order against Trump to "protect the integrity of the trial and the jury pool." Trump's team, absent evidence, has argued that the Biden administration is trying to silence the former president's speech during the 2024 presidential campaign.

Prosecutors and Trump's defense attorney appeared before Chutkan at a hearing in Washington, D.C. on Monday morning. Trump was not present at the hearing. The trial is scheduled for March 2024.

Chutkan laughed after Trump’s lawyer John Lauro argued that the current conditions are working, saying she disagreed before she went through some of Trump's statements one by one. Chutakn said Trump "doesn’t” have unfettered First Amendment rights, and that there's "no question" that the court is entitled to draw restrictions to ensure the fair administration of justice.

Chutkan said she had concerns about the breadth of the proposed order presented by Smith's office. But Molly Gaston of the special counsel's office said Trump "can criticize President Biden to his heart’s content" because Biden had nothing to do with the case.

Trump posted on his Truth Social platform during the hearing, saying, “The TRUMP GAG ORDER that the CORRUPT Biden Administration is trying to obtain is totally Unconstitutional!”

Trump, prosecutors said in a filing ahead of the hearing, wants "special treatment, asserting that because he is a political candidate, he should have free rein to publicly intimidate witnesses and malign the Court, citizens of this District, and prosecutors." But in this case, they wrote, Trump should be treated like any criminal defendant.


Trump's team has argued that the proposed gag order is politically motivated.

“At bottom, the Proposed Gag Order is nothing more than an obvious attempt by the Biden Administration to unlawfully silence its most prominent political opponent, who has now taken a commanding lead in the polls,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in a brief filed last month.

Trump’s team sought to delay the trial until 2026, and Smith’s team wanted jury selection in the case to begin this year, but Chutkan set a trial date for March 4, 2024, the day before “Super Tuesday,” when primary voters in several states cast their ballots.

Chutkan, who has received threats in connection with her oversight of the case, previously warned Trump about talking about the case in a way that could cause witness intimidation or impact the proceedings.

“Mr. Trump, like every American, has a First Amendment right to free speech,” Chutkan said. ‘But that right is not absolute.”

Trump, Chutkan said at an August hearing, “is a criminal defendant,” and would “have restrictions like every other defendant.” Trump’s defense, she said, “is supposed to happen in this courtroom, not on the internet. And to the extent your client wants to make statements on the internet, they always have to yield to witness security and witness safety.”

In a separate civil trial in New York, a judge ordered Trump to delete a disparaging post about a member of the judge's staff.

“Personal attacks on members of my court staff are unacceptable, inappropriate and I won’t tolerate it,” said Judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing the New York attorney general's fraud lawsuit against Trump, his company, and his two adult sons. “Consider this a gag order on all parties with respect to posting or publicly speaking about any member of my staff."

Just having some fun here...

Clemson students protest removal of tampons from men’s restroom
NY Post ^ | 10/14/2023 | Alyssa Guzman

A group of Clemson University students protested the removal of tampon dispensers from the men’s library bathrooms in response to a conservative student group’s complaints.

Holding brightly colored signs reading “Destigmatize menstruation” and “Hello, it’s the 21st century,” around 50 students demonstrated on campus Wednesday to demand school administrators reinstall the feminine hygiene dispensers.

The dispensers were removed after the Clemson College Republicans complained they were found inside the library’s men’s bathrooms.

“If you weren’t aware already, Clemson University has tampon/pad dispensers in the MEN’S restrooms located in Cooper Library. We truly live in a [clown] world,” the student group posted on X on Sept. 13.

Take Back Pride, who organized the protest, said the sanitary products were “unjustly” removed from the restrooms and are asking for them to be reinstalled, as well as for the College Republicans be reprimanded for their role in the removal, according to College Fix.

“Queer people on this campus are not just going to magically disappear,” student organizer Pan Tankersley told the College Fix.

“So instead of working against us, like taking away menstrual products from the men’s bathrooms, making people feel unwelcomed, there should be support for the community that is already fighting to feel safe here.

“If anything, the university needs to step up and needs to protect its students.”

Biden interviewed as part of special counsel investigation into handling of classified documents

President Biden has been interviewed as part of an independent investigation into his handling of classified documents, a possible sign that the probe is nearing its end. Special counsel Robert Hur is examining the improper retention of classified documents by Biden from his time as a senator and as vice president that were found at his Delaware home and a private office that he used before becoming president.

Tellingly, the documents do not appear to have been intentionally smuggled, stuffed into a bathroom, and then waved about in front of guests regularly. More importantly, Biden is fully cooperating with investigators, rather than ordering minions to hide boxes of secret papers, destroy evidence, and generally obstruct justice.

TOO LATE!!!

Under pressure, Trump changes his tune on Israel, Netanyahu​

Donald Trump usually doubles down on his most controversial rhetoric. After criticizing Israel, however, the former president broke with his usual MO.


Oct. 16, 2023, 8:18 AM CDT
By Steve Benen

While many political leaders in the United States have been eager to voice support for Israel in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, Donald Trump went in a very different direction during a campaign event in Florida last week.

The former American president claimed, for example, that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “let us down” and did “a very terrible thing” when the prime minister — according to Trump’s version of events — decided that Israel would not participate in a mission that targeted Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani in 2020.

As we discussed soon after, Trump also criticized Israeli intelligence, and in the same appearance, described Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group, as “very smart” — a label the Republican usually reserves for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, North Korea’s Kim Jung Un and China’s Xi Jinping.

The rhetoric was not well received. For one thing, the Republican’s claims about Israel’s role in the Suleimani mission have been discredited. For another, Trump’s criticisms of Israel — and compliments for Hezbollah — have faced significant pushback from the former president’s ostensible allies.

A New York Times report noted that even Israeli conservatives were “stunned” by Trump’s rhetoric. The article quoted Attila Somfalvi, a senior political analyst and commentator on Israeli television, adding that the former American president’s criticisms came “as a shock to a country that had been broadly supportive of Mr. Trump throughout his administration.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, who often goes to embarrassing lengths in service of Trump, appeared on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” and conceded that Trump’s kind words for Hezbollah were “a huge mistake.” When host Kristen Welker also noted the former president’s admonishments for Netanyahu, the South Carolina Republican added, “I thought it was not helpful.”

It’s against this backdrop that Trump did something he generally does not do: He took some unsubtle steps to walk back what he’d done. The Associated Press reported:

Former President Donald Trump said Friday that he stood with Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as his GOP rivals continued to pointedly denounce his lashing out at Netanyahu days after Hamas’ deadly attacks. Referring to Netanyahu by his nickname, Trump posted “#IStandWithIsrael” and “#IStandWithBibi” on his Truth Social network Friday afternoon.

Click to expand...

Three hours before his “#IStandWithIsrael” and “#IStandWithBibi” message, the Republican posted a separate item that read, “I have always been impressed by the skill and determination of the Israeli Defence Forces. As they defend their Nation against ruthless terrorists, I want to wish every soldier the best of luck. May you return home safely to your families, and may God bless you all!”

As a general rule, Trump responds to controversies surrounding his rhetoric by doubling down. The more people the Republican outrages, the more he repeats the original message that sparked the uproar in the first place.

This time, however, someone apparently told the former president that he made a mess he should at least try to clean up.

M

Jim Jordan, allies eye hardball tactics to get speaker’s gavel​

Can Jim Jordan become House speaker by bullying his GOP critics into submission? The Ohio Republican and some of his notable allies intend to find out.


Oct. 16, 2023, 7:00 AM CDT
By Steve Benen

Friday was not a normal day in the U.S. House of Representatives. It was a day in which House Republicans nominated House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan for speaker — two days after he lost a similar intraparty race — though he received only 56% support from the GOP conference, despite running against a relatively obscure member who did not campaign for the position and who publicly conceded that he didn’t actually want the job.

Ordinarily, this would clear the way for a floor vote, at which point the majority conference would put the gavel in its nominee’s hands, but Jordan and his allies were cognizant of the fact that he had plenty of Republican detractors — more than enough to block him from succeeding. To that end, the GOP conference held a second vote — what was referred to as a “validation vote” — intended to gauge how many members were prepared to oppose Jordan’s nomination on the floor.

It was at that point when Jordan learned that at least 55 members of his conference opposed his candidacy. He could afford to lose no more than four members if the right-wing Ohioan intended to prevail.

And so, instead of holding a floor vote, everyone simply went home.

This was not, however, a weekend for quiet reflection. As The New York Times reported, Jordan and his allies “have begun a right-wing pressure campaign against Republicans opposed to electing him speaker, working to unleash the rage of the party’s base voters against any lawmaker standing in the way of his election.”

It is an extraordinary instance of Republican-on-Republican fighting that underscores the divisions that have wrought chaos inside the party, paralyzing the House of Representatives in the process. Several of Mr. Jordan’s supporters have posted the phone numbers of mainstream G.O.P. lawmakers they count as holdouts, encouraging followers to flood the Capitol switchboard with calls demanding they back Mr. Jordan — or face the wrath of conservative voters as they gear up for primary season.

Click to expand...

The report added that Jordan’s backers have identified the Republicans they see as standing in his way, and they’re encouraging far-right voters to “browbeat them” into submission.

The approach isn’t especially surprising — Jordan has spent his political career relying on bullying tactics — though it is qualitatively different from the recent norm. When Kevin McCarthy was concerned about shoring up GOP support for his bid, he agreed to a series of secret side deals. When Steve Scalise struggled to lock down the votes he needed, he held private meetings with skeptics, asking what he could do to satisfy their concerns.

Jordan and his allies, meanwhile, are adopting far more aggressive tactics. Instead of making offers, they’re relying on intimidation campaigns, hoping that House Republicans who don’t want to make the Ohioan speaker will ultimately be afraid not to.

What’s more, Jordan has some high-profile GOP voices in his corner: Not only is McCarthy backing the Judiciary Committee chairman — taking steps he was not willing to take on behalf of Scalise — but Jordan also has Donald Trump’s support. There’s even some evidence to suggest Fox News’ Sean Hannity has intervened to help Jordan, twisting lawmakers’ arms.

Will this work? For now, that’s a good question without a good answer. There’s been some reporting that Jordan’s GOP skeptics have been irritated by the hard sell, but Republicans from competitive districts have been known to fold under pressure before, and it’s an open question as to how many of the 55 members who opposed Jordan on Friday — in a secret-ballot election in which no one would know how they voted — will do so again in a recorded floor vote.

For now, the plan is to hold that vote Tuesday — as in tomorrow — and according to a Politico report, anti-Jordan members from within the House Republican conference are vowing to support a GOP rival to the party’s nominee. “While they have not yet nailed down a specific name,” the article added, “they believe the person they ultimately land on will not only be able block Jordan from the speakership, but also give cover to those who want to vote against him.”

Watch this space.

Postscript: It’s a far-fetched scenario, but there’s been some chatter in recent days about the partisan risks associated with a floor vote.

If one member gets a majority, he or she becomes speaker. If no one gets a majority, the race will go to a second ballot. But some have speculated that if Democratic turnout for the floor vote is 100%, it means House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will get 212 votes. If there are a significant number of GOP absences, it would lower the threshold for what constitutes a majority, and at least theoretically, Jeffries could become speaker by accident.

I don’t really think this will happen, and even if it did, Republicans would oust him soon after by way of a motion to vacate the chair. But it’s one more complication to keep in mind as the process moves forward.

The families also sought financial compensation from the U.S. government, but the Biden DOJ walked away from those negotiations two years ago.


Immigrant children, many of whom were separated from their parents, at a housing complex near the Mexico border in Tornillo, Texas, in 2018.Mike Blake / Reuters file

Oct. 16, 2023, 11:04 AM CDT
By Julia Ainsley and Jacob Soboroff

The Biden administration and more than 4,000 migrants who were separated from their families at the U.S.-Mexico border by the Trump administration reached a legal settlement Monday that allows the families to live and work in the U.S. for three years while receiving housing, mental health and legal assistance to apply for asylum.

The settlement also prohibits the federal government from separating any migrant families crossing the border for eight years, unless the parents are considered a danger to their children or the public or they have previously entered the country illegally more than twice.

The deal, announced by the Justice Department, may end one of the darkest chapters in U.S. immigration policy, in which families crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally in 2017 and 2018 were systematically separated. Children younger than 18 were sent to the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services, while parents were prosecuted by U.S. attorneys in federal court.



But the settlement could be derailed by Republicans in Congress if they challenge the court’s mandate to appropriate money to reunify and provide services to separated families.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw of the Southern District of California is expected to approve the proposed settlement, but he may be asked to review objections. Those objections could come from parties such as America First Legal, a conservative legal group run by Stephen Miller, the former Trump adviser who was considered the architect of the family separation policy.

The families also sought financial compensation from the U.S. government, but the Biden administration’s Justice Department abruptly walked away from those negotiations two years ago when President Joe Biden was asked if families would be receiving $450,000 each and he said it was “not going to happen.”

Individual families are still seeking damages in civil court, where the Biden administration has been fighting them.

“While no settlement can ever wipe away this tragic episode in our country’s history, the settlement is a much-needed step forward to help the thousands of families that were so brutally separated under the Trump administration,” said Lee Gelernt of the American Civil Liberties Union, the lead counsel representing the families in the case. “The settlement will allow little children to finally see their parents after years of separation and permit suffering families to seek permanent status in the U.S. Critically, it will also prohibit such a cruel policy in the future. Whatever one thinks about border policy generally, there can be no disagreement that ripping babies and toddlers from their parents is morally repugnant.”

On a call with reporters about the settlement, a Department of Homeland Security official said family separation was a “cruel and inhumane policy.”

That official added that more than 3,000 separated families have been reunified and hundreds more remain separated.

The agreement also covers more than 290 children who are U.S. citizens separated from noncitizen parents at the border by the Trump administration and who were not previously included in the lawsuit.

The threats from Rep. Mike Turner about the potential for a coalition speaker appear designed to rally support for the party's nominee for the job, Rep. Jim Jordan.


Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, warned that his fellow Republicans might need to find a deal with Democrats if the impasse over choosing a new House speaker continues.Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images file


Oct. 16, 2023, 8:13 AM CDT / Updated Oct. 16, 2023, 9:20 AM CDT
By Summer Concepcion and Sahil Kapur

Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, says a deal “will have to be done” with Democrats to choose a new House speaker if Republicans are unable to elect someone on their own after GOP Rep. Kevin McCarthy was ousted from the position this month.

During an interview Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Turner was asked whether he could envision a scenario in which Republicans could work with Democrats to find a “mutually acceptable speaker.”

Turner, who chairs the Intelligence Committee, said although he would “prefer there to be a Republican solution” and believes Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, would be an “excellent speaker,” the path to electing someone could come down to Republicans reaching across the aisle to make it happen.

“I think he’ll be able to get to 217,” Turner said of Jordan. “If not, we have other leaders in the House. And certainly, if there is a need if the radical, you know, almost just handful of people in the Republican side ... to make it for us unable to be able to return to general work on the House, then I think obviously, there will be a deal that will have to be done.”

The threats from Turner and other Republicans of a coalition speaker appear designed to pressure GOP holdouts into backing their nominee. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" that there have been no serious discussions about that prospect, and that Democrats would demand rules changes to elevate bipartisan bills.

"We want to ensure that votes are taken on bills that have substantial Democratic support and substantial Republican support so that the extremists aren't able to dictate the agenda," Jeffries said.

Jordan's allies have used aggressive tactics to try to corral the votes to elect him speaker, seeing a potential floor vote as a mechanism to pressure centrists or politically vulnerable Republicans. That could could happen as early as Tuesday.

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., an early opponent of Jordan’s speakership bid who became the subject of intense criticism from the right, switched to “yes” after saying he’s had “two cordial, thoughtful and productive conversations over the past two days” about advancing spending, defense and farm bills.

“As a result, I have decided to support Jim Jordan for Speaker of the House on the floor,” Rogers said on X, adding that he has “always been a team player” for his party.

The House voted by a slim, six-vote margin to oust McCarthy when a handful of conservatives joined Democrats to remove him. The vote marked the first time in U.S. history that a speaker of the House was ousted.

Republicans nominated Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., for the speakership in a secret ballot vote last week, defeating Jordan by a vote of 113-99. But Scalise dropped his bid for the spot just a day later after it became clear that he would not be able to get the votes needed to be elected.

On a second try, Jordan won the GOP nomination for speaker in a 124-81 vote, defeating Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga. It is unclear, however, whether Jordan can secure the 217 votes needed on the House floor.

Democrats in recent days have ratcheted up their rhetoric against Jordan, an outspoken Trump ally, whom they cast as an insurrectionist, election denier and extremist.

“House Republicans have selected as their nominee to be the speaker of the people’s House the chairman of the chaos caucus, a defender in a dangerous way of dysfunction, and an extremist extraordinaire,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Friday on the steps of the Capitol, flanked by dozens of Democratic lawmakers. “His focus has been on peddling lies and conspiracy theories and driving division amongst the American people.”

House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., raised red flags about Jordan’s role in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, saying, “Every Republican who cast their vote for him is siding with an insurrectionist against our democracy.”

Some moderate Democrats have expressed a willingness to enhance the powers of temporary Speaker Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., in the interim. In a letter to McHenry last week, centrist Democrats Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, Susie Lee of Nevada, Ed Case of Hawaii, and Jared Golden of Maine supported empowering McHenry in 15-day increments to allow the House to conduct business.

But that idea faces internal resistance as many Republicans are opposed to the idea of enhancing McHenry's powers.

The House adjourned for the weekend after Jordan's nomination for speaker. A second ballot asking members if they could back Jordan on the House floor fell short of the 217 votes he needs to secure the job, with 152 lawmakers voting in favor and 55 opposed.

This is for tent and his braindead followers

71-year-old landlord stabs six-year-old Muslim boy to death in Illinois hate crime

A 71-year-old, ignorant, angry landlord has been charged with murder and a hate crime after fatally stabbing a SIX-YEAR-OLD CHILD and grievously wounding his mother simply because they were Muslims. "You Muslims must die!" Joseph Czuba screamed as he carried out the vile attack, which was surely in no way influenced or spurred on by the alarmingly racist, xenophobic rhetoric spewing from right-wing airwaves and radical "America First" politicians 24 hours a day.

President Biden says Hamas should be eliminated "entirely"

The president appeared on CBS' 60 Minutes and declared that the Palestinian militant group Hamas should be eliminated "entirely" — but reiterated his support for a "two state" solution to the conflict that involves an official Palestinian state and a Palestinian authority to run it. Biden also insisted that US support for Ukraine’s war against Russia would not be interrupted by the new conflict.

Trump faces reckoning as DC judge mulls gag order

US District Court Judge and woman not f*cking around Tanya Chutkan will consider special counsel Jack Smith's formal request to order the serially indicted ex-president to stop attacking potential witnesses, prosecutors, and court officials involved in his sweeping federal case over election fraud. Trump obviously cannot stop yapping away about all the ways the world has wronged him, so a formal gag order would drastically raise the specter of jail time for the grifter should Chutkan see fit to rein him in.

The people's House is silent thanks to a broken GOP​

Without a speaker, what's meant to be the most representative part of government is paralyzed.

Oct. 15, 2023, 5:00 AM CDT
By Hayes Brown, MSNBC Opinion Writer/Editor

It’s been almost two weeks since a petty revolt among Republicans led to the first successful vote to overthrow a speaker of the House. Since the removal of Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., the House GOP has been running around in circles trying to find someone — anyone — who can garner enough support to take up the gavel. One nominee, Majority Leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana, has already bowed out for lack of consensus. There’s little evidence that the second candidate to win an internal vote, Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan of Ohio, will fare much better.

As a result, the House floor has been quiet, save for the occasional pro forma session to give the illusion that the body still functions. Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., hasn’t sought to test the limits of the limited powers he’s been given as a steward of the speakership. It feels fitting, in a terrible sense, that with the Republicans unable to name someone to speak for them, the people’s House has been silenced.

It feels fitting, in a terrible sense, that with the Republicans unable to name someone to speak for them, the people’s House has been silenced.

The role of speaker was much more literal when it originated in the British Parliament. When it was bestowed upon Sir Thomas Hungerford in 1377, the job was literally to be the spokesperson for Parliament in addressing the crown. “Until the seventeenth century, the Speaker was often an agent of the King, although they were often blamed if they delivered news from Parliament that the King did not like,” according to the U.K. Parliament’s website. “This made the role of Speaker quite perilous; seven Speakers were executed by beheading between 1394 and 1535.”

But as Parliament asserted its authority, the speakership became more independent. It also came to be seen as an essential part of legislative bodies, as evidenced once English colonies arose in North America. During the first parliamentary meeting at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619, one of the first acts of the assembled burgesses was to select a speaker. Other colonial legislatures followed suit, including North Carolina’s and Massachusetts’.

The apparent self-evidence of the necessity of a speaker means the Constitution is a little vague about one of the most important jobs in the country. Article I, Section 2 merely says, “The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers”; the job wasn’t mentioned at all in the Federalist Papers, and it didn’t appear in notes from James Madison and others attending the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Instead, as with so many things in America, the exact role of the speaker has been made up on the fly, at times gaining and losing functions as the years have passed.

It began more or less in line with the British version of the gig, simply managing the flow of debate among peers and staying aloof from the actual back-and-forth between members. As the party system took root, the speakership became the prize to be claimed by the head of the party in the majority at the beginning of each Congress. And as member of the Houses in their own standing, speakers also vote on legislation, although, according to the Congressional Research Service, voting at their discretion was allowed only after 1850.

It’s extremely fitting with the job’s historic origin that the modern speaker is also meant to be the chief spokesperson for the House. The speaker serves as the point person in negotiations with the White House and the Senate. The speaker holds weekly news conferences with the media to lay out the majority’s agenda. In this way, speakers serve as an embodiment of the will of the people in the more directly representative branch of Congress. There’s a reason the speaker was placed directly in the line of succession to the presidency after the vice president.

But the most consequential power the speaker holds is controlling the floor of the House: deciding who gets to speak, which motions get recognized and which bills come up for votes. Because that power hasn’t been transferred to McHenry in this interregnum, the legislative process has ground to a halt. Granted, the legislative process was often halted when McCarthy was speaker, as the far right defied his halfhearted attempts at order, but there’s a more desperate and uncertain feeling over the current paralysis.


While the floor remains silent, there’s a cacophony of voices elsewhere. With no speaker, it seems like factionalism is the order of the day, as every member of the Republican caucus is scrambling to be heard over their colleagues. Scalise was unable to win over McCarthy’s and Jordan’s supporters, which prompted him to withdraw his name from consideration. It’s unlikely that Jordan will be able to convince moderate Republicans that he can unite the party and not help cause a blowout for Republicans in competitive districts in next year’s elections. McCarthy’s dream of returning to power faces a similar math problem. And while talk of a bipartisan compromise candidate has a certain Aaron Sorkin-esque appeal, the practical reality of the job seems to preclude it — at least for now.

There’s no telling just now how long this impasse will last. As I’ve said before, the current makeup of the House GOP isn’t built to allow for coalitions, not even internally among its own members. There is no one voice who could rightly speak for the Republican caucus as it stands, because its members would rather cut out their own collective voice box than allow someone else to do it on their behalf.

His recent remarks remind all of us that our national security will also be on the ballot.


Oct. 14, 2023, 5:00 AM CDT
By Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi

When former President Donald Trump spoke at a campaign rally in New Hampshire on Wednesday, he ostensibly was laying out a vision for American foreign policy in the wake of Hamas’s brutal attack on Israeli citizens last weekend. Instead, Trump kicked an ally while they’re hurting, heaped praise on our mutual enemy Hezbollah and tied the attack to his own delusions of the “stolen” 2020 election. In case anyone had forgotten, Trump’s incoherent remarks reminded us all that he is a fickle friend, a terrible ally and a walking national security risk.


Since news of Hamas’ attack broke, President Joe Biden has been the model of a responsible leader. He immediately condemned Hamas’s assault and pledged support for Israel’s defense, while reminding the Israeli government of its obligations under the rules of war. He sent Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Israel and Jordan and promptly engaged with heads of state around the world to make sure we are containing the crisis and providing support as needed. President Biden also reaffirmed his commitment to a negotiated two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians.

The consequences of Trump’s remarks can be far reaching in this fraught moment.

By contrast, Trump decided this week was a good time to scorn Israel to “step up its game.” He referred to Israel’s defense minister as a “jerk” for putting Hezbollah, which he called “very smart”, on notice to not attack Israel. Despite the fact that all Israeli citizens are required to serve in the military for two to three years, Trump claimed Israel “wasn’t ready militarily” to protect itself from Hamas and Hezbollah. He not only insulted Israel’s current leadership, but also insulted the everyday people who have trained and live under the constant threat of attack, keeping two terrorist groups at bay for decades.

Trump didn’t utter these words out of some grand foreign policy vision. He ridiculed a U.S. ally in its time of suffering because of a grudge. According to multiple reports, Trump’s fury is rooted in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s prompt congratulations to Biden after the 2020 election. The former president, incredibly, saw that not as an acknowledgment of reality, but a show of disloyalty.

As a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I know that Trump’s statements go against what those of us who work on national security wrangle with in real terms every day: that Israel is surrounded by threats and the target of the world’s largest state-sponsor of terrorism, Iran. As a major non-NATO ally, Israel collaborates with the U.S. in the development of military technology and regularly engages in joint military exercises with the American military and other forces.

The consequences of Trump’s remarks can be far reaching in this fraught moment. As the United States rallies leaders to defend Israel, Trump is a warning to those same leaders that in just one year, the United States may turn on a dime and abandon its allies. Trump’s mercurial nature and his focus on personal grievance will leave leaders hedging their bets before going all in on any deals or agreements with the United States.

Few Americans recognize the ugly version of this country that Trump presents to the world.

Trump’s America is callous in the face of shared hardship and willing to praise our enemies while hanging our allies out to dry. Trump would use the mantle of leader of the free world to demoralize communities under attack and settle his own feuds. As this crisis continues, and even if it ends long before next November, Trump’s recent remarks must be a reminder to all of us that our national security will also be on the ballot.