U.S. Rep. Max Rose, a Jewish New York Democrat in his first term in Congress, apologized to visibly frustrated constituents at a town hall in Staten Island on Tuesday for not "protecting them" from fellow freshman Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar’s repeated use of "anti-Semitic tropes."
Rose’s comments came as Minnesota Democrats are seriously considering the prospect of supporting an unprecedented primary challenge against the 37-year-old Omar in 2020, following bipartisan condemnation of several of her remarks, according to officials and state representatives. Earlier this month, the House passed a bipartisan resolution condemning hate of all kinds in the wake of Omar’s comments. But Democrats kept Omar’s name out of the resolution, which several Republicans opposed as a watered-down, half-hearted effort.
“As a young congressman, I’ve got to tell you I’m sorry,” Rose told an audience gathered by the Council of Jewish Organizations (COJO), according to a video of the town hall posted on Facebook by Jewish Insider, which first reported the comments. “You sent me to Congress to take responsibility. You sent me to Congress to have your back … and I failed you. Because I know that Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s comments really caused you all a lot of pain by bringing up anti-Semitic tropes.”
Omar, 37, a Somali-American and one of two Muslim women in Congress, posted on Twitter in 2012 that “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” She drew condemnation in February even from fellow Democrats after she implied that Jewish politicians in the U.S. were bought.
Omar re-ignited the flames later that month when she once again suggested that groups supportive of Israel were pushing members of Congress to have "allegiance to a foreign country."
Rose, 32, a U.S. Army veteran of the war in Afghanistan and Purple Heart recipient, denied that his Jewish faith affected his patriotism and called Omar’s remarks "horrifying" — but he said she should not yet lose her seat on the powerful House Foreign Relations Committee, a prospective move he called an unnecessary "escalation." Republicans, earlier this year, stripped U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, of his committee assignments after he made remarks widely seen as supportive of white nationalism, although King denied those charges.
“Certainly as a Jewish combat veteran, I could tell you I don’t have dual allegiance,” Rose said, as an attendee pushed him for answers on Democrats’ response to Omar’s comments. “I have allegiance to the flag. I have allegiance to the United States of America.”
Rose continued: “We have got to show her that there is a pathway for her to do the right thing, and we have to be vigilant towards that. Believe me, she understands that [removing her from her committee assignments] is a possibility, and nobody is taking that off the table, but we are not there yet.”
Adding that “I am not satisfied with what I’ve seen thus far, I’m not," Rose concluded by saying that he nevertheless accepted Omar’s apology. President Trump and top Republicans have characterized Omar’s apology as half-hearted and insincere, saying that her repeated anti-Israel comments revealed her true feelings.
"I was horrified and sad when she made the comments," Rose said. "So horrified that as a freshman member of Congress I stepped in front of my party’s leadership and I was the first member of the Democratic Party to criticize her. I did say that I accepted her apology. You know why I did that? Because I am an adult. Because my goal was to continue the quiet and non-glamorous actions of coalition-building and trying to protect the people in this room from those comments being made.”
"I was horrified and sad when she made the comments."
Other Democrats have offered less-than-flattering defenses for the congresswoman. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi raised eyebrows earlier this month when she said Omar “doesn’t understand” that some of the words she uses are "fraught with meaning."
Activists and officials interviewed in Minnesota have said recently while they have not yet recruited a viable alternative candidate to run against Omar, frustrations are mounting.
“There’s definitely some buzz going around about it, but it’s more a buzz of, ‘Is anyone talking about finding someone to run against her?’ than it is anyone saying they’re going to run against her or contemplate it," state Rep. Ron Latz, a Democrat, told the Hill. "There’s definitely talk about people wanting someone to run against her."
And Omar Jamal, a Somali community activist, told the Washington Post that he has been in touch with Jewish community leaders about Omar. He said he supported her campaign but called her recent comments, "wrong, period."
"This is up to Ilhan Omar," he said. "She has really spoken in a very dangerous way, and it’s going to be up to her to reach out to people and fix this."
Source: Fox News Politics
Former independent counsel Kenneth Starr praised Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and his lawsuit against Twitter Monday saying that the legal action will move the social media giant into the “age of accountability.”
“I think this is going to be one of those action-forcing events, it’s calling Twitter, and more broadly these social platforms, into the age of accountability,” Starr said on “America’s Newsroom.” “They’ve enjoyed the age of running free, running loose, doing what they want to do but especially since they hold a very important power – censorship.”
Twitter has been accused by conservatives of censoring their views.
President Trump Tuesday slammed Twitter and other media companies, accusing them of backing Democrats. Trump made the accusation on his Twitter account.
"Facebook, Google, and Twitter, not to mention the Corrupt Media, are sooo on the side of the Radical Left Democrats," Trump tweeted.
Starr believes Twitter’s decision-making process around what it chooses to censor and what it chooses not to is the key issue.
“They can censor. They proudly say we must censor,” Starr said. “But are they censoring in a fair-minded way?”
Starr added: “We don’t know much at least about how this process of filtering goes through. So, I think that the lawsuit is going to help illuminate that.”
Nunes filed a the lawsuit Monday seeking $250 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages against Twitter and a handful of its users on Monday, accusing the social media site of "shadow-banning conservatives" to secretly hide their posts, systematically censoring opposing viewpoints, and totally "ignoring" lawful complaints of repeated abusive behavior.
Starr believes Nunes is using litigation to get the answers he wants from Twitter and using the courts to do what Congress is unable to do.
“It’s again proof that litigation can be a powerful sword, a powerful engine for getting the truth,” Starr told co-host Sandra Smith. “I think this is a terrific method for getting real accountability the way, frankly, it’s going to be hard for Congress to do.”
Fox News’ Gregg Re contributed to this report.
Source: Fox News Politics
Pennsylvania State Representative Brian Ellis has resigned after reportedly being accused of raping an incapacitated woman at his home several years ago.
In a statement written to the House speaker on Monday, the Republican lawmaker said his resignation would be effective immediately, and that serving the district was his "highest professional honor," WTAE reports.
His unnamed accuser is reportedly a state employee who never worked directly for Ellis, but had rejected advances from the husband and father-of-two "multiple times before," according to state victim advocate Jennifer Storm. The woman said that she was having a drink with a friend when she believes she was drugged, and had no memory of the next 12 hours. The next day, she went to the hospital.
"She reported to doctors that she had no memory of the previous evening and she believed she was sexually assaulted," her lawyer, Christine Wechsler, said on Friday.
The incident is thought to have taken place at Ellis’ home near the capitol in Harrisburg at least three years ago.
Ellis was stripped of his chairmanship of the House Consumer Affairs Committee two months ago when the allegations were first revealed, and was subsequently encouraged by House Republican leaders to step down "to take care of his family and address the allegations raised against him," a statement read.
A criminal investigation by the Dauphin County District Attorney is ongoing, but Ellis has yet to be charged with any crime.
"It is with immense gratitude to the sacrifices made by my family, the support of my constituents, and the friendship of my colleagues that I have concluded that it is in the best interests of my family, the residents of the 11th House district, and my own health that I resign from the General Assembly," Ellis said on Monday.
"By this letter, I hereby officially tender my resignation as the state representative for the 11th House district, effective immediately."
Source: Fox News Politics
It’s unclear what legislative issues may consume Congress between now and the end of September but one thing’s for sure: President Trump’s veto of a measure to terminate his national emergency for the border has the potential to spark another government shutdown on Oct. 1.
Yes, the president and Congress just sparred over the border wall during the 35-day shutdown which ended this past January. They could be back at it again soon because Trump elected to go around Congress, testing the limits of the Constitution and separation of powers, and mining appropriations bills for wall money.
It was thought that the bipartisan attitude on Capitol Hill which forged a funding agreement could generate cooperation and goodwill heading into Fiscal Year 2020. But, President Trump’s national emergency declaration may have doomed any charity left in Congress.
The House and Senate lack the votes to override Trump’s veto. The House is about 40 votes shy. The Senate is eight votes off the mark. The House is still set to try the override on March 26, but it’s almost certain the override endeavor will perish there — and President Trump will use his declaration to use various military funds to cover the cost of the wall unless blocked by a federal court.
Now the administration has presented lawmakers with a list which details a pool of military projects from which it may use cash to pay for the wall. The administration has called the clump of money “unobligated.” It amounts to $12.9 billion.
“He is planning to take funds from real, effective operational priorities and needed projects and divert them to his vanity wall. That may help shore up his political base, but it could come at the expense of our military bases and the men and women of our Armed Forces who rely on them,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.
Congress is just starting to prepare the 12 appropriations bills which fund the government for FY ‘20. Almost all Democrats, and frankly, many Republicans, have described Trump’s effort to bypass Congress as brazen. Lawmakers of both parties have guarded Congressional prerogatives of the purse closely, so it’s likely a bipartisan group of lawmakers will start to install restrictions to curb the president from diverting funds in the next spending round – without direct Congressional approval.
Therein lies the rub.
President Trump’s budget request calls for $8.6 billion in wall funding for FY ‘20. Congress likely will grant the president some of the money – but not all. Will he attempt to sidestep Congress again? Will Trump veto bills where Congress tries to re-assert its power of the purse or curb his ability to circumvent the traditional appropriations process? That’s where a possible shutdown comes in.
Meantime, it’s unclear what Congress can tackle the rest of the year.
Infrastructure? No action. Washington recently saw another “infrastructure week” but there was no sign of any progress.
There’s a lot of talk about trade, but the administration hasn’t yet forged a formal agreement with China. Negotiators did ink a pact with Canada and Mexico to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Still, there’s no timetable for the House or Senate to consider the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer met last week with House Democrats, but it’s anyone’s guess when or if anything could move through Congress on trade.
The agenda in the Senate focuses mostly on the confirmation of judges and other administration nominees. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has a few more queued up for next week, but the actual GOP agenda is unclear.
Tax reform is done, for good or ill. Republicans can’t go back to take yet another stab at repealing and replacing ObamaCare, so the GOP is trained on problems of the Democrats. McConnell, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and House Republican Conference Chairwoman Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., routinely have pilloried Dems over their own internal divides. GOP leaders simply have pointed out issues Democrats have had with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, among others. The House Republican leadership brass routinely has gone after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for not doing more to keep the conduct of Omar and Tlaib in check.
McConnell’s set up a procedural vote to try starting debate next week on the Green New Deal, backed by Ocasio-Cortez and others. The Senate needs 60 yeas just to launch debate.
Senate Republicans certainly don’t support the Green New Deal. McConnell’s gambit is to get Democrats on the record as either supporting or rejecting the measure. Consider all of the Senate Democrats running for President: Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kamala Harris of California and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — not to mention Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. McConnell clearly would love to register a roll call vote on where Democrats stand in favor of the Green New Deal. Then, Republicans could crow about how radical and out-of-step the Democrats have been.
Or, McConnell also would enjoy Democrats opposing the Green New Deal. He then could exclaim that Ocasio-Cortez’s blueprint was too drastic even for the most liberal and environmentally friendly voices in the Democratic party. Either way, McConnell would get something he’s wanted.
But, it’s unclear whether he would score something definitive. The vote set for next week is just a procedural vote. It’s two steps away from an actual up-or-down vote on the underlying measure. Any vote to start debate — or to prevent the measure from coming to the floor — is muddled when it comes to messaging. Sure, McConnell could say that Ocasio-Cortez’s resolution was too far-flung to merit debate. But, that’s not the strongest argument to make in politics.
This is why the legislative agenda on Capitol Hill is so jumbled. There’s no clear path on what the sides can accomplish in the coming months. There will be a fight over lifting the debt ceiling this summer. How the sides resolve that is unclear. And the national emergency declaration likely will create yet another standoff over the border wall in September.
In other words, the rest of 2019 could reflect how the year started.
Source: Fox News Politics
U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s unfavorable rating has spiked after just months in Congress, with most of the public viewing her negatively rather than favorably, a new poll shows.
The New York Democrat shot to fame amid the party’s lurch to the left and embracement of socialist policies such as the Green New Deal, yet the more people learned about the 29-year-old freshman congresswoman, the more they were turned off by her.
A Gallup poll released Friday shows that Ocasio-Cortez’s unfavorable rating has risen by 15 points since last September, when she had yet to win the general election, increasing from 26 percent to 41 percent of the American adults polled.
She has also managed to increase her favorability rating, but only by 7 points. About 31 percent of surveyed people view her favorably, compared to 24 percent in September.
Since September, Ocasio-Cortez became more widely recognized across the country, with half of the respondents saying they have never heard of her before. Now only a fifth of surveyed people says they aren’t familiar with the self-described Democratic socialist.
The poll notes that Ocasio-Cortez’s name recognition is growing compared to that of other politicians at the same point in their careers in Congress. More surveyed people know the New York Democrat than they knew Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz as freshmen.
Overall, the results suggest that Ocasio-Cortez may be a polarizing figure. Most of her support is galvanized around younger, more diverse Democrat-leaning groups, while most of her opposition is composed of Republicans and more conservative Democrat-leaning groups.
Nearly three-quarters of Republican respondents say they view her negatively, with only 5 percent having a positive view. Among the Democrats, 56 percent of respondents had a favorable view of Ocasio-Cortez, compared to only 15 percent of the Democrats polled who don’t support her.
She’s also favored by adults 18 to 34, people of color and women. Yet she’s facing a favorability deficit among men (-24), whites (-24), and adults 55 or older (-22).
Among self-described independents, she has a negative net rating of 5 percent.
Source: Fox News Politics
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, slammed a U.S. Justice Department decision to seek a FISA warrant — and blasted what he described as the deceitful methods used to persuade the FISA court to grant it — during an appearance on Fox News’ "Hannity” on Thursday night.
“They didn’t tell the court the dossier was unverified," Jordan told Fox News host Sean Hannity, referring to the court created under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. "They didn’t tell the court who paid for it, namely the Clinton campaign. They didn’t tell the court that Christopher Steele, the guy who wrote it, was desperate that Trump not win. They didn’t tell the court that Christopher Steele had been fired by the FBI because he’s out leaking information. That’s a lot not to share with a secret court, especially, Sean, when you’re getting a warrant to go spy on the other party’s campaign.
"They didn’t tell the court who paid for it, namely the Clinton campaign."
Jordan, 55, the ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, and member of the House Judiciary Committee, called for a “single standard” for everyone when it comes to breaking the law, saying there shouldn’t be a separate set a rules for people named “Comey,” “Clinton,” “Lynch,” among others.
“All the way up until May 17, 2017, when they named Bob Mueller special counsel, they had zero, zero evidence of any type of collusion,” Jordan continued. “All of that time and still no evidence, and yet they moved ahead with this whole thing.”
Source: Fox News Politics
The House of Representatives voted Thursday in favor of a resolution to encourage Attorney General William Barr to release Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s full report to both Congress and the country amid Democratic fears information about the investigation would not be made public.
The resolution enjoyed overwhelming bipartisan support and passed in a floor vote 420-0. Four Republican lawmakers voted present.
“Congress will not accept any effort to bury this report,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the chairman of House Intelligence Committee, said on the House floor Thursday. “Anything less than full transparency would be unacceptable.”
Since the measure is a non-binding resolution, Mueller, Barr and President Trump cannot be forced to release more information to Congress and the public than the Justice Department and federal law require. Republicans were quick to point out that – despite their support for the resolution – because the resolution was non-binding, it had little sway over whether or not the report is released to the public.
Barr testified during his confirmation hearings in February that, as he understands the regulations governing the special counsel, the report will be confidential – and any report that goes to Congress or the public will be authored by the attorney general.
Some Democrats sounded the alarm after Barr’s testimony, with Connecticut Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal charging that Barr indicated he’d exploit legal "loopholes" to hide Mueller’s final report from the public and to resist subpoenas against the White House.
"I will commit to providing as much information as I can, consistent with the regulations," Barr had told Blumenthal when asked if he would ensure that Mueller’s full report was publicly released.
Mueller’s team is still leading several prosecutions, including against longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on charges of witness tampering and lying to Congress, and against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who awaits sentencing on charges he lied to FBI agents during the Russia probe. Flynn is cooperating as part of a separate Foreign Agents Registration Act case regarding lobbying work in Turkey as part of his plea deal.
Thursday’s resolution vote came on the same day it was announced that one of Mueller’s top prosecutors in the Russia investigation will soon leave his post – prompting more speculation that the probe is wrapping up.
Andrew Weissmann, who will leave the investigation reportedly to teach at New York University, helped build the case against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, who was recently sentenced to more than seven years in prison following two cases related to the Mueller probe.
Weissmann has been a frequent target of conservative legal interest groups and supporters of the president. Author Michael Wolff said former Trump advisor Steve Bannon told him that Weissmann was like "the LeBron James of money laundering investigations."
Fox News’ Gregg Re and Luis Casiano contributed to this report.
Source: Fox News Politics
At first glance, you’d be hard-pressed to find two lawmakers more dissimilar than Ilhan Omar and Steve King.
Omar is a Somali immigrant and freshman Democratic congresswoman on the liberal end of the partisan spectrum. King is a long-tenured Republican congressman whose tough stances on issues like immigration have made him among the most conservative lawmakers in Washington.
And yet ever since Congress last week passed a resolution condemning bigotry in response to alleged anti-Semitic comments from Omar, it has been difficult to talk about one lawmaker without mentioning the other.
Both lawmakers ran into trouble with their own parties for incendiary comments. Yet as the dust settles on last week’s Omar controversy, Republicans maintain that the Minnesota congresswoman was treated with kid gloves by comparison – and continue to pressure Democrats to deal with Omar like they dealt with King.
“The Democrats have yet to take any action to remove her from her committee,” Rep. Liz Cheney, a Wyoming congresswoman and the third-ranking Republican in the House, said over the weekend, referring to Omar’s still-secure spot on the Foreign Affairs Committee. “I’m hopeful that they’ll be able to stand up and do the right thing.”
The parties’ handling of how to discipline the lawmakers is a study in contrasts.
For his part, King was stripped of committee assignments as he faced condemnation for saying, “White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” to the New York Times earlier this year.
Democratic leaders, however, have allowed Omar to remain on the Foreign Affairs Committee. And they overhauled a planned resolution on anti-Semitism following concern in the ranks that it would unfairly single out Omar, and instead passed a broad anti-bigotry resolution last week. This, following comments from Omar claiming Israel supporters seek "allegiance" to the Jewish state, which drew accusations that she was echoing the "dual-loyalties" smear.
“It is absolutely shameful that Nancy Pelosi and Leader [Steny] Hoyer and the Democratic leaders will not put her name in a resolution on the floor and condemn her remarks and remove her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Those people who won’t condemn it are enabling it,” Cheney said.
Despite Cheney’s comments, however, neither King nor Omar was named in the resolutions drafted in response to their comments.
Further Democrats argue that it took Republicans a long time to censure King for racially charged comments he’s made in the past.
“It took them 13 years to notice Steve King?” Pelosi said of the Republicans, adding that President Trump never condemned King for his comments. Trump has called Omar “terrible” and said she should resign from her post on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Other Democratic lawmakers – including several presidential candidates – came to Omar’s defense. They suggested that her comments could be seen simply as criticism of U.S. foreign policy and Israeli lobbying efforts.
"We have a moral duty to combat hateful ideologies in our own country and around the world — and that includes both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said in a statement. "In a democracy, we can and should have an open, respectful debate about the Middle East that focuses on policy. Branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Unlike Omar, King — who has a history of controversy including ties to far-right European groups, exaggerated claims about immigrants and crime and an endorsement of a white nationalist politician in Canada — did not apologize for the comments that led to his reprimand. He has rejected claims that he is aligned with white nationalists.
“Omar’s apology, and the speed at which it was offered, is quite different from how Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) responded when he came under fire for his comments about race,” Eugene Scott, a columnist for the Washington Post, wrote. “King refused to apologize. Though he didn’t deny his quote in the Times, he painted the outrage against him as a political witch hunt.”
Some conservative commentators, however, argue that King’s comments were made over a long period of time, while Omar has only been in Congress since January and already has been the center of controversy on numerous occasions. They add that while GOP leaders may have taken their time condemning King, they eventually took a firm stance against him.
“They probably should have done something sooner and they probably regret not doing something sooner,” Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, told Fox News.
Olsen added that if Democrats don’t take firm action against Omar, she will continue to court controversy and the party will end up in a similar situation as the Republicans with King.
“King got in trouble for a lot of scandals until it became something they couldn’t ignore,” he said. “And the same thing will probably happen with the Democrats and Omar.”
Source: Fox News Politics
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., just pulled a move straight out of the movie “Office Space” on Vice President Mike Pence.
Pelosi has decided to revoke the honorary office that former House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., gave Pence on the first floor of the Capitol back in 2017.
While Pence rarely used the office, NPR reported that his nameplate was removed from the door and that the space has been reassigned, according to a Democratic aide.
The vice president, who serves as the president of the U.S. Senate and has an office on that chamber’s side, was given the House office shortly after President Trump’s inauguration in January 2017; it was a sign of goodwill between the House, then led by the GOP, and one of its former members.
The space is at the moment sitting empty.
"Room assignments are reviewed and changed at the beginning of every Congress," an aide told NPR.
The House speaker is the only member of Congress to have the power to assign coveted offices in the Capitol Building. Besides revoking Pence’s honorary office, Pelosi has doled out new office space for the White House legislative affairs team in the building.
Source: Fox News Politics
Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., continued her attack on Sunday on last week’s Democratic resolution condemning anti-Semitism and other bigotry – saying that it was nothing more than a move to protect Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., by not calling her out by name.
Cheney, the third-ranking Republican in House, was one of the few – and certainly the most prominent – members of the GOP to break with the party to oppose the resolution last Thursday. At the time she labeled it "a sham put forward by Democrats to avoid condemning one of their own and denouncing vile anti-Semitism."
Speaking on Sunday to NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Cheney doubled-down on her comments.
“Look, I think there are two ways we could have gone,” she said. “Some of the people in our conference clearly looked at it and said there’s nothing objectionable in the resolution. My statement made clear that that was my view as well. But I decided to vote against it because I think it was really clearly an effort to actually protect Ilhan Omar, to cover up her bigotry and anti-Semitism by refusing to name her.”
Omar, a freshman congresswoman from Minnesota, has been at the center of a political firestorm almost since the day she took office for a series of comments that have been anti-Semitic and highly critical of the state of Israel.
The one-sided 407-23 vote on Thursday belied the emotional infighting over how to respond to Omar’s recent comments suggesting House supporters of Israel have dual allegiances. For days, Democrats wrestled with whether or how to punish the lawmaker, arguing over whether Omar, one of two Muslim women in Congress, should be singled out, what other types of bias should be decried in the text and whether the party would tolerate dissenting views on Israel.
Cheney, who led the effort to remove controversial Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, from his committee posts after making numerous remarks that she deemed “abhorrent and racist,” has questioned why Democratic leaders have not acted in a similar manner with Omar.
“The Democrats have yet to take any action to remove her from her committee,” she said. “And they’ve got a real problem. I mean, the extent to which they’re abiding by anti-Semitism, enabling anti-Semitism in their party. It’s something we watch them struggle with, but something that’s dangerous for the country. I’m hopeful that they’ll be able to stand up and do the right thing.”
She added: “It is absolutely shameful that Nancy Pelosi and Leader [Steny] Hoyer and the Democratic leaders will not put her name in a resolution on the floor and condemn her remarks and remove her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Those people who won’t condemn it are enabling it.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Source: Fox News Politics