Categories
house Intelwars Mandate Masks Pelosi refuse

Republicans refuse to wear masks on House floor in protest of ?Pelosi mandate

Several Republicans refused to wear their masks on the House floor Tuesday afternoon in a rebellion against Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) refusal to lift the mandate, despite the threat of hefty fines for the rule violation.

What are the details?

Politico reported ahead of the protest that Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) announced during a GOP conference meeting earlier in the day that he is “done” wearing masks, and will refuse to wear one on the House floor.

Mast confirmed his plan to the outlet, and said “many” of his colleagues agreed to do the same.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted from the House floor later, “We’ve had enough. We are refusing to wear our masks on the floor during this vote in spite of Pelosi’s threat to take $500 from each of us. Her rule is not based on science. All you need to know is the mask rule has only ever applied to members when they can be seen on TV !”

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) later tweeted out a photo of herself along with Reps. Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Massie declaring, “#FreeYourFace Masks are oppressive and nothing but a political tool. End the oppression!”

Greene also posted a picture of herself along with seven other Republicans outside the steps of the Capitol, tweeting, “Proud to join these Patriots for a peaceful protest on the House floor against mask mandates!”

Journalist Jordan Schactel reported that other GOP members who joined the protest included Reps. Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Chip Roy (Texas), Bob Good (Va.), Beth Van Duyne (Texas), and Greg Steube (Fla.).

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is expected to introduce a motion on the topic on Wednesday, but sources told Politico that the “language is still being worked out.”

What’s the background?

Pelosi insists on keeping her mask mandate in place — threatening members with $500 fines on a first offense and $2,500 for a second — despite the CDC announcing last week that fully vaccinated Americans can stop wearing masks indoors in most places.

The speaker’s move was condemned by several GOP lawmakers, including Mast, who tweeted that her action was “not about science” and “all about power.”

The Hill pointed out that the Senate never had a mask mandate in place, and both Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leaders Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) ditched their masks following the CDC’s new guidance.

Share
Categories
CDC floor house Intelwars Mask mandate Nancy Pelosi

Pelosi keeps mask mandate on House floor, citing unvaccinated members

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says the mask mandate required on the floor of the lower chamber will remain in place, despite the CDC offering new guidance that fully vaccinated Americans can ditch wearing masks in most places.

Pelosi argues that not everyone in the House is vaccinated, so the ban stays.

What are the details?

Following the CDC’s announcement of the changes on Thursday, CNN asked Pelosi if she would lift the House’s mask mandate.

“No,” the speaker told the outlet. “Are they all vaccinated?”

Brian Monahan, the attending physician to Congress, issued a memo the same day, writing: “For the Hall of the House: The present mask requirement and other guidelines remain unchanged until all Members and floor staff are fully vaccinated.”

The Washington Post noted that Dr. Monahan further states in his update that per CDC guidance, “recovery from natural infection is not equivalent to completion of a vaccination.”

Some GOP House members such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), have publicly stated that they will not get the COVID-19 vaccines because they already have antibodies after previously contacting the virus, according to The Washington Examiner.

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham Thursday night that the House floor mask mandate “should have been gone months ago,” telling the host, “Most members are either vaccinated or have antibodies — it’s a dumb rule to have.”

In a tweet, Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) wrote that Pelosi keeping the mandate in place is “not about science. It’s all about power.”

A group of 34 Republicans sent Pelosi a letter first obtained by The Daily Caller on Thursday, calling on the speaker to lift the mandate following the guidance.

“CDC guidance states fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a mask or physically distance in any setting except where required by governmental or workplace mandate,” the letter reads. “It is time to update our own workplace regulations. Every member of Congress has had the opportunity to be vaccinated, and you have indicated about 75 percent have taken advantage of this opportunity.”

Members who violate the House mask mandate face a $500 fine for the first offense, and $2,500 for a second offense.

Anything else?

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans have celebrated the CDC’s changes by tossing their masks, although most were seen continuing to wear the coverings in the chamber on Thursday.

The Hill reported that Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) were seen pulling off their masks and yelling “freedom” after they stepped off an elevator together following the CDC announcement.

Following the final vote for the week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was seen walking maskless after leaving the Senate chamber, saying out loud: “Free at last.”

Share
Categories
51st state house Intelwars Pass Statehood Washington

House Democrats pass bill to make Washington, D.C., the 51st state

The House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday that would make Washington, D.C., the 51st state in the U.S., with every member voting with their party in the Democrat-majority chamber.

Now, all eyes are on the Senate, where Democrats also hold control but do not appear to have the votes needed to pass the bill.

What are the details?

House Democrats voted unanimously — 216 to 208 — for the bill that was symbolically dubbed H.R. 51 to reflect its purpose in making the District of Columbia the 51st state.

The Constitution mandates that the seat of government be federally controlled, which would require a Constitutional Congress to change. But advocates say H.R. 51 circumvents that need by merely shrinking the federally controlled district to a two-mile area that includes the White House, the U.S. Capitol, some national monuments and other federal buildings.

If passed into law, the rest of Washington, D.C., would become the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, after abolitionist Frederick Douglass.

Currently, residents of Washington, D.C., can vote in presidential elections and the District has a House Delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), but she cannot vote on legislation.

With statehood, D.C. would have two senators and one representative, further entrenching the Democratic Party’s current power in the federal government given the overwhelming likelihood that the dDistrict remains deep-blue.

As The Hill noted, President Joe Biden “won the District’s three electoral votes in last year’s election with 92 percent of the vote.”

Democrats argue that D.C. residents currently suffer from “taxation without representation,” while Republicans are calling D.C. statehood a power-grab from the left.

This is the second time H.R. 51 has passed the House, and the first time was just last session when it was stopped in the Senate — which was then controlled by Republicans. Now, Democrats see more momentum behind it.

The Washington Post reported that “Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) pledged Tuesday that ‘we will try to work a path to get [statehood] done,’ and the White House asked Congress in a policy statement to pass the legislation as swiftly as possible.”

Despite support from Democratic leaders, the bill faces an uphill climb in the 50-50 upper chamber, which currently requires 60 votes to pass most legislation.

Even if Democrats were able to scrap the filibuster as many on the far-left have pushed to do, moderate Democrats such as Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.) have thus far refrained from commenting on H.R. 1.

When asked by CNN about the legislation on Thursday, Manchin replied, “I got so many things on my plate that I haven’t even gotten to that yet.”

Sinema’s office told The Post the senator “does not preview votes,” when asked about her position on statehood.

Share
Categories
house Intelwars Iowa Mariannette miller-meeks Rita hart

House takes first step in contested election review that may result in Republican being unseated

The Democrat-controlled House took the first steps last week of adjudicating a contested House seat that may result in a Republican lawmaker being replaced by her Democratic challenger.

What is the background?

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R) was declared the winner of Iowa’s second congressional district over Democratic challenger Rita Hart last November by just six votes — 196,964 to 196,958.

After Iowa certified Miller-Meeks’ win, Hart appealed to the House by filing a Notice of Contest. Hart’s campaign alleged that “the Miller-Meeks campaign has sought to keep legitimate votes from being counted — pushing to disqualify and limit the number of Iowans whose votes are counted,” the Iowa City Press-Citizen reported.

Hart claims there are 22 “legally-cast, uncounted votes” from her election — and, of course, she alleges that if those votes are counted, she would be the rightful winner of the contest.

Lawyers for Hart’s campaign allege the Democrat would have won the race by just nine votes had the 22 votes not been excluded.

What is happening now?

The House Administration Committee gathered last Friday to establish the process by which Hart’s claims will be adjudicated.

Politico reported, “The Friday meeting was brief. Members unanimously agreed to a resolution that establishes procedures the committee will abide by as it considers recent elections contested under the act.”

Miller-Meeks has asked the committee to dismiss Hart’s claims, but Friday’s action indicates the committee is taking the claims seriously. Formally rejecting Miller-Meeks’ request would begin an investigative process that could result in Miller-Meeks losing her seat if Hart’s claims are confirmed.

More from Politico:

To deal with past contested elections, the Administration Committee, chaired by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), has set up a task force to oversee an investigation or recount. That panel would make a recommendation based on its findings to the entire House, which could then vote on who should hold the seat.

What was the reaction?

Hart’s campaign praised the development, claiming the step meant the voice of voters would be heard.

“We are glad to see the House Committee on Administration taking action towards ensuring that every legally cast vote is counted in this race and that all Iowans’ voices are heard. Every legal voter in this country has a right to have their ballot counted and the remedy here is clear — count the ballots,” campaign manager Zach Meunier said.

However, House Administration Committee ranking member Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) warned the development may result in a “dangerous precedent.”

“I can’t think of a worst first step this committee could take in a new Congress than to waste taxpayer dollars by moving forward with overturning this election,” he said, Politico reported.

Part of that danger may be the fact that Hart’s campaign did not exhaust her legal remedies in Iowa.

In fact, Hart’s campaign revealed in early December that was their exact strategy: bypass Iowa courts in lieu of the Democrat-controlled House. The Hart campaign claimed “limitations in Iowa law” made necessary the direct appeal to the House.

The Hart campaign’s decision earned scorn from Miller-Meeks’ campaign, and even Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R).

“Rita Hart has chosen a political process controlled by Nancy Pelosi over a legal process controlled by Iowa judges. All Iowans should be outraged by this decision,” the Miller-Meeks campaign said, the Des Moines Register reported.

Reynolds similarly reacted, “By heading straight to a Democratic-controlled Congress, Hart is attempting to undermine the voice of Iowans.”

Share
Categories
Fined GOP house Intelwars louie gohmert Metal Detectors

Two GOP House members fined $5,000 for bypassing new metal detectors; Republicans say Pelosi did too

Two Republican members of Congress have been hit with $5,000 fines for circumventing the metal detectors leading into the House chambers under new rules passed this week in the Democrat-controlled body.

But GOP members say Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was seen skirting security, too, and deserves the same fine.

What are the details?

CNN reported Friday that “GOP Reps. Andrew Clyde of Georgia and Louie Gohmert of Texas have both been fined $5,000 for how they went through the metal detectors” according to a senior Democratic aid, noting that “These fines are part of a new rule established this week.”

Gohmert confirmed to news to Axios, telling the outlet, “”We’ll be appealing because this is ridiculous. This isn’t ‘The Godfather’ where you plant a gun in the toilet tank. There is no toilet tank in the bathroom.”

Shortly after the news broke, the Republican office of the Committee on House Administration sent a letter to the House sergeant at arms, to inform him that on Thursday, “at approximately 9:59 am, multiple members observed the Speaker of the House entering the House Chamber without completing security screening.”

The GOP committee’s Twitter account sent out a message saying, “Speaker Pelosi broke her own rules this week by entering the House Chamber without going through security. We are demanding she face the same fines as every other member of Congress.”

What’s the background?

In the days following the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol when Congress was set to count the Electoral College votes for the presidential election, new security checkpoints including metal detectors were installed outside the doors entering the House chamber.

Some Republican members expressed fury over the additional measures, and a number of them refused to comply, including Gohmert.

Fellow GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert tweeted at the time, “”I am legally permitted to carry my firearm in Washington, D.C. and within the Capitol complex. Metal detectors outside of the House would not have stopped the violence we saw last week — it’s just another political stunt by Speaker Pelosi.”

Pelosi reacted to the resistance by proposing a $5,000 fine on members the first time they dodge the metal detectors, and a $10,000 fine for the second offense — with the penalty being deducted directly from members’ paychecks. The measure passed earlier this week.

Forbes noted that Pelosi declared at a press conference last month that “the enemy is within the House of Representatives,” citing members who “want to bring guns on the floor” and “have threatened violence on other members.”

Share
Categories
expel house Intelwars Marjorie taylor greene resolution

Dem congressman introducing resolution to expel GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green from House

Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez of California announced Wednesday night that he will introduce a resolution calling for newly-elected Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to be expelled from the House of Representatives, citing reports of her “repeated endorsements of sedition, domestic terrorism, and political violence.”

What are the details?

Gomez tweeted, “I don’t need to explain why @RepMTG is a clear and present danger to Congress and our democracy. She did it herself. And she must go. I’m introducing a resolution to expel her from Congress immediately.”

In a press release, the congressman wrote, “As if it weren’t enough to amplify conspiracy theories that the September 11 attacks were an inside job and the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was staged, a string of recent media reports has now confirmed that Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene had previously supported social media posts calling for political violence against the Speaker of the House, members of Congress, and former President Barack Obama.”

He argued:

Such advocacy for extremism and sedition not only demands her immediate expulsion from Congress, but it also merits strong and clear condemnation from all of her Republican colleagues, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Her very presence in office represents a direct threat against the elected officials and staff who serve our government, and it is with their safety in mind, as well as the security of institutions and public servants across our country, that I call on my House colleagues to support my resolution to immediately remove Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene from this legislative body.”

At the time of Gomez’s announcement, Rep. Greene’s name had already been trending on Twitter for hours after video went viral showing Greene accosting Parkland survivor and gun-control advocate David Hogg as he walked through Washington, D.C., in March of 2019—roughly one year after the mass murder that took the lives of 17 people and left several more injured.

Gomez did not make mention of Greene confronting Hogg, but pointed to several other instances of the congresswoman’s past social media activity, such as when she “like a comment from 2019 that a ‘bullet to the head would be quicker’ than an election for removing Speaker Pelosi from office, and messages about executing FBI agents working for the ‘deep state.'”

On Tuesday, CNN published a report detailing Greene’s controversial messages, including a post where she suggested Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama would be hanged over the Iran Deal.

A commenter asked Greene, “Now we get to hang them?? Meaning H & O???,” to which she replied, “Stage is being set. Players are being put in place. We must be patient. This must be done perfectly or liberal judges would let them off.”

Greene called the CNN story a “hit piece,” and issued a statement saying, “Over the years, I’ve had teams of people manage my pages. Many posts have been liked. Many posts have been shared. Some did not represent my views. Especially the ones that CNN is about to spread across the internet.”

The Republican from Georgia has only been in Congress for a few weeks, but already filed articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden. She has also been accused of following the QAnon conspiracy theory.

Share
Categories
Delivers house IMPEACHMENT Intelwars Senate Trial

House officially delivers impeachment article to Senate for second trial against Trump

The nine House Democrats tapped as prosecutors in the second Senate trial against former President Donald Trump have officially delivered an article of impeachment to the upper chamber.

What are the details?

The managers put on a somber display marching ceremoniously through the U.S. Capitol on Monday to present the Senate with its single article that alleges Trump incited an insurrection through his actions surrounding the Jan. 6 attack on the very same building by a mob of Trump supporters.

The Hill reported that the lower chamber “impeached Trump 12 days ago and Senate leaders have agreed to postpone the start of the public trial until the week of Feb. 8.” The longest-serving Democrat in the upper chamber, Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy of Vermont, announced Monday that he would preside over the trial rather than Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Roberts.

Ten House Republicans joined Democrats in voting for impeaching Trump, making the condemnation a bipartisan effort as opposed to the first impeachment of the then-president last year when no GOP members cast a vote in favor of his ouster.

The initial impeachment attempt by House Democrats failed in the GOP-led Senate, but the upper chamber is now split 50-50 with Democrats in control. Only Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah voted to convict Trump in the first trial, and while Democrats have more leverage in this second go-round, several conservative members have expressed reservations about convicting the former president now that he is out of office.

The New York Times reported that the 50 Republican senators “for now appear reluctant to convict him,” and Democrats need 17 GOP members to join them — which could be a tall order.

According to The Washington Post:

While no final decisions on trial strategy have been made, House impeachment managers are concentrating on building their case around Trump personally — both what he said in the run-up to the Jan. 6 attack and at a rally that day, and how his words were interpreted within the White House and outside of it, according to people familiar with the deliberations.

President Joe Biden told CNN Monday that the impeachment trial against Trump “has to happen.” The Associated Press reported that while the Democrat acknowledged “the effect it could have on his agenda, he said there would be ‘a worse effect if it didn’t happen.'”

Anything else?

NBC News White House correspondent Kelly O’Donnell reported that “former President Trump chose the time of the second impeachment being presented to the Senate to announce of post presidency office,” tweeting out a public statement by Trump.

It reads:

Today, the 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, formally opened the Office of the Former President.

The Office will be responsible for managing President Trump’s correspondence, public statements, appearances, and official activities to advance the interests of the United States and to carry on the agenda of the Trump Administration through advocacy, organizing, and public activism.

President Trump will always and forever be a champion for the American people.

Share
Categories
fines house Intelwars Metal Detectors Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi proposes steep fines for House members who evade new metal detectors

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Wednesday that the House will be considering a new rule that would impose hefty fines on lawmakers who refuse to comply with the added security measures put in place yesterday, after several Republican members dodged new metal detectors placed outside the chamber.

What are the details?

A number of GOP members were reportedly “furious” on Tuesday when they approached the House chamber and discovered they would need to pass through metal detectors manned by U.S. Capitol police officers in order to gain entry.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), made headlines earlier this month about bringing her own firearm into work, was the first to make waves with her refusal to comply with officers searching her bag before entry.

Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) reacted to the new security checkpoints by tweeting, “For members of Congress to enter the floor of the U.S. House, we now have to go through intense security measures, on top of the security we already go through. These new provisions include searches and being wanded like criminals. We now live in [Nancy] Pelosi’s communist America!”

The Hill reported that “ultimately, roughly 10 lawmakers were seen bypassing the detectors and walking into the chamber, raising questions as to the devices’ efficacy, particularly given officers’ hesitancy to restrain House members.”

Following Wednesday’s session where the House voted to impeach President Donald Trump for a second time, Pelosi revealed her plan to remedy GOP resistance to the metal detectors: a new rule to be considered by the Democrat-controlled chamber that would make noncompliance a costly protest.

The speaker said in a statement, “On behalf of the House, I express my deepest gratitude to the U.S. Capitol Police for the valor that they showed during the deadly insurrection on the Capitol, as they protected the lives of the staff and the Congress.”

“Sadly, just days later, many House Republicans have disrespected our heroes by verbally abusing them and refusing to adhere to basic precautions keeping members of our Congressional community, including the Capitol Police, safe,” she continued. “The House will soon move forward with a rule change imposing fines on those who refuse to abide by these protections. The fine for the first offense will be $5,000 and $10,000 for the second offense. The fines will be deducted directly from Members’ salaries by the Chief Administrative Officer.”

She concluded, “It is tragic that this step is necessary, but the Chamber of the People’s House must and will be safe.”

Share
Categories
Gender inclusive Gender language house House rules Intelwars James mcgovern Nancy Pelosi

Democrats propose major change to House rules, eliminating family language for ‘gender-inclusive’ alternatives

House Democrats unveiled proposed changes to the House rules on Friday, including the elimination of all “gendered” language and to make permanent the recently established House “Office of Diversity and Inclusion.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-Mass.) claimed that “changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral” are necessary changes meant to “honor all gender identities.”

The
proposed changes would establish “gender-inclusive” language in the House rules by eliminating “gendered” language.

Instead of words like “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter,” the proposed rules say the House should use language like “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild.”

The proposed rules also demand the following changes:

  • “Seafarers” instead of “seamen”
  • “Chair” instead of “chairman”
  • “Resign” instead of “submit his or her resignation”
  • “Such Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner serves” instead of “he or she serves”
  • “Such Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner holds” instead of “he or she holds”
  • “Themselves” instead of “himself” or “herself”

“Thanks to the leadership of Chairman McGovern and our Members, Democrats have crafted a package of unprecedented, bold reforms, which will make the House more accountable, transparent and effective in our work to meet the needs of the American people,” Pelosi said in a statement.

The rules will be voted on after the 117th Congress is sworn in on Sunday.

In response, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) mocked the proposed changes.

“This is stupid. Signed, – A father, son, and brother,” McCarthy tweeted.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus covid COVID-19 house house democrats Intelwars Kevin McCarthy Nancy Pelosi speaker

Democrats panic that COVID could prevent Pelosi’s return to speaker — and even result in a GOP speaker

Democrats are reportedly panicked over the possibility that the coronavirus pandemic could hinder House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s expected re-election as House speaker, possibly even resulting in the top House Republican being elected speaker despite the Democratic majority.

What are the details?

To protect lawmakers vulnerable to COVID-19, the House adopted emergency rules in May that allowed House members to vote by proxy, which meant they were not required to be on the House floor to cast votes.

However, the emergency rules expire at the end of the 116th Congress, which could complicate Pelosi’s expected re-election as speaker.

The Hill explains:

[T]he proxy-voting rule expires with the new Congress, requiring lawmakers to be in the Capitol in person if they want to participate in the Jan. 3 floor vote for Speaker. The House will adopt a new rules package governing the 117th Congress just after the Speaker vote. That makes physical attendance tantamount to Pelosi’s success, since Democrats are on track to have a razor-thin majority of 222 seats, and at least three moderate members of the caucus are already on record saying they don’t intend to vote for Pelosi on Jan. 3: Reps. Conor Lamb (Pa.), Jared Golden (Maine) and Elissa Slotkin (Mich.).

In fact, House rules dictate that a speaker candidate must receive an absolute majority of votes cast during the speaker election to become speaker of the House.

This means the combination of a slim Democratic majority and Democrats opposing Pelosi could give the speakership to the Republican Party if several Democratic members are unable to attend the speaker vote because they are sick with COVID-19.

What are Democrats saying?

If more Republicans than Democrats are present at the vote, Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) explained that Kevin McCarthy, the top House Republican, could be elected speaker.

“Let’s say, just theoretically, we had six or eight people out with COVID and the Republicans have none. They probably could elect McCarthy,” Yarmuth told the Hill.

Other House Democrats anonymously told the Hill:

  • “We’re in a health care crisis, right? No one can get sick. That’s the X-factor here. We need everyone to be healthy. … That’s the big fear.”
  • “Obviously, the concern is that with 435 people going all over the country, it’s hard to imagine that not one of us will have the virus on Jan. 3.”

Despite pledges from some moderate Democrats to oppose Pelosi’s speaker re-election, the Democratic Party has internally communicated that this year is not the time for advancing personal political prerogatives.

“There’s the usual suspects who make it part of their brand to vote against her. But I think there’s an awareness — and there’s certainly a message coming from within the caucus — that this may not be a year for the usual branding,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) told the Hill.

Share
Categories
America Farewell GREED house Intelwars Joe kennedy

Outgoing Democratic Rep. Joe Kennedy says America is plagued by greed in farewell speech to House

Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Joe Kennedy III delivered what the Hill called “bittersweet remarks” in his final address to the House of Representatives on Wednesday, telling the lower chamber that while he was “proud and hopeful” of what could be accomplished after his departure, America is a nation plagued by greed.

What are the details?

Kennedy, 40, served four terms in Congress, and instead of running for re-election to the House in 2020, he made a failed attempt to challenge fellow Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Ed Markey for his seat. Markey, 74, beat Kennedy by 10 points.

In his farewell speech, Kennedy began by calling his service to his district “an honor” before extending his gratitude to his wife, several fellow members, constituents, and aides.

The Democrat said that he leaves the House “proud and hopeful,” while calling the U.S. a “complicated and messy country.”

“We violated our founding promises before the ink was dry,” Kennedy asserted, saying, “We boldly declared ‘we the people’ and promptly defined ‘we’ as rich, white, Protestant male.” He continued, “We staked out moral high ground of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and paid for it with human bondage, abuse, and suffering that we carry to this day.”

Kennedy went on to voice encouragement that progress has been made, before pointing to “the great lie of our times: that the American pie is finite. That for my family to survive, yours must suffer. That the richest nation on Earth is somehow plagued by scarcity, rather than greed.”


Rep. Joe Kennedy gives bittersweet farewell speech on House floor

www.youtube.com

The New York Times reported that with Kennedy’s departure, “2021 will be the rare year since 1946” that a member of his famous family will not have a seat in Congress.

The Associated Press noted:

Kennedy is the grandson of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, D-N.Y., who was assassinated in 1968. A member of that Kennedy family has been in Congress with little interruption since Robert Kennedy’s brother, the future President John F. Kennedy, entered the House from Massachusetts in 1947.

The Democrat did not hint at what his plans are for the future during his farewell address, besides promising his children that he has “breakfast, bath, school drop-off duty for the next 15 years or so.”

According to the Boston Herald, Kennedy said he has been in talks for a possible post in the Biden administration.

The outlet further reported:

Kennedy’s also been floated as a top contender for a special Senate election in the increasingly unlikely chance U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren gets tapped for a position in President-elect Joe Biden’s administration. But his spokeswoman, Emily Kaufman, recently told the Herald, “Joe does not plan to run for Senate next year if a seat opens up.”

Share
Categories
house Intelwars Kevin McCarthy Ousters trolls

House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy trolls Democrats over their party’s losses

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) did a “quality” job of trolling Democrats on Tuesday for their 2020 losses in the lower chamber, to the extent that he even received a nod from a seasoned journalist who unintentionally prompted the GOP leader’s display.

What are the details?

Politico’s John Bresnahan, who has covered Congress for more than 20 years, tweeted a picture Tuesday showing House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) taking “a picture with Democrats not coming back next year after losing on Election Day.”

Bresnahan reported that Hoyer was “telling (a) story about elections lost,” and encouraging the ousted Democrats to “not lose heart.”

In reaction, McCarthy posted a picture of himself beaming while strolling through the Capitol Building’s Statuary Hall with no one else around, tweeting, “Here’s a group photo of me with all the House Republicans who lost races this year.”

McCarthy took both praise and heat for the post, but Bresnahan replied, “Quality trolling.”

What else?

Democrats maintained control of the House under Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) after Election Day on Nov. 3, but their majority was winnowed down.

USA Today reported earlier this week:

At least 10 Democratic incumbents fell to Republicans in the House, though the party clung on to control of the chamber. Aspirations to take the Senate majority seemed to wither as race after race was called for Republicans – even in states where Democrats polled significantly higher than incumbents.

While Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been roundly declared the projected winner in the race for the White House by mainstream media, President Donald Trump continues to contest the election results and the GOP is expressing optimism after performing well against Democrats in down ballot races.

Control of the Senate also remains up in the air, as the nation awaits the results of the two remaining seats in play that will be decided in Jan. 5 runoffs in Georgia between sitting GOP Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, who are facing challenges from Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, respectively.

Republicans currently carry the Senate 50-48, but if both Democrats win in Georgia and Biden is inaugurated, Democrats would control both chambers of Congress along with the presidency.

Share
Categories
house house democrats Intelwars Kevin McCarthy

Democrat-run House will be ‘laziest Congress in modern history’ next year, top Republican explains

According to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the upcoming year in the House of Representatives will be the “laziest Congress is modern history.”

That’s because House Democrats — who hold a majority in the House and therefore manage the legislative calendar — have scheduled only 101 days of work for the upcoming year, a significant reduction compared to previous years.

“House Democrats have scheduled 101 days of work for next year — a 25% reduction. Let me say it again: 101 working days. For the whole year. Laziest Congress in modern history,” McCarthy tweeted over the weekend.

What did McCarthy say?

Speaking at his weekly press conference last Thursday, McCarthy expressed urgency over the coronavirus pandemic and providing Americans with relief — but said Democrats are not really interested in working.

“We have to get to work on this, we have to get it done, but working is something that this majority has not a good record on doing. Just look at the floor schedule this week, Democrats have focused on cats and cannabis, but not on COVID,” McCarthy explained.

“You’d think after a humiliating defeat at the ballot box this year, that Democrats didn’t defeat one Republican incumbent,” he added. “Of the 27 most vulnerable races, Republicans won them all. That Democrats would get to the picture that the Americans are demanding some action on these issues.”

“It certainly doesn’t appear that in the next Congress anything will change. Yesterday the Democrats released next year’s House schedule. The average number of days working in the first session of the past four Congresses have been 134 days. You would think with all the challenges that this country has, that we’d probably maybe even work, at least more, or at the very least that same amount of time. Nope,” McCarthy said.

As McCarthy explained, House Democrats last week passed measures to decriminalize recreational marijuana use and to ban private ownership of big cats, paying homage to the Netflix documentary “Tiger King.”

They did not, however, address the COVID crisis.

At his press conference, McCarthy went on to explain that next year’s House calendar represents a larger problem within the Democratic Party: They like to get paid for not working.

“Democrats think Congress needs a 25% reduction. Yes, you don’t even have to show up for work,” McCarthy said. “Sixty Democrats yesterday, one third of them, didn’t show up for work — just voted by proxy and still got paid. And now they found out they don’t even have to work as much as they did … Congresses before. A 25% reduction, with only scheduled 101 days.”

“They’ll probably become the laziest Congress we have ever had,” McCarthy declared.

What about COVID relief?

Lawmakers have infamously been unable to compromise on additional COVID relief. House Democrats passed a bill in May that would cost taxpayers more than $3 trillion; it was the largest bill the House had ever approved.

However, Republicans have rejected the massive spending, instead seeking to spend just around $1 trillion in the next bill, narrowing which Americans should receive economic benefits. Democrats have framed Republican efforts as refusing to help struggling Americans.

However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted last week that she’s now happy to negotiate and compromise on COVID-19 relief because Joe Biden appears to have won the White House.

Share
Categories
defense spending house Intelwars National Defense Authorization Act NDAA President Donald Trump Section 230 reform Senate

Tulsi Gabbard backs Trump veto threat on defense bill over Section 230’s Big Tech protections

President Donald Trump on Wednesday gained unexpected support from a former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate after he criticized Section 230’s protections for Big Tech companies.

Trump on Tuesday threatened to veto the National Defense Authorization Act, a bill to authorize defense spending, demanding that Congress first reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The law protects web publishers from being sued for content posted on their platforms by third parties.

“Section 230, which is a liability shielding gift from the U.S. to ‘Big Tech’ (the only companies in America that have it — corporate welfare!), is a serious threat to our National Security & Election Integrity. Our Country can never be safe & secure if we allow it to stand,” Trump tweeted.

“Therefore, if the very dangerous & unfair Section 230 is not completely terminated as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will be forced to unequivocally VETO the Bill when sent to the very beautiful Resolute desk. Take back America NOW. Thank you!”

Retiring Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a frequent critic of the president, expressed her full support for Trump’s veto threat.

“Please don’t back down. The freedom and future of our country is at stake,” Gabbard tweeted.

The rest of Congress, for the most part, is intent on brushing aside Trump’s veto threat.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said that while he agrees with the president on the need to reform Section 230, it “has nothing to do with the military” or appropriations for the armed forces.

“You can’t do it in this bill. That’s not a part of the bill,” Inhofe said, according to Politico.

“I would hope that he would not actually follow through with that because the NDAA is critical,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said of Trump’s veto threat.

“At this last minute, this sudden threat on an item that’s not even part of a defense bill. … I don’t think we could do it in a thoughtful, logical way at all,” said Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.), the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.

He suggested the president’s veto threat “seems to be more out of spite than anything else.”

Politico reported that the House of Representatives will soon advance a compromise defense bill that resolves differences between the House and Senate versions of the NDAA, known as a conference report. The conference report leaves Section 230 unaltered.

President Trump does have some Republican support for vetoing the NDAA. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) will not support the bill because of legislative language about U.S. military bases named for Confederate soldiers. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he supports Trump “using all the leverage he can” to reform Section 230.

But Republican leadership remains opposed to tying Big Tech legislation to defense spending.

“I don’t think the defense bill is the place to litigate that,” said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican. “There will be enormous support for getting the defense authorization bill passed and hopefully signed into law.”

Share
Categories
defense spending house Intelwars National Defense Authorization Act NDAA President Donald Trump Section 230 reform Senate

Tulsi Gabbard backs Trump veto threat on defense bill over Section 230’s Big Tech protections

President Donald Trump on Wednesday gained unexpected support from a former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate after he criticized Section 230’s protections for Big Tech companies.

Trump on Tuesday threatened to veto the National Defense Authorization Act, a bill to authorize defense spending, demanding that Congress first reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The law protects web publishers from being sued for content posted on their platforms by third parties.

“Section 230, which is a liability shielding gift from the U.S. to ‘Big Tech’ (the only companies in America that have it — corporate welfare!), is a serious threat to our National Security & Election Integrity. Our Country can never be safe & secure if we allow it to stand,” Trump tweeted.

“Therefore, if the very dangerous & unfair Section 230 is not completely terminated as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will be forced to unequivocally VETO the Bill when sent to the very beautiful Resolute desk. Take back America NOW. Thank you!”

Retiring Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a frequent critic of the president, expressed her full support for Trump’s veto threat.

“Please don’t back down. The freedom and future of our country is at stake,” Gabbard tweeted.

The rest of Congress, for the most part, is intent on brushing aside Trump’s veto threat.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said that while he agrees with the president on the need to reform Section 230, it “has nothing to do with the military” or appropriations for the armed forces.

“You can’t do it in this bill. That’s not a part of the bill,” Inhofe said, according to Politico.

“I would hope that he would not actually follow through with that because the NDAA is critical,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said of Trump’s veto threat.

“At this last minute, this sudden threat on an item that’s not even part of a defense bill. … I don’t think we could do it in a thoughtful, logical way at all,” said Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.), the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.

He suggested the president’s veto threat “seems to be more out of spite than anything else.”

Politico reported that the House of Representatives will soon advance a compromise defense bill that resolves differences between the House and Senate versions of the NDAA, known as a conference report. The conference report leaves Section 230 unaltered.

President Trump does have some Republican support for vetoing the NDAA. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) will not support the bill because of legislative language about U.S. military bases named for Confederate soldiers. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he supports Trump “using all the leverage he can” to reform Section 230.

But Republican leadership remains opposed to tying Big Tech legislation to defense spending.

“I don’t think the defense bill is the place to litigate that,” said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican. “There will be enormous support for getting the defense authorization bill passed and hopefully signed into law.”

Share
Categories
Banquet dinner Holiday house Intelwars Nancy Pelosi new members

House slammed over new member banquets as Americans are told to skip holiday gatherings with family

Leadership in the House of Representatives was lambasted Friday for moving forward with traditional banquets welcoming newly elected members of the lower chamber to Washington, D.C., while Americans are being warned against large holiday gatherings outside their immediate households due to concerns over the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

What are the details?

NBC News congressional correspondent Leigh Ann Caldwell set off a firestorm across the political spectrum when she tweeted out a picture showing the Capitol building’s National Statuary Hall filled with dining tables.

“House Dem and GOP leaders are holding respective dinners for new members,” Caldwell wrote, noting, “@SpeakerPelosi told me it’s safe. ‘It’s very spaced,’ she said and there is enhanced ventilation and the Capitol physician signed off.”

The Twittersphere reacted with fury, with many pointing to the hypocrisy of such a move.

“This is setting such a bad example,” the Daily Beast’s Jackie Kucinich replied. “Doctors are asking Americans to skip family gatherings for Thanksgiving to slow the spread but sure, enjoy the golden tables in a Stat Hall, a room without working windows.”

Conservative writer and politico Rachel Bovard reacted, “AHAHAHA I tried to have a normal wedding reception this year and every venue told me to get bent.”

Food Network judge and chef Andrew Gruel pointed out, “We just had to close dining at our New Mexico locations due to a state lockdown.”

“Rules are for thee, not for Pelosee,” chided former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, in a dig at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)

Following heat after news broke about the dinners, Pelosi’s deputy chief of staff, Drew Hammill, said that the event had been “modified.”

“Our office strictly follows the guidance of the Office of Attending Physician, including for this dinner,” he wrote. “To be a further model for the nation, this event has been modified to allow Members-elect to pick up their meals to go in a socially-distanced manner.”

Later in the evening, Hammill tweeted out, “Members-elect are now picking up their boxed meals and departing the Capitol. There is no group dinner. Members-elect are in DC already for orientation.”

It is unclear how many people—including incoming members and invited guests—were present at the Democrats’ “dinner” on Friday evening, or how many are expected at the Republicans’ planned engagement.

Some House races remain undecided across the country, but UPI reported Friday that “about 50 new members of Congress gathered to start the process of hiring staff and setting up offices as they transition to Washington” during “orientation in the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center Congressional Auditorium.”

Share
Categories
Decide election house Intelwars Nancy Pelosi Ready

Nancy Pelosi says House is ‘ready’ to decide who will be president if election ends up in Congress

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says the lower chamber is “ready” if the election between President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden ends up disputed and in the hands of Congress.

What are the details?

NPR‘s Ari Shapiro asked Pelosi on Monday, “Let’s talk about what might happen in the election tomorrow because there are a lot of dire scenarios if the vote does not produce a decisive result. Some of those scenarios involve you as the speaker of the House. Are you confident in the resilience of American democratic systems to handle a contested election if it comes to that?”

“Our country is a great country,” the speaker replied. “We’re even great enough to survive one term of Donald Trump. Two terms would be such a serious setback that I worry for our country.”

“But what if the outcome is disputed?” Shapiro pressed. “What if this is being fought in the courts or there is a constitutional crisis? I mean, there are all kinds of scenarios, and in some of them, the speaker of the House plays a prominent role.”

“And the speaker of the House is ready for that prominent role,” Pelosi responded. “But let’s not worry about that right now.

“We’re ready. We’re prepared,” she continued. “We’ve been ready for a while because we see this irresponsibility of the president, his disrespect for the Constitution, for our democracy, and for the integrity of our elections. So we’re ready for him.”

Pelosi added, “What we want to be ready for is a big vote tomorrow to dispel any thought other than that, on January 20, Joe Biden will be inaugurated president of the United States, that we will have a Democratic House and a Democratic Senate.”

Anything else?

The Hill reported that “should the presidential election not present a clear winner by electoral vote, then it is up to the House to choose the next president.”

An article by 270towin.com explains that if neither Trump nor Biden is able to secure 270 electoral votes, “the election for President is decided in the House of Representatives, with each state delegation having one vote. A majority of states (26) is needed to win. Senators would elect the Vice-President, with each Senator having a vote. A majority of Senators (51) is needed to win.”

Share
Categories
deal house Intelwars Kevin McCarthy Nancy Pelosi Shutdown spending

House passes bipartisan spending deal by a landslide, averting government shutdown

The House of Representatives passed a bipartisan spending bill by a landslide late Tuesday night, which, if passed by the Senate and signed by President Donald Trump, will continue funding the federal government through Dec. 11.

What are the details?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced in a statement ahead of the vote that she had reached a deal with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Republicans for a continuing resolution that would “add nearly $8 billion in desperately needed nutrition assistance for hungry schoolchildren and families.”

“We also increase accountability in the Commodity Credit Corporation, preventing funds for farmers from being misused for a Big Oil bailout,” she said.

The Washington Post reported that the stopgap measure passed “overwhelmingly” in a 358-to-57 vote, noting that Republicans had rejected an earlier “partisan bill” put forward by Democrats the day before.

Not one Democrat voted against the legislation, but 56 Republicans did along with former GOP member Libertarian Justin Amash (Mich.).

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted Tuesday night, “Pelosi got caught trying to jam through a bill that ignored kids & hurt farmers. Republicans stopped her, & we just won a vote to keep the government operating for ALL Americans. It’s not perfect. But it’s a heck of a lot better than what Democrats tried to pull.”

According to The Hill, the Senate is expected to take up the CR as early as next week. The outlet noted, “Both parties are strongly incentivized to avoid a government shutdown, given the proximity to the November elections and the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.”

CBS News reported that “The resolution funds the government until December 11, avoiding a possible shutdown at the end of September.”

Share
Categories
Baltimore black GOP Haters house Intelwars Kimberly klacik trump

GOP House candidate Kimberly Klacik fires back at critics who claim she only got Trump nod because she’s black

Maryland Republican congressional candidate Kimberly Klacik delivered a scorching response Thursday to the abuse she has received online since President Donald Trump endorsed her last month, and she did not hold back.

What are the details?

“My favorite part about getting Trump’s endorsement is reading the comments claiming Trump only did it because I am black..” Klacik tweeted, adding, “…as if we didn’t spend 3 weeks watching modern day overseer @JoeBiden play Duck Duck Goose w/three black women to pick a VP solely based on complexion.”

On Aug. 31, President Trump tweeted, “Kimberly Klacik is really working hard to help the people of Baltimore. She is running for Congress as a Republican, & if she wins she will be an inspiration to all. She is strong on inner city rebuilding, healthcare, our Military & Vets. She has my Complete & Total Endorsement!”

Twitchy.com compiled examples of some of the racist messages Klacik received in the aftermath.

One person wrote in reaction to one of Klacik’s tweets, “stop being used as the black pawn for this weak little man. You’re ruining your chances at having any kind of life of dignity and respect by enabling this fat ass moron. Well, perhaps you deserve that, eh?!”

Another wrote, “Lol your a joke Tap dancing for the Republicans Turn in your black card,” while yet another added, “She is a black person that thinks she’s white that can only find the time to put other black people down. @kimKBaltimore will always present as #black cause she is black and that’s what people see first. Many proud black people died so she can have her freedom to stand on them.”

Somebody tweeted of Klacik, “‘She is running for Congress as a Republican.’ How Trump describes a black congressional candidate. He can’t believe a black person would be a Republican because he knows what being a Republican means, i.e. being white. He just can’t hide his racism and bias.”

One sicko reacted, “coons 4 trump.”

Anything else?

Klacik has seen her profile rise nationally after receiving millions of views for her campaign ad calling out decades of failed Democratic leadership in the city of Baltimore, which she would represent if she wins in November. She also spoke at the Republican National Convention last month.

But she has, sadly, received plenty of abuse long before even launching her campaign. In July of last year, she was attacked online, in the media, and targeted by hackers after she dared to appear on Fox News to expose footage exposing the dilapidated conditions in many parts of Baltimore.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus COVID-19 house Intelwars Robert redfield

CDC director admits hospitals have monetary ‘incentive’ to inflate coronavirus death count

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Robert Redfield admitted last week that American hospitals may have monetary incentive to inflate coronavirus death counts.

During a hearing by the House Oversight and Reform Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis on Friday, Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.) asked whether hospitals have “perverse incentive” to inflate COVID-19 fatality numbers.

Shockingly, Redfield admitted that they do.

“I think you’re correct in that we’ve seen this in other disease processes, too,” Redfield said.

“Really, in the HIV epidemic, somebody may have a heart attack but also have HIV — the hospital would prefer the [classification] for HIV because there’s greater reimbursement,” he explained. “So, I do think there’s some reality to that.”

“When it comes to death reporting, though, ultimately, it’s how the physician defines it in the death certificate, and … we review all of those death certificates. So I think, probably it is less operable in the cause of death, although I won’t say there are not some cases,” he continued. “I do think though [that] when it comes to hospital reimbursement issues or individuals that get discharged, there could be some play in that for sure.”

Debate has raged over whether coronavirus deaths are being counted accurately, and various studies have found conflicting conclusions.

More from the Washington Examiner:

A Yale study concluded that the overall coronavirus death toll in the United States is a “substantial undercount” of the actual number; White House coronavirus response team member Dr. Deborah Birx suggested in May that deaths are being overcounted by 25%.

There appear to be cases where the opposite has happened. An investigation in Florida found that several deaths were wrongly attributed to the virus, including the case of a man who died from a gunshot wound to the head.

The CDC’s website lists over 3,700 coronavirus deaths characterized as “intentional and unintentional injury, poisoning and other adverse events.” In Texas, more than 3,000 people were recently removed from the overall coronavirus count because they were never actually tested but considered “probable” cases.

Still, it may never be possible to get an accurate count of deaths or cases, considering not everyone who contracts the disease is tested.

Indeed, antibody tests continually show that a significant portion of the population has likely contracted COVID-19, yet never knew they had the virus.

Share
Categories
floor house Intelwars Masks Nancy Pelosi Removal rule

Pelosi mandates masks on House floor, threatens members with removal for noncompliance

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced a new rule that lawmakers and staff will be required to wear a mask while in the hall of the lower chamber, warning that anyone who refuses to do so could be booted out by the Sergeant at Arms.

What are the details?

Speaking from the chair on Wednesday, Pelosi declared that starting Thursday, “Members and staff will be required to wear masks at all times in the Hall of the House except that members may remove their masks temporarily when recognized,” CSPAN reported.

Pelosi said she “expects all members and staff to adhere to this requirement as a sign of respect to the health, safety, and wellbeing of others present” before adding:

The chair would also like to remind members that the Speaker has the authority to direct the Sergeants At Arms to remove a member from the floor as a matter of decorum. To reiterate, the chair views the failure to wear a mask as a serious breach of decorum.

Politico posted text of the new rule online, which showed the mandate is open-ended, and “will remain in effect until a determination is made that such a requirement is no longer necessary.”

The speaker’s decision came the same day Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) revealed he tested positive for COVID-19. The Republican told KETK-TV following his diagnosis that he has gotten a lot of heat for not wearing a mask in the past, but he has increased his mask-wearing in recent weeks.

He told the outlet, “I can’t help but wonder if my keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, that if I might have put some germs or some of the virus onto the mask and breathed in it…I don’t know.” Gohmert says he has not experienced any symptoms of the disease.

Gohmert said his views on facial coverings is, “If somebody feels strongly about everybody should wear a mask, then they shouldn’t be around people that don’t wear masks.”

The Hill noted that Pelosi implement a mask requirement for committee meetings a month ago, “shortly after another GOP lawmaker, Rep. Tom Rice (S.C.) — who was spotted without a mask on the House floor — tested positive for the coronavirus.”

Masks have become a partisan issue since the committee mask requirement was put in place, adding further tension in an already-divided House of Representatives.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) has scolded GOP members of his committee numerous times, even threatening to not recognize members who were not wearing masks—leading to battles with ranking member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Share
Categories
GOP house Intelwars Tedros adhanom ghebreyesu Testifys WHO

House GOP members call on WHO chief to testify for providing false info on China’s COVID response

A group of House Republicans sent a letter to World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus on Wednesday, demanding answers on the WHO’s contradictory reporting on its discovery of the coronavirus — and calling on Dr. Tedros to clear things up under oath.

What are the details?

Oversight and Reform Committee Ranking member James Comer (R-Ky.) joined every GOP member of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis in signing the letter, including Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio), Blaine Luetkemeyer (Mo.), Jackie Walorski (Ind.), and Mark Green (Tenn.).

The letter recalls how the Oversight Committee reached out to the WHO back in early April regarding the organization’s “failed response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including its reported improper relationship with the Chinese Communist Party,” and the response that came more than two months later “was wholly incomplete and contained at least one false statement.”

The Republicans pointed out that the WHO initially claimed that China had first reported on the COVID-19 outbreak, but the international organization backtracked last week and admitted that China had not, in fact, notified them about the onset of the virus.

“This revelation demands your complete and forthright response to the Committee’s previous request and sworn testimony before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis,” the members wrote to Tedros. “Until you appear under oath, America and the world will not know the origins of this crisis.”

In a statement to TheBlaze, Ranking Member Comer explained further, “From the very start, the WHO and Secretary-General Tedros have proven that their priority has been to assist the Chinese government at the expense of the American people and the rest of the world. While China spread misinformation so it could hoard medical supplies, Tedros was praising them for their transparency.”

He added, “Now we also know that the WHO even lied to the world and this Committee about what China told them about the virus. Until the WHO undergoes some serious reforms, it doesn’t deserve our money or our membership.”

Share
Categories
house Intelwars jerry nadler Jim Jordan Masks

Jim Jordan fights back after Jerry Nadler tries to silence a GOP member for refusing to wear a mask

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday attempted to enforce a new rule pushed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), requiring committee chairs to “exclude members who fail to comply” with wearing a mask during proceedings.

But when Nadler tried to skip over a mask-free Republican’s speaking time during a meeting, Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pushed back.

What are the details?

The Hill reported that the Capitol physician — at the request of Pelosi — issued guidance Tuesday night requiring lawmakers to wear facial coverings for all meetings “in a limited space, such as a committee hearing room, for greater than 15 minutes.”

A senior Democratic aide told the outlet that the speaker had asked committee chairs to “enforce rules of decorum and exclude members who fail to comply.”

While overseeing a Judiciary Committee meeting the next day, Nadler reminded his colleagues of the new rule — saying he had been “lenient” for most of the day — but warned that moving forward “anyone who is not wearing a mask will not be recognized to speak. Period.”

Immediately thereafter, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), who was not wearing a mask, sought to speak to argue his case for not covering his face. Nadler ignored him, and attempted to skip over the congressman to allow a Democrat to take the allotted time.

“McClintock has tried repeatedly to make his point,” Jordan interjected. After Nadler made another effort to move on to the Democrat, Jordan said, “No, no, it’s our side. You just had a Democrat speak, it’s our turn.”

After a back-and-forth, Nadler eventually relented, allowing McClintock to express his opposition to the mask rule and its enforcement. The California Republican argued, “I consider masks much more effective at spreading panic and much less effective at stopping a virus.”

Share
Categories
Coronavirus house Intelwars Nancy Pelosi

House passes $3 trillion coronavirus bill despite it likely being ‘dead on arrival’ in Senate

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives has passed the most expensive legislation ever approved in history—a $3 trillion behemoth of a bill aimed at providing coronavirus relief—despite the fact that the Republican-run Senate is unlikely to even take it up.

What are the details?

The legislation, called the HEROES Act, was pushed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and passed by a vote of 208-199. A single Republican, Rep. Steve King (N.Y.) voted for the bill, and fourteen Democrats broke with their party in opposing it.

Fox News reported:

The legislation includes $915 billion in state and local aid that could prevent layoffs of public workers, like first responders and teachers; a new $200 billion ‘heroes’ fund for hazard pay for essential workers; $100 billion for K-12 and higher education and $85 billion for coronavirus testing.

The legislation aims to get more money into the pockets of American hard-hit by widespread business closures. Eligible individuals would receive $1,200 checks for each person in their household, up to $6,000.

The bill extends add-on unemployment benefits of $600 payments, in addition to state benefits, through January 2021, creates a special enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act exchanges for the uninsured and provides $175 billion for families to pay their mortgages and rent. The legislation includes student loan forgiveness, an employee retention tax credit and increases maximum SNAP benefits, which are currently $768 a month, by 15 percent.

“But,” the outlet noted, “tucked into the legislation are provisions that rankled the Republicans including expanding $1,200 checks to certain undocumented immigrants, restoring the full State and Local Tax Deduction (SALT) that helps individuals in high-taxed blue states, a $25 billion rescue for the U.S. Postal Service, allowing legal marijuana businesses to access banking services and early voting and vote-by-mail provisions.”

According to The Hill, the HEROES Act was drafted by House Democrats without any consultation with Republicans. Speaker Pelosi said of the bill, ‘We’re putting our offer on the table. We’re open to negotiation.”

ABC News reported that earlier this week, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said the bill would be “dead on arrival” in the upper chamber, while Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said of the legislation, “This week, the Speaker published an 1,800-page seasonal catalog of left-wing oddities and called it a coronavirus relief bill.” He added, “Here we go again.”

Share