Rubio, Fox News try to explain Trump’s failures on infrastructure​

After Joe Biden poked fun at Donald Trump's infrastructure failure, Marco Rubio and Fox News mounted a defense. It didn't go especially well.


Sept. 8, 2023, 10:26 AM CDT
By Steve Benen

In a Labor Day speech in Philadelphia this week, President Joe Biden had a little fun talking about an area where he succeeded — and Donald Trump failed.

“We used to have the best infrastructure in the world and then we fell to #13 in the world,” the Democrat said. “But guess what? The great real-estate builder — the last guy here, he didn’t build a damn thing. Under my predecessor, ‘infrastructure week’ became a punchline. On my watch, infrastructure is being a decade.”

This apparently didn’t sit well with some of the Republican’s allies. Here, for example, is what Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade told Sen. Marco Rubio on the air yesterday:

“You know why [infrastructure legislation didn’t pass under Trump]? Because of the Russia stuff that they brought up at the time! Every time they roll out infrastructure, some other fake Russian lead would pop up and distract everybody.”

Click to expand...

The Florida senator agreed.

“Well, that, and a global pandemic in which local authorities across the country were prohibiting people from working.”

Click to expand...

So, a couple of things.

Right off the bat, we know exactly why Trump’s push for an infrastructure package failed, and it wasn’t because of “the Russia stuff” or the pandemic. As regular readers might recall, GOP officials spent much of the then-president’s first two years working on repealing the Affordable Care Act (an initiative that failed) and a package of regressive tax breaks (which passed, though the party stopped talking about them because the policy was so unpopular).

After the 2018 midterm elections, however, which left the House in Democratic hands, there were still hopes that an infrastructure deal could come together, and Democratic leaders were prepared to make it happen.

Trump had other ideas. According to the Republican’s own version of events, the then-president presented Democrats with an offer: The White House would work on infrastructure if Democrats agreed to stop investigating Trump scandals. Democratic leaders, naturally, said that wasn’t an option — they added, of course, that Congress can legislate and conduct oversight at the same time — at which point Trump abandoned the process.

But just as notable was the Fox host treating the Russia scandal as if it were nonsense, and Rubio going along with the line. If anyone in GOP politics knows better, it’s the senior Republican senator from Florida.

Circling back to our earlier coverage, after Russia launched an expansive and expensive covert military intelligence operation that targeted the U.S. political system in 2016, the Senate Intelligence Committee launched a lengthy and thorough investigation. The panel ultimately published voluminous findings, which arrived at a variety of important conclusions, including the apparent fact that the Russian government “directed extensive activity, beginning in at least 2014 and carrying into at least 2017, against U.S. election infrastructure at the state and local level.”

While the committee didn’t find evidence of Russian attackers going so far as to change votes, congressional investigators did conclude that Moscow’s efforts “exploited the seams between federal authorities and capabilities, and protections for the states.”

This, of course, was the same Senate panel that literally described a “direct tie between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services” as part of its official findings.

This was not an obscure document unrelated to Rubio’s work on Capitol Hill; he was the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee when the panel released its findings.

If Trump’s allies are looking for a credible excuse to explain away Trump’s failure on infrastructure, they’ll have to look elsewhere.

Presidential centers ring the alarm on the state of our democracy​

As a rule, presidential centers try not to generate national news. Given the state of our democracy, they apparently felt the need to make an exception.


Sept. 8, 2023, 7:00 AM CDT
By Steve Benen

A year ago this week, President Joe Biden delivered an unusual prime-time speech from the Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia. The point of his message was straightforward: Biden made the case that the state of our democracy was in peril, due to Donald Trump, his followers, and their extremist ideology.

A year later, the public learned that the incumbent Democrat isn’t the only presidential-level observer with such concerns. The New York Times reported:

A coalition representing nearly every former president from Herbert Hoover to Barack Obama issued a collective call on Thursday to protect the foundations of American democracy and maintain civility in the nation’s politics. The alliance of presidential centers and foundations for U.S. leaders dating back nearly a century, both Democrats and Republicans, is a historic first. Never before has such a broad coalition of legacy institutions from former administrations joined together on a single issue.

Click to expand...

As a rule, presidential centers and foundations don’t generate national news. In fact, they don’t try: These institutions deliberately steer clear of the political disputes of the day, ceding that ground to those presently in the arena.

But given the state of our democracy, they apparently felt the need to make an exception.

“Americans have a strong interest in supporting democratic movements and respect for human rights around the world because free societies elsewhere contribute to our own security and prosperity here at home,” the joint statement read. “But that interest is undermined when others see our own house in disarray. The world will not wait for us to address our problems, so we must both continue to strive toward a more perfect union and help those abroad looking for U.S. leadership.”

The letter added that “elected officials must lead by example and govern effectively in ways that deliver for the American people.” It went on to say that Americans should also “respect democratic institutions and rights.”

The statement was endorsed by the Obama Foundation, the George W. Bush Presidential Center, the Clinton Presidential Center, the George & Barbara Bush Foundation, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, the Carter Center, the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Foundation, the Richard Nixon Foundation, the LBJ Foundation, the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, the Truman Library Institute, the Roosevelt Institute, and the Hoover Presidential Foundation.

The Eisenhower Foundation did not participate, though it told the Associated Press, “The Eisenhower Foundation has respectfully declined to sign this statement. It would be the first common statement that the presidential centers and foundations have ever issued as a group, but we have had no collective discussion about it, only an invitation to sign.”

Donald Trump, meanwhile, does not have a presidential library, and his “foundation” was shuttered after getting caught committing fraud. No organization affiliated with the Republican signed on to the joint statement.

That’s just as well. As the Times’ report noted, “The statement is largely anodyne in its prose and is careful not to include specific examples that could seem to refer to a current or a former elected leader. But some of its wording, and its timing, appear to serve as a subtle rebuke of former President Donald J. Trump.”

What’s more, let’s not brush past the ringleader behind the effort: The AP’s report added that the push for the joint statement “was spearheaded by David Kramer, executive director of the George W. Bush Institute.”

If Trump starts whining via social media about his predecessors, at least we’ll know why.

Judge denies Mark Meadows' bid to move Georgia election case to federal court​

The former White House chief of staff had argued that the charges against him in Fulton County related to his actions as a federal official serving in the Trump administration.

Sept. 8, 2023, 4:57 PM CDT / Updated Sept. 8, 2023, 7:19 PM CDT
By Dareh Gregorian and Daniel Barnes

A judge on Friday denied former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows' bid to move the Georgia criminal case against him to federal court, ruling that his alleged involvement in efforts to pressure state leaders to overturn the 2020 election results was not part of his official duties as a government official.

U.S. District Judge Steve C. Jones issued the ruling after holding a hearing on the matter in Atlanta federal court last week that included five hours of testimony from Meadows, who, along with former President Donald Trump was charged last month in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ sweeping election interference case.

"The Court concludes that Meadows has not shown that the actions that triggered the State’s prosecution related to his federal office," Jones wrote, adding, "Meadows’ alleged association with post-election activities was not related to his role as White House Chief of Staff or his executive branch authority."

State prosecutors, Jones said, had “put forth evidence that at various points during the time of the alleged conspiracy Meadows worked with the Trump campaign, which he admitted was outside of the role of the White House Chief of Staff."

Mark Meadows at the White House, on Oct. 30, 2020.Patrick Semansky / AP file

"In light of the State’s evidence that Meadows undertook actions on behalf of the campaign during the time period of the alleged conspiracy, Meadows was required to come forward with competent proof of his factual contention that his actions involving challenges to the outcome of the Georgia’s Presidential election results were within his role as Chief of Staff. His efforts fall short,” the judge wrote.

Meadows later notified the court that he would appeal the ruling. His attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday night.

To date, five of the 19 defendants in the DA's case have moved to have their case heard in federal court. In a court filing this week, Trump said he might move to do so as well. Under court-ordered deadlines, he has until the end of this month to decide, according to the filing.

Jones said in Friday's ruling that his decision "does not, at this time, have any effect on the outcome of the other co-Defendants who have filed notices of removal."

The indictment in Fulton County alleges Trump, Meadows and the 17 others engaged in schemes aimed at subverting the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia, a 2020 battleground state that was won by Joe Biden.

Meadows is charged with violation of Georgia's anti-racketeering law and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer for his involvement in Trump's Jan. 2, 2021, call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to "find" the exact number of votes needed to defeat Biden. He's pleaded not guilty.

Meadows’ lawyers argued that the charges all pertain to official actions he took while he worked for the president, and the case should therefore be heard in federal court, where he could assert additional defenses, including immunity from the criminal charges.

“Mr. Meadows has the right to remove this matter. The conduct giving rise to the charges in the indictment all occurred during his tenure and as part of his service as Chief of Staff,” Meadows’ lawyers wrote in a 14-page filing.

The DA's office countered that White House officials shouldn't be involved in political campaigns. “Federal law prohibits employees of the executive branch from engaging in political activity in the course of their work,” they noted, pointing to the Hatch Act, a law that Meadows once told Politico “nobody outside of the Beltway really cares” about.

The law “bars a federal employee from ‘us[ing] his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election’” — exactly the conduct Meadows is charged with, prosecutors noted.

In his ruling, Jones agreed that "engaging in political activities exceeds the outer limits of the Office of the White House Chief of Staff.” He also declined to consider Meadows' immunity claim, since he found he was acting outside the scope of his duties.

The judge further noted that the purpose of the removal stature is to prevent interference with federal functions, and said that's not what's happened in this case.

"Assuming jurisdiction over this criminal prosecution would frustrate the purpose of federal officer removal when the state charges allege—not state interference with constitutionally protected federal activities, but federal interference with constitutionally protected state actions," Jones wrote.

Heads up, guys.

The IRS plans to crack down on 1,600 millionaires to collect millions of dollars in back taxes​

BY FATIMA HUSSEIN
Updated 1:46 PM CDT, September 8, 2023

WASHINGTON (AP) — The IRS announced on Friday it is launching an effort to aggressively pursue 1,600 millionaires and 75 large business partnerships that owe hundreds of millions of dollars in past due taxes.

IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel said that with a boost in federal funding and the help of artificial intelligence tools, the agency has new means of targeting wealthy people who have “cut corners” on their taxes.

“If you pay your taxes on time it should be particularly frustrating when you see that wealthy filers are not,” Werfel told reporters in a call previewing the announcement. He said 1,600 millionaires who owe at least $250,000 each in back taxes and 75 large business partnerships that have assets of roughly $10 billion on average are targeted for the new “compliance efforts.”

Werfel said a massive hiring effort and AI research tools developed by IRS employees and contractors are playing a big role in identifying wealthy tax dodgers. The agency is making an effort to showcase positive results from its burst of new funding under President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration as Republicans in Congress look to claw back some of that money.

“New tools are helping us see patterns and trends that we could not see before, and as a result, we have higher confidence on where to look and find where large partnerships are shielding income,” he said.

In July, IRS leadership said it collected $38 million in delinquent taxes from more than 175 high-income taxpayers in the span of a few months. Now, the agency will scale up that effort, Werfel said.

“The IRS will have dozens of revenue officers focused on these high-end collection cases in fiscal year 2024,” he said.

A team of academic economists and IRS researchers in 2021 found that the top 1% of U.S. income earners fail to report more than 20% of their earnings to the IRS.

The newly announced tax collection effort will begin as soon as October. “We have more hiring to do,” Werfel said. “It’s going to be a very busy fall for us.”

Grover Norquist, who heads the conservative Americans for Tax Reform, said the IRS’ plan to pursue high wealth individuals does not preclude the IRS from eventually pursuing middle-income Americans for audits down the road.

“This power and these resources allow them to go after anyone they want,” he said. “The next step is to go after anyone they wish to target for political purposes.”

Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said the IRS’ new plan is a “big deal” that “represents a fresh approach to taking on sophisticated tax cheats.”

“This action goes to the heart of Democrats’ effort to ensure the wealthiest are paying their fair share,” he said in a statement.

David Williams, at the right-leaning, nonprofit Taxpayers Protection Alliance, said “every business and every person should pay their taxes — full stop.” However, “I just hope this isn’t used as a justification to hire thousands of new agents,” that would audit Americans en masse, he said.

The federal tax collector gained the enhanced ability to identify tax delinquents with resources provided by the Inflation Reduction Act, which Biden signed into law in August of 2022. The agency was in line for an $80 billion infusion under the law, but that money is vulnerable to potential cutbacks by Congress.

House Republicans built a $1.4 billion reduction to the IRS into the debt ceiling and budget cuts package passed by Congress this summer. The White House said the debt deal also has a separate agreement to take $20 billion from the IRS over the next two years and divert that money to other non-defense programs.

With the threat of a government shutdown looming in a dispute over spending levels, there is the potential for additional cuts to the agency.

NO! Say it ain't so!!!​

​

Trump Actually Inflated Net Worth by $3.6 BILLION Per Year, New York AG Says​

Isabella Ramirez​

Breaking News Intern
Published Sep. 08, 2023 2:36PM EDT




The New York attorney general’s office, which first accused Donald Trump of inflating his net worth by as much as $2.2 billion in just one year, now says the former president actually overstated his wealth by nearly double that amount.

According to a Friday court filing from Attorney General Letitia James, Trump consistently lied about his net worth by $1.9 billion to $3.6 billion between 2011 and 2021, citing expert analysis. Even then, James called the huge figure “still a conservative estimate” as doubts remain regarding many elements of Trump’s financial statements.

The new filing stems from a $250 million civil fraud lawsuit filed against Trump, his kids, and his business accusing them of allegedly using overestimates of his net worth to get more out of banks and insurers. But, Trump has previously stood by his “PHENOMENAL NUMBERS” and “BIG CASH” in a Truth Social post, claiming “I WAS DEFAMED BY NYS - ELECTION INTERFERENCE!”

The case is set to go to trial on Oct. 2. Trump’s attorneys did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

... Shannon Elizabeth just turned 50

Here we go:

I am out of town for a wedding and can’t go to the game. Pretty disappointed.

Section 119. 4 tickets and a parking pass. Let me know and I will transfer them later tonight or in the morning.

Let's go! Beat the Farm!

Login to view embedded media

Jeff's weekly roundup:

Max and I talk about the Caleb Williams GQ story, the Raleek Brown situation, Max dissects a Zachariah Branch route concept (great stuff!), we trade takeaways from the first two weeks and look ahead to Stanford.

LISTEN HERE

Uhhh….
doesn’t this guy have like 30+ starts at CB in the Pac?….by far, our most experienced CB.

why is he playing backup safety/nickel?
(when he plays at all)

another genius move by The Grinch, I presume……

The Pac-12 announces it will not go quietly with a perfect start to the season​

BY JOHN MARSHALL
Updated 3:19 PM CDT, September 5, 2023

If this is indeed the Pac-12’s final act, what an opening scene.
Seemingly destined for dissolution, the self-proclaimed Conference of Champions announced it will not go quietly after a perfect weekend of football.

With No. 6 Southern California’s opening win over San Jose State, the Pac-12 has started the season 13-0 for the first time since 1932. It’s also the most wins by an FBS conference without a loss to start a season since at least 1980.

“Do you believe now?’ Colorado coach Deion Sanders said.

Sanders was referring to his Prime Time Buffs’ takedown of then-No. 17 TCU.

His statement also fits the entire conference.

The Pac-12 will be down to two teams — Oregon State and Washington State — in 2024 after a mass exodus that sent teams to the Big 12, Big Ten and ACC.

The conference was expected to be the strongest it’s been in years and didn’t disappoint through the season’s first two weeks, winning its games by an average of 52.6 points per game — best by any FBS conference in the past 40 years.

The Trojans kicked it off with a blowout of San Jose State in Week 0 and did the same thing to Nevada.

Arizona State, picked to finish 10th in the Pac-12, kicked off the Kenny Dillingham era by surviving dust, rain and lightning to hold off Southern Utah 24-21 last Thursday. The Sun Devils were in control, leading 21-7 at halftime, but lost their mojo a bit after a more than two-hour weather delay.

The other teams expected to end up in the Pac-12 cellar also won their openers.

Stanford began Troy Taylor’s first season with a 37-24 win at Hawaii and California knocked off North Texas 58-21. The wins came after both schools learned they will be leaving the Pac-12 for the ACC.

The biggest surprise — well, at least outside Boulder — was Colorado’s win at TCU, which played in the national championship game a year ago.


The flamboyant Sanders created a national buzz by insisting the Buffaloes would shock people despite winning one game last season and having an overhauled roster.

Sanders and the Buffaloes converted some of the nonbelievers, beating the Horned Frogs 45-42 as nearly three-touchdown underdogs behind coach’s son Shedeur Sanders’ school-record 510 yards and four touchdowns.

Colorado moved into the AP Top 25 at No. 22 on Tuesday — for the first time since a brief stay in 2020 — in the first regular-season poll of the year.

“A lot of you didn’t believe in us,” Shedeur Sanders said. “It’s crazy because you just got to understand our coach, Coach Prime, my dad, everywhere he went, he was a winner. Every game, every opportunity, he took advantage of.”

The wins kept coming.

No. 8 Washington, the Pac-12’s second-highest ranked team, opened its season with a 56-19 win over Boise State. No. 12 Utah turned what was supposed to be a tough opening game against Florida into a physical 24-11 win despite playing without injured quarterback Cam Rising.

No. 13 Oregon got off to a rousing start, setting a school modern-era and Autzen Stadium scoring record with an 81-7 win over Portland State.

“Oregon’s opponents will have a hard time finding a weakness in that team,” Portland State coach Bruce Barnum said.

Cam Ward kicked off his second season as Washington State’s starting quarterback by throwing for 451 yards and accounting for four touchdowns in a 50-24 win over Colorado State.

UCLA had some defensive struggles early against Coastal Carolina, but pulled away for a 27-13 win. Arizona did what it was supposed to against an FCS opponent, avenging a loss two years earlier to Northern Arizona with a 35-point win.

No. 16 Oregon State capped the Pac-12’s perfect start with a 42-17 win over San Jose State on Sunday behind Clemson transfer quarterback DJ Uiagalelei’s five total touchdowns.

“They have a fantastic football team,” Spartans coach Brent Brennan said. “They’re sound in all three phases, extremely sound. They play a unique brand of football.”

So does the rest of the Pac-12.

The perfection will likely end soon, but Pac-12 After Dark is shining bright so far before the lights go out — possibly for good.

Don't threaten us with a good time...hahaha

Login to view embedded media

The political relevance of Trump’s preference for the south of France​

First, Donald Trump celebrated a U.S. defeat at the World Cup. Then, he said he'd prefer to be in France. This sort of rhetoric just isn't normal.


Aug. 10, 2023, 2:52 PM CDT
By Steve Benen

It was just four days ago when Donald Trump responded to the United States coming up short in the World Cup by celebrating the defeat of his own country’s team. While common sense suggests the bare minimum of patriotism would lead an American politician to root for American athletes in international competition, the former Republican president actually taunted the U.S. women’s soccer team.

As part of an online harangue, Trump went so far as to argue, “Many of our players were openly hostile” to the United States.

That wasn’t true — none of the women on the team expressed any such hostility — though there was a degree of irony to the circumstances: The former president was questioning the athletes’ patriotism while simultaneously rejoicing in the loss of his country’s team.

Two days later, as HuffPost noted, Trump expressed a preference for enjoying the south of France rather than being in the United States.

Trump, who has frequently expressed disdain for America and Americans, made the comment during a campaign rally in New Hampshire on Tuesday as he griped about the criminal charges against him and lamented ever getting into politics. “I could have been relaxing at Mar-a-Lago or in the south of France ― which I would prefer being in this country, frankly,” he said.

Click to expand...

As a video clip of the comments suggested, this was not a scripted comment: The former president apparently just said what he was thinking.

After seeing this, my first thought was about partisan asymmetry. Indeed, it’s worth pausing to imagine what the reaction might be if a Democratic presidential hopeful, after rooting against an American team, said he or she would prefer to be in the south of France rather than the United States.

It’s also worth noting that if Trump acted on this preference, he might not enjoy the reception: As recently as 2020, the Republican’s final full year in the White House, a report from the Pew Research Center found that Trump was wildly unpopular in France.

But it was the back-to-back comments that struck me as especially notable: On Sunday, the former president applauded a U.S. defeat in the World Cup tournament, and on Tuesday, he’d rather be in France than his own country.

This comes less than a year after Trump used his social media platform to describe the United States as, among other things, “evil.”

Given this, I continue to find it remarkable that questions about the former president’s patriotism aren’t louder.

Indeed, none of this is especially new. Revisiting our previous coverage, it was two weeks after his 2017 inauguration when Trump sat down for an interview in which he was reminded that Russia’s Vladimir Putin is “a killer.” Trump replied, “There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent?”

As we discussed at the time, Americans generally weren’t accustomed to hearing their president be quite this critical of the United States. What’s more, the idea that the American chief executive saw a moral equivalence between us and a brutal autocrat came as a reminder that Trump didn’t always hold his country in the highest regard.

It was part of an unsubtle larger pattern. In December 2015, then-candidate Trump was asked about Putin’s habit of invading countries and killing critics. “He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader,” Trump replied, “unlike what we have in this country.” Reminded that Putin has been accused of ordering the murder of critics and journalists, Trump added, “Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also.”

In a July 2016 interview with The New York Times, the Republican went on to argue that the United States lacks the moral authority to lead, because we’re just not a good enough country to command respect. “When the world looks at how bad the United States is, and then we go and talk about civil liberties, I don’t think we’re a very good messenger,” he said.

There’s never been a president, from either party, who’s been so cavalier about America lacking in credibility. Sentiments such as “When the world looks at how bad the United States is...” are usually heard from America’s opponents, not America’s president. The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg noted during the 2016 campaign that Barack Obama “has never spoken as negatively about America as Donald Trump has.”

The Republican also explicitly rejected the idea of “America exceptionalism,” questioning aloud whether the United States really is “more outstanding” than other nations.

To be sure, it’s a free country. If Trump wants to argue that the United States is “evil,” that’s his right. If he’s convinced that the United States is not a force for good in the world, he’s welcome to make the case. He can also root against U.S. athletes and dream of spending time on foreign soil. All of this, of course, is his business.

But it’s more than a little jarring to see the Republican, at different times, both claim the moral high ground on patriotism and run down his own country in ways no former president has ever done.

Can't get with the skirt... but otherwise a good piece. ✌🏾

tOSU- They didn’t look good on offense. With all those WR’s we lost to them, should be interesting if this keeps up. Maybe we can pluck some players in the portal if they want to play in a higher octane offense.

ND- they play NCST next. Should see just how good they think they’re.

TEX- they struggled against Rice and now play Bama. Ewers was 0-6 on throws 20+ yards. Would love to see Saban lose.

Duke- great to see them beat Clemson. Elko was a great DC. Wonder how long he will last at Duke. Great resume builder.

A&M- play Miami next. Offense looked good and would like nothing more that Mario Cristbal to lose.

Colorado- it was awesome to see that team win. Another test with Nebraska next.

Good one with Max — I’m going to post it first thing tomorrow morning. Want to do a lot of writing today, and we have the Riley Zoom coming up soon.

Biden Admin Weighs Response to Migrant Influx That’s Sure to Piss Off Greg Abbott​

Mark Alfred​

Breaking News Intern
Updated Sep. 07, 2023 6:12PM EDT / Published Sep. 07, 2023 6:02PM EDT

​

The Biden White House is weighing a major policy change at the southern border that would compel migrant families that entered the U.S. without authorization to stay in Texas—a program it may enforce via GPS monitoring in ankle bracelets, multiple officials told the Los Angeles Times. It comes amid renewed criticism of the White House’s handling of the influx of migrants from Republicans and some Democrats. New York City Mayor Eric Adams earlier Thursday blasted the administration for putting his city under huge financial strain thanks to the massive influx.

The White House’s proposed policy would seek to halt the flow of migrant families across the country, relegating them to Texas in a move sure to irk its governor, Republican Greg Abbott, who has taken to bussing migrants to various Democrat-run cities. It would also make it easier to deport families should they fail initial screenings, given their proximity to the border. Specifically, officials within the Department of Homeland Security discussed “targeting Central American families” via the new program, as those countries would best facilitate significant deportation, according to the Times.

What happened to the Republican Party??? Real Republicans need to stop this sickness that's happened to their Party before it's too late.​

​

GOP plots shocking illegal power grab in key 2024 state​

The Wisconsin Republican Party has made it clear that they are moving to impeach the newly elected state Supreme Court Justice, Janet Protasiewicz, before she even hears a SINGLE case — all because she won’t rubber-stamp their extremist agenda of racial gerrymandering, enforcing the state’s 1849 abortion ban, and possibly even throwing the 2024 election to Donald Trump.

This is an obscene and outrageous subversion of the will of Wisconsin voters, who voted by a decisive 11pts to put Judge Janet on the bench. To make matters worse, it’s an existential threat to American democracy as we know it. If the Wisconsin GOP succeeds in illegally impeaching Judge Janet, you can bet your bottom dollar that every single red state legislature in the country will follow suit, entrenching one-party extremist rule and ensuring that there is no way that 2024 will be a free and fair election.

Washington Post Op-Ed:​

Secretaries of the Navy, Air Force and Army to Tuberville: Stop this dangerous hold on senior officers​

By
Carlos Del Toro
Frank Kendall
and
Christine Wormuth

September 4, 2023 at 8:01 p.m. EDT

Carlos Del Toro is secretary of the Navy. Frank Kendall is secretary of the Air Force. Christine Wormuth is secretary of the Army.
As the civilian leaders of the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Space Force and Army, we are proud to work alongside exceptional military leaders who are skilled, motivated and empowered to protect our national security.

These officers and the millions of service members they lead are the foundation of America’s enduring military advantage. Yet this foundation is being actively eroded by the actions of a single U.S. senator, Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who is blocking the confirmation of our most senior military officers.

The senator asserts that this blanket and unprecedented “hold,” which he has maintained for more than six months, is about opposition to Defense Department policies that ensure service members and their families have access to reproductive health no matter where they are stationed.


After the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, this policy is critical and necessary to meet our obligations to the force. It is also fully within the law, as confirmed by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

Senators have many legislative and oversight tools to show their opposition to a specific policy. They are free to introduce legislation, gather support for that legislation and pass it. But placing a blanket hold on all general and flag officer nominees, who as apolitical officials have traditionally been exempt from the hold process, is unfair to these military leaders and their families.

And it is putting our national security at risk.

Thus far, the hold has prevented the Defense Department from placing almost 300 of our most experienced and battle-tested leaders into critical posts around the world.


Three of our five military branches — the Army, Navy and Marine Corps — have no Senate-confirmed service chief in place. Instead, these jobs — and dozens of others across the force — are being performed by acting officials without the full range of legal authorities necessary to make the decisions that will sustain the United States’ military edge.

Across the services, many generals and admirals are being forced to perform two roles simultaneously. The strain of this double duty places a real and unfair burden on these officers, the organizations they lead and their families.

The blanket hold is also exacting a personal toll on those who least deserve it.

Each of us has seen the stress this hold is inflicting up and down the chain of command, whether in the halls of the Pentagon or at bases and outposts around the world.

We know officers who have incurred significant unforeseen expenses and are facing genuine financial stress because they have had to relocate their families or unexpectedly maintain two residences.

Military spouses who have worked to build careers of their own are unable to look for jobs because they don’t know when or if they will move. Children haven’t known where they will go to school, which is particularly hard given how frequently military children change schools already.

These military leaders are being forced to endure costly separations from their families — a painful experience they have come to know from nearly 20 years of deployments to places such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
All because of the actions of a single senator.

Any claim that holding up the promotions of top officers does not directly damage the military is wrong — plain and simple.

The leaders whose lives and careers are on hold include scores of combat veterans who have led our troops into deadly combat with valor and distinction in the decades since 9/11. These men and women each have decades of experience and are exactly who we want — and need — to be leading our military at such a critical period of time.

The impact of this hold does not stop at these officers or their family members.

With the promotions of our most senior leaders on hold, there is a domino effect upending the lives of our more junior officers, too.
Looking over the horizon, the prolonged uncertainty and political battles over these military nominations will have a corrosive effect on the force.

The generals and admirals who will be leading our forces a decade from now are colonels and captains today. They are watching this spectacle and might conclude that their service at the highest ranks of our military is no longer valued by members of Congress or, by extension, the American public.

Rather than continue making sacrifices to serve our nation, some might leave uniformed service for other opportunities, robbing the Defense Department of talent cultivated over decades that we now need most to maintain our superiority over our rivals and adversaries.

Throughout our careers in national security, we have deeply valued the bipartisan support shown for our service members and their families. But rather than seeking a resolution to this impasse in that spirit, Tuberville has suggested he is going to further escalate this confrontation by launching baseless political attacks against these men and women.

We believe that the vast majority of senators and of Americans across the political spectrum recognize the stakes of this moment and the dangers of politicizing our military leaders. It is time to lift this dangerous hold and confirm our senior military leaders.