Approximately 30 minutes before the scheduled vote on the GOP healthcare bill to “repeal and replace” Obamacare, the house was quickly gaveled into recess. After it became clear that they didn’t have the votes necessary to pass, Paul Ryan and Donald Trump had agreed to pull the bill and postpone the vote.
While there is much talk about the need for 60 votes to end a filibuster and confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, fact is, the GOP only needs 51 votes. The Democrats gave up the right to filibuster several years ago. Led by Harry Reid, they changed the rules so as to allow Obama nominees to sail through the Democrat controlled senate with no resistance from the GOP.
Today, Democrats argue that they had made an exception and left the filibuster in place for Supreme Court nominees. Keep in mind that at the time there was no Supreme Court opening to fill – so that argument holds no water. And while in the minority, the GOP did NOT filibuster Obama’s Supreme Court nominees. As a matter of fact, it has NEVER happened. So if the Democrats indeed filibuster Judge Gorsuch, they themselves will yet again be setting precedence.
Democrats will also argue that if the GOP ends the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, it will come back to haunt the GOP when the Democrats are back in control. This argument is just as weak, if not weaker. Do they truly expect the GOP to trust that if only they don’t use the nuclear option today, the Democrats – who have ALREADY done it – won’t in the future?
There is a famous cartoon involving Charlie Brown, Lucy, and a football.
I have just chaired a meeting of the Government’s emergency committee, Cobra, following the sick and depraved terrorist attack on the streets of our capital this afternoon.
The full details of exactly what happened are still emerging, but having been updated by police and security officials, I can confirm that this appalling incident began when a single attacker drove his vehicle into pedestrians walking across Westminster Bridge- killing two people and injuring many more, including three police officers. This attacker, who was armed with a knife, then ran towards Parliament where he was confronted by the police officers who keep us and our democratic institutions safe. Tragically one officer was killed. The terrorist was also shot dead.
The United Kingdom’s threat level has been set at severe for some time, and this will not change. Acting deputy commissioner Rowley will give a further operational update later this evening.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to all who have been affected, to the victims themselves, and their family and friends who waved their loved ones off but will not now be welcoming them home.
For those of us who were in Parliament at the time of this attack these events provide a particular reminder of the exceptional bravery of our police and security services who risk their lives to keep us safe. Once again today, these exceptional men and women ran towards the danger, even as they encouraged others to move the other way. On behalf of the whole country, I want to pay tribute to them – and to all our emergency services – for the work they have been doing to reassure the public and bring security back to the streets of our capital city. That they have lost one of their own in today’s attack only makes their calmness and professionalism under pressure all the more remarkable.
The location of this attack was no accident. The terrorists chose to strike at the heart of our capital city, where people of all nationalities, religions, and cultures come together to celebrate the values of liberty, democracy and freedom of speech. These streets of Westminster, home to the world’s oldest parliament, are ingrained with a spirit of freedom that echos in some of the furthest corners of the globe. And the values our Parliament represents: democracy, freedom, human rights, the rule of law – command the admiration and respect of free people everywhere. That is why it is a target for those who reject those values.
But let me make it clear today, as I have had cause to do before – any attempt to defeat those values through violence and terror is doomed to failure.
Tomorrow morning, Parliament will meet as normal. We will come together as normal. And Londoners and others from around the world who have come here to visit this great city, will get up and go about their day as normal. They will board their trains, they will leave their hotels, they will walk these streets, they will live their lives. And we will all move forward together, never giving in to terror and never allowing the voices of hate and evil to drive us apart.
In Monday’s hearing, Comey admitted that leaks of classified info is serious and criminal – but refused to answer whether or not the FBI is pursuing an investigation to identify the person responsible for the leak. Gowdy was visibly upset.
On CBS’s Face the Nation, Senator Ted Cruz clearly and succinctly described the problem with the proposed “repeal and replace” RINOcare plan. He explained that the idea of a “three bucket solution” is a fantasy, and argued that if the GOP wants to honor their word or repealing Obamacare, they must come up with a realistic procedural plan.
Cruz described the current GOP as a recipe for disaster.
Cruz: If Republican’s hold a big press conference and pat ourselves on the back that we’ve repealed Obamacare, and everyone’s premiums keep going up… people will be ready to tar and feather us in the streets. And quite rightly.
Two most pertinent points:
1. Of Ryan’s three step (three bucket) plan, there is no chance that step three will pass the senate. Step three would require ALL Senate Republicans and eight Senate Democrats to pass. That simply will never happen. He calls bucket three “the sucker’s bucket.”
2. Because bucket three will never pass, it needs to be included in bucket one. Although the establishment wants to argue that this is not possible, by rules, it is indeed possible because the items in step three can be considered budgetary in nature, therefore only requiring 50 votes.
After months of denials, Donna Brazile has finally come clean about leaking debate questions to the Hillary Clinton campaign. In Time today, Brazile buries her confession is an essay about possible ties (despite no evidence) between the Trump campaign and Russia:
Brazile: Then in October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign….
My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen. But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret.
It is important to note that Brazile was also a paid contributor for CNN at the same time. In March of 2016, she leaked a worrisome question (regarding the death penalty) to Hillary Clinton’s director of communication, Jennifer Palmieri. Palmieri confirmed receipt of the mail by responding.
Politico Jennifer Palmieri, director of communications for the Clinton campaign, wrote back within three hours, seemingly not as worried:
Hi. Yes, it is one she gets asked about. Not everyone likes her answer but can share it.
She then instructs a copied employee to share the campaign’s standard answer to the question to Brazile.
A few months later, Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned as head of the DNC amid her own scandal, and Brazile was named interim head. When the Brazile scandal broke in October, CNN fired Brazile, but the DNC retained her as chairman.
The unexplored question seems to be, what was Clinton’s role in this? If she was kept in the dark, Hillary should have fired Palmieri in October when all of this came out. After all, that would mean the Palmieri knew of the corruption but didn’t expose it. But Hillary didn’t fire Palmieri, which makes it reasonable to suspect that Hillary was indeed tipped off in March, and did nothing about it.
So the game was indeed rigged – Playing right into Trump’s tiny hands.
Brazile, confronted in October, denies and plays the roll of victim:
Mark Levin made a compelling case today against Rachel Maddow, arguing that she indeed may have committed a felony when releasing Trump’s tax returns. He argues that by broadcasting Trump’s return, Maddow clearly seems to have violated the Taxpayer Browsing Protection Act, 26 U.S.C.§ 7213, specifically the section below.
TAXPAYER BROWSING PROTECTION ACT‘‘SEC. 7213A. UNAUTHORIZED INSPECTION OF RETURNS OR RETURN INFORMATION. ‘‘(a) PROHIBITIONS.— ‘‘(1) FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND OTHER PERSONS.—It shall be unlawful for— ‘‘(A) any officer or employee of the United States, or ‘‘(B) any person described in section 6103(n) or an officer or employee of any such person, willfully to inspect, except as authorized in this title, any return or return information. ‘‘(2) STATE AND OTHER EMPLOYEES.—It shall be unlawful for any person (not described in paragraph (1)) willfully to inspect, except as authorized in this title, any return or return information acquired by such person or another person under a provision of section 6103 referred to in section 7213(a)(2). ‘‘(b) PENALTY.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any violation of subsection (a) shall be punishable upon conviction by a fine in any amount not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment of not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.
An unidentified man is wanted in connection with a hate crime this week, related to the recognition of International Women’s Day on Wednesday.
International Women’s Day is an annual event, started by socialists over 100 years ago. The left’s relentless efforts to divide Americans continued as they called on women to avoid working and shopping on Wednesday.
The Oregonian First, women are asked “to refrain from paid and unpaid work.” The national organizers acknowledge this might be difficult for women with children and women with “economic insecurity.”
For the women that can’t strike, say the organizers on their website, “We strike for them.”
Next, everyone is encouraged to refrain from shopping, in stores and online, though “exceptions include local small businesses and women-owned businesses that support us.”
Everyone is also asked to wear red to express solidarity with the strike. The organizers chose red because it is “a color of signifying revolutionary love and sacrifice.”
One could easily fill a book critiquing the glaring intellectually weak thoughts behind this boycott and strike, but I’ll share just one observation. Picture a business that is run by a man who is married (to a woman) and has two young daughters to support. If the intent is to help women, is it really a good idea to boycott that business? And if it were a single father with two young boys at home – then what?
That said, on the day of the boycott/strike, the suspected hate criminal appears to have trolled the campus of American University by… hanging up flyers that weren’t approved by the university. Yes, he was hanging up flyers – a printout of a meme that said “STOP TALKING AND BITCHING WOMAN ON MARCH 8 AND MAKE ME A SANDWICH.”
Yes, your tax dollars hard at work, chasing down this alleged hate criminal: