Rashida Tlaib

Page: 2

X

Story Stream

recent articles

Most top Republicans and Democrats squared off this week in fierce warfare over the Mueller report and its findings clearing President Trump of criminal collusion with Russia, but there was one island of calm in the sea of partisan enmity.

Eliot Engel, the Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Mike McCaul, the panel’s ranking Republican, on Monday shared the stage at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington and publicly lauded each other’s personal integrity and shared commitment to protecting the U.S.-Israel alliance.

The easy rapport between the two lawmakers — particularly the absence of biting words or outward signs of vitriol — was almost jarring in an era of Twitter storms and continuous partisan recriminations.

“First of all, I think when it comes to foreign affairs, I think it’s very important that partisan politics should stop at the water’s edge – I think it’s very important that other nations see us working together – and we’ve had that tradition on the Foreign Affairs Committee,” Engel told the crowd.

McCaul, the former chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, was wholeheartedly on board.

“Eliot and I are very protective of the integrity of the committee — it should not be politicized. It should not be partisan,” he said. “In fact, when we travel overseas, we travel not as Republicans or Democrats but as Americans representing the United States of America, and that’s what is so great about it.”

The genial conversation between New Yorker Engel and Texan McCaul came the same week many Republicans were calling for several prominent Democratic lawmakers, including House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, to resign over their role in fueling the Trump-Russian collusion narrative.

Engel was notably absent from that list even though, as a chairman of the top foreign policy panel, he has often joined his Democratic colleagues in questioning President Trump’s ties to Russia and those of his close associates.

In the last month, Engel, along with five other Democratic chairmen, signed a letter to administration officials pressing for documents and interviews related to Trump’s communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin.  Late last week, he also signed onto a Democratic missive demanding that the Justice Department release the full Mueller report and underlying evidence to the relevant congressional committees.

Still, unlike Schiff, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, Oversight and Reform Chairman Elijah Cummings, and other Democratic anti-Trump bulldogs, Engel hasn’t leveraged his perch on the Foreign Affairs Committee into a leading Russia-collusion antagonist on the cable news circuit, alienating Republicans in the process.  

He also hasn’t let party loyalties hinder his willingness to work with McCaul and other Foreign Affairs Committee Republicans on their many areas of broad agreement.

For the last six years, Engel and former Rep. Ed Royce, the California Republican who previously chaired the panel, enjoyed a similar camaraderie. The same type of bipartisan comity has traditionally extended across the Capitol to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but during the Trump administration that has become increasingly rare.

In the last two years, the cross-party collaboration actually took a perverse turn in the Senate: The former Republican chairman, Sen. Bob Corker, a top Trump GOP adversary, and the top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Bob Menendez, worked together to stymie the confirmation of dozens of the president’s State Department nominations.

Republican Sen. James Risch, who is generally viewed as more closely aligned with Trump, now chairs the panel and is expected to push back against efforts by Menendez to continue blocking the president’s nominees.

Engel and McCaul are hardly natural political allies. They share nearly opposite views when it comes to climate change, abortion, gun control and Obamacare.  But it doesn’t hurt that Engel, who is Jewish, and McCaul are both stalwart defenders of Israel even though Engel’s Democratic caucus is in the middle of a divisive public feud over support for that Mideast ally.

In recent weeks, Engel, a 30-year House veteran and one of the most senior members of his party’s caucus, has been making headlines sparring with freshmen Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, both of whom have been accused of making anti-Semitic comments. Both also support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, or BDS, movement against Israel.

When Omar accused U.S. supporters of Israel of dual loyalties by pushing for “allegiance to a foreign country,” Engel led the bipartisan condemnation. He called the comment a “vile anti-Semitic slur” and demanded an apology. Omar previously had accused Israel of “hypnotizing” the world and claimed in her “it’s all about the Benjamins, baby” tweet that lawmakers support Israel in exchange for campaign funds.

Omar eventually apologized for both statements but has continued to take swipes at other Democratic leaders. On Tuesday, she pointedly criticized Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s condemnation of the BDS movement.

After Omar’s first comments sparked a bipartisan backlash, Engel pushed for passage of a resolution denouncing anti-Semitism, but Democratic leaders pivoted and included language condemning Islamophobia and white supremacy, which Republicans derided as an effort to water it down.

During their joint AIPAC appearance, both Engel and McCaul pledged do everything in their power to fortify the U.S.-Israeli relationship.

“I’m very proud of my Jewish heritage, and I’m very proud of the fact that the United States and Israel have remained good friends,” Engel said while sharing the stage with McCaul. A few minutes later he pledged to make sure “that strong bond is never broken.”

They two also readily expressed their concerns about the divisions in the Democratic caucus and what they viewed as anti-Semitic efforts to undermine the U.S.-Israel relationship.

“Yes, we have some people who say things they should not say, and I’m very happy to voice my objection to it publicly,” Engel said.

“I am deeply disturbed by some in Congress who are threatening this alliance. I don’t think I’ve seen this in the 15 years I’ve been in Congress, and I don’t have any tolerance for that,” McCaul said.

Both lawmakers also expressed deep concern about Trump’s decision, now reversed, to significantly draw down troops in Syria, where Iranian Shia militias have made inroads and ISIS could reconstitute without U.S. troops to help stabilize the area.

The two leaders, along with Risch and Menendez, are circulating a letter to Trump highlighting the mounting threats to Israel’s northern border and supporting U.S. action to stand by Israel.

Last month, the pair also teamed up on a letter demanding answers from the administration on how U.S. military equipment ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda-linked terrorists in Yemen. The letter complained about unauthorized transfers of U.S. equipment and weapons by the Saudi and UAE governments. McCaul was one of just three Republicans to sign the letter.

In early January, soon after Engel took over as chairman and the same day the Trump administration recognized opposition leader Juan Guaido as the true president of Venezuela, Engel and McCaul wrote a joint letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urging him to prioritize the safety of U.S. diplomats in Caracas and requesting an “immediate” briefing on the unfolding events there.

Susan Crabtree is a veteran Washington reporter who has spent two decades covering the White House and Congress.

COMMENTARY

X

Story Stream

recent articles

President Trump was spared charges on Sunday that would have led to his impeachment, claimed “total exoneration” and angrily pledged retribution against Democrats and media figures he blames for feeding the Russian collusion story. On Monday his Department of Justice reaffirmed support for a lawsuit that seeks to invalidate the Affordable Care Act. For Democrats who can think straight, both of these events can be helpful to their party in the long run.  

To start with, they should accept that because Trump has largely been freed from the burden of doubt he has been under during the entirely of his presidency, next year’s election won’t be the referendum they had hoped for, but a choice election that the incumbent now has a far better chance of winning. And because the special counsel did not choose to charge him with obstruction of justice, something many of Trump’s allies and aides feared was likely, impeachment is — for all intents and purposes — now off the table. Without that charge from Bob Mueller or Attorney General Bob Barr, Senate Republicans would never go along with any Democratic impeachment. Democrats should see this as a good thing.

Smart Democrats will start by expressing their relief that a U.S. president has not been charged with conspiracy and was not found to have rigged his election with an adversarial government — something that would have traumatized and likely irreparably damaged our country. Democrats should also thank Mueller for his integrity, and for a fair and lawful process. They are right to call for the full release of Mueller’s findings, as have many Republicans, including Sen. Chuck Grassley. House committees also have more investigations planned or in the pipeline — and oversight of the White House’s security clearance process, Jared Kushner’s potential business dealings with the Saudi Kingdom and Qatar while deciding national security policy, the Trump Organization’s loans from Russians that may have made the president and/or his family members beholden to the Putin government, are all appropriate areas of inquiry. But attempts to keep the prospects of impeachment alive, no matter what Mueller’s findings reveal on potential obstruction of justice, will backfire on Democrats for certain.

House Democratic leaders, starting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has dismissed impeachment for months, affirmed Tuesday they want to focus on policy instead of probes. News of the administration’s support for ending all ACA protections has focused the minds of Democratic leaders, with Majority Whip Jim Clyburn telling CNN Tuesday morning that the Mueller chapter has “closed” and that health care is “the new chapter.” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said health care “was a defining issue of the 2018 midterm elections. We embrace this fight because House Democrats were given the majority in order to defend health care.”

The leadership will, no matter the contents of the special counsel’s report, struggle to keep everyone in line. There are those who have been around forever — such as impeachment advocate Rep. Al Green, who on Twitter promoted his lunch Tuesday with Tom Steyer in the members dining room of the House — and those who are new to the House, such as Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who decided to call for a commission on the question as soon as Trump was cleared. In a letter to her colleagues, Tlaib wrote: “I, firmly, believe that the House Committee on Judiciary should seek out whether President Trump has committed ‘High crimes and Misdemeanors’ as designated by the U.S. Constitution and if the facts support those findings, that Congress begin impeachment proceedings.”

Democrats didn’t run on Trump’s troubles or the Mueller investigation in the midterms and little has changed out on the campaign trail where Democratic candidates running to be the party’s nominee in 2020 are being asked by voters about health care, climate change, gun control, college loan reform, immigration, taxes and jobs. Not only was health care the top issue in the midterms for Democrats, it was for most voters, and the candidates who championed coverage for pre-existing conditions and other Obamacare protections won those voters by a 75 percent-23 percent margin. During the midterms, Democrats cited, to great effect, a provision from one of the GOP replacement plans that never passed, an “age tax” that would allow insurers to charge patients age 50 and over five times more for coverage.

Health care remains the Republicans’ and Trump’s worst political liability, having failed since 2011 as a party to repeal and replace it, which Trump promised in 2016 and 2017 that they would finally do. After that failure, Trump and GOP candidates also promised voters in the 2018 election they would not allow insurers to deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions, after they eliminated the ACA’s individual mandate to purchase health care as part of their tax reform law. But that will occur should a court ultimately overturn the law.  

Health care coverage, and other pocketbook issues, are likely the reason Republicans saw an erosion of support from white women without a college degree, a key to Trump’s 2016 voting base, in the midterms. Writing for CNN, political analyst Ron Brownstein identified non-evangelical working-class white women as a key target bloc for Democrats next year “in pivotal Rust Belt states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where relatively fewer blue-collar whites are also evangelical Christians,” adding that nationwide nearly three-fifths of these women voted for Democrats last November and told exit pollsters they disapproved of Trump’s performance in office.

Those women may not have benefited from the tax cut, may see their communities suffering from Trump’s trade wars, may have not seen any factories moving back into town, and aren’t likely to see Trump fulfill his broken promise on health care, no matter how many times he rebrands the GOP as “the party of health care,” as he has this week.  President Trump is likely to spend a lot of time talking about the Mueller probe and collusion in his campaign next year, according to aides and advisers, and his allies are seeking an “investigation of the investigators.” If Democrats talk about Trump, or Mueller or Barr, these very same voters may sit 2020 out, but if the Democratic nominee talks about their challenges and the policy prescriptions that could alleviate their problems, the party is in the running to win them over and beat Trump.

A.B. Stoddard is associate editor of RealClearPolitics and a columnist. 

Despite the Mueller report summary stating that there was not enough evidence to indict President Donald Trump on collusion with Russia in the 2016 election campaign, Rep. Rashida Tlaib has sent a letter to her Democratic colleagues requesting that they sign a resolution urging the House Judiciary Committee to probe if Trump has committed any impeachable offenses, National Review reported on Tuesday.

The Michigan representative, who previously broke with Democratic leadership in calling for an inquiry specifically aimed at finding out if Trump committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” and vowed to “impeach the mother****r” in her election night speech, said in her letter sent Monday that special counsel Robert Mueller did not adequately explore the possibility of impeachable offenses.

In the letter, obtained by Business Insider, Tlaib wrote that “The actions of President Trump before he was officially sworn in… is currently being investigated by the Southern District of New York and much of it is part of the completed report by… Mueller. However, the most dangerous threat to our democracy is President Trump’s actions since taking the oath of office.”

She then went on to argue that an additional impeachment-focused investigation is needed, because the ongoing Congressional probes looking into Trump’s personal financial history and his family business operations are insufficient.

Tlaib specifically mentioned three areas that should be explored: whether the president’s ongoing ties to his family businesses violates the foreign emoluments clause; whether his hush money payment reimbursements to Michael Cohen violate federal election law; and whether the president obstructed justice by firing former FBI director James Comey.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has dismissed the possibility of impeachment without bipartisan support as an divisive move that would prove counter-productive for Democrats in 2020.

Source: NewsMax Politics

Molly Prince | Politics Reporter

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar played on her phone in the back of the chamber as the House of Representatives voted on the resolution that was intended as a reprimand for the congresswoman’s anti-Israel comments, according to a report published Friday.

The House passed a resolution March 7 that initially served to condemn a series of anti-Israel statements Omar made, but was subsequently “watered down” to condemn hatred in all forms. The resolution was in response to the ages-old canards about Jews that Omar had asserted over Twitter, including a claim that Republicans’ support for Israel is bought by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Many also interpreted her comments as Jews having a “dual loyalty” to the U.S. and Israel.

The text of the resolution, which passed 407-23, did not mention Omar by name. (RELATED: Minnesota Democrats Reportedly Want Ilhan Omar Out — She Blames Trump)

During the vote, Omar was reportedly playing on her phone and was “seemingly oblivious to the remarkable rebuke being leveled at her,” according to Politico. She was reportedly standing alone in the back of the room until fellow Democrat Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington entered the chamber, where they “embraced and soon doubled over in laughter.”

“She came up to me on the floor, and she gave me a big hug,” Jayapal told Politico. “I told her that some of my gray hair was [from her] over the last week.”

Omar, along with fellow Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, became America’s first Muslim congresswomen when sworn into office in January. Both congresswomen’s time in office has been embroiled in allegations of anti-Semitism — Omar has defended the anti-Israel statements, such as ones invoking Allah to expose Israel’s “evil doings,” and she is on record suggesting Israel is not a democracy. She also gave an interview to a host that referred to Israel as the “Jewish ISIS” and mocked how Americans speak about al-Qaeda and Hezbollah.

Following the resolution’s passage, Omar issued a statement saying she was “tremendously proud” of the anti-hate bill.

“Today is historic on many fronts. It’s the first time we have voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history. Anti-Muslim crimes have increased 99% from 2014-2016 and are still on the rise,” the statement read.

Omar’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Follow Molly @mollyfprince

Send tips to molly@dailycallernewsfoundation.org

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Source: The Daily Caller

X

Story Stream

recent articles

CARLSBAD, Calif. — In the days and weeks after California Republicans suffered staggering losses up and down the ticket last November, the party’s outlook for the future was anything but sunny.

Voter turnout across the state in 2018 set a record for a midterm election, which was not a good sign for the GOP. High voter participation traditionally benefits Democrats, and turnout across the state is all but certain to increase even more in the coming presidential campaign year.

Running as a Republican, especially now in President Trump’s long, overbearing shadow, has never been tougher in California, where two out of three voters either disapprove or downright despise the president.

Combined with the GOP’s anemic voter registration here, which last week slipped to a reported 23.5 percent — five points behind “no-party preference” — many state Republicans are preparing for another major blow in 2020.

A month ago, however, state party delegates may have avoided a complete death spiral by electing Jessica Patterson (pictured), an attractive millennial Latina, as the party chair, opting against unrepentant Trump acolytes Travis Allen and Steve Frank. Supporters applauded Patterson’s energetic pledge to unite and reorganize the party, though many still didn’t see a clear path forward.

But then national Democrats and the party’s leftward lurch, led by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, started lighting the way.

“I am certainly more optimistic today than I was after the election and significantly more so,” said Stephen Puetz, a GOP campaign consultant with Axiom Strategies who previously served as chief of staff to San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, a Republican re-elected in 2016 in the majority Democratic city. “We’re going to take back some of these House seats. I don’t know if we’ll take back six – but we’ll take back some.”

Puetz is fresh off an invigorating campaign win in a special election contest for an Orange County Board of Supervisors seat. Irvine Mayor Don Wagner defeated Loretta Sanchez, a well-known liberal former congresswoman.

The hard-fought victory in the once-Republican stronghold, which has been trending more liberal in recent years, was particularly gratifying for Puetz and other Republicans after Reps. Mimi Walters and Dana Rohrabacher, who have represented the county for decades in the state legislature and Congress, fell to Democratic challengers in November.

“Some California Republicans might have been concerned about the direction of the party [under Trump], but now they have seen the alternative and this push toward socialism – and it scares them, as it should,” Puetz told RealClearPolitics. 

California Freshmen Dems Fret Over Socialism Push

Republicans aren’t the only ones recoiling from national Democrats’ far-left turn. Newly elected California House Democrats from traditionally red districts, such as Katie Hill and Harley Rouda, now fear the socialist label could cost them re-election and swing the House majority back to the GOP.

Over the last week, some Democratic House freshmen have started lashing out against their brasher colleagues’ support for socialism, impeachment and the divisive Green New Deal.

Hill, who last November flipped a Los Angeles-area district that Republicans had held for decades, made it clear she’s not jumping on the Ocasio-Cortez bandwagon. “As we run up to this presidential [election], we need to show that Democrats, as a whole, are not socialists,” she told Politico last week. “We’re not pushing for impeachment without serious cause and serious evidence.”

Rouda, a businessman and former Republican who defeated 15-term Rep. Rohrabacher, also distanced himself from his freshman class’s far-left flank.

“I’d like to think that the Republican Party is not run by a bunch of folks that subscribe to be nationalists, like Steve King does,” he said, referring to the Iowa congressman who lost his committee seats after making controversial statements on white supremacy and nationalism. “So while Steve King’s views don’t represent the entire Republican Party, those on the far left of the Democratic Party do not represent the mainstream caucus.”

This open Democratic grousing is music to California GOP operatives’ ears.

 “[Speaker Nancy] Pelosi is not in control of her caucus, and she has got to figure out a way to rein in these three complete narcissists,” said Jason Roe, a Southern California-based Republican campaign strategist, referring to Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Omar. “Any punishment that Pelosi can mete out is a victory for them. They are disrupters, and if they are being punished for disrupting, it’s exactly what they want. You can’t use traditional levers of power with them.”

Roe is telling his GOP clients running for office in California to “stay away from litigating Trump and start litigating AOC and the left – this is the gift that keeps on giving.”

Murphy: California GOP Must Tack Center-Right

Republicans shouldn’t get too excited about the Democratic clashes playing out on the national stage, according to Mike Murphy, one of the most high-profile and longest-serving GOP political consultants in the country.

Murphy acknowledged that national Democrats are making significant mistakes right now but cautioned that Pelosi still has time to straighten it all out before voters really start paying attention to the 2020 presidential election.

“Politics is very dynamic – and yes, Democrats may be stumbling around right now, but that doesn’t mean they are going to keep doing it and hand Trump the election,” said Murphy, an admitted Never-Trumper who has run more than 20 statewide or national campaigns, including Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential, as well as gubernatorial races for Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Murphy now co-directs the University of Southern California’s Dornsife Center for the Political Future, along with Democratic consultant Bob Shrum.

Republicans in California battlegrounds, he argued in an interview, should stop catering to GOP primary voters and instead distance themselves from Trump and tack to the center-right.

“[The party] needs to recruit younger candidates who look a lot more like Californians – Latinos and Asians – and become a brand known for kitchen-table economic issues that are attractive to small-business owners, where a lot of the jobs are created,” he told RealClearPolitics. “We need to be perceived as the party who has remedies for that – we need to get out of the issues surrounding hypersensitivity to immigration and [promoting] nativism and hostility” that’s perceived by the gay community and others.

“We need to align the message to be center-right, not totally responding to the cult of Trump, which resonates more with the primary voter. Making them happy makes sure you lose statewide,” he added.

Murphy supports Patterson, the newly elected GOP chairwoman, but says she faces a near-impossible task of rebuilding the party with Trump still in office, comparing the California GOP’s future to that of the Democratic Party’s seemingly permanent minority status in Utah.

“I think our best chances are in 2022, because I think [Trump] will lose” the presidential race, he predicted.

New GOP Chairwoman: One-Party Rule Is Failing California Voters

Unsurprisingly, Patterson threads the needle more carefully.

An experienced political operative who worked for former Gov. Schwarzenegger, 2010 gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman and 2008 presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, Patterson has set up extensive statewide political networks and worked closely with party donors. For the past few years she’s served as executive director of California Trailblazers, an organization that trains Republican candidates.

Patterson, 38, knows those candidates must reflect their districts to have any chance of winning. Indeed, the political makeup of GOP-leaning districts varies wildly throughout the state, from pro-Trump eastern San Diego County and parts of the Central Valley, to northern Los Angeles stretching into Ventura County where Latinos make up nearly 40 percent of the population and voters chose Hillary Clinton over Trump, 50 percent to 44 percent.

 “I was always the person in the race that was talking about uniting the party – I didn’t try to break the party into factions,” Patterson said. “We are all Republicans, and I would rather focus on the 90 percent of things we can agree on than the things that we don’t. So I will always be about addition, not subtraction, and growing and engaging more people.”

While Patterson is the first woman to run the state GOP, she doesn’t play the gender card even while stressing that her top priority will be broadening the party’s appeal beyond its base.

“Being a woman is just kind of a bonus,” she said.

During a lengthy interview, Patterson wasn’t critical of Trump but she also clearly didn’t want to tie the party too closely to him. She quickly deflected when asked if she supports the president’s signature campaign promise to build a border wall.

“I support border security,” said Patterson, whose paternal grandfather was born in Mexico. “Republicans and Democrats in Washington are going to have to get to an agreement on what they think that looks like.”

Pressed further, specifically regarding Trump’s declaration of a national emergency in order to fund the barrier, she said, “That’s something for the people in Washington, D.C., to hash out.”

As to whether the California GOP is going to campaign for the president’s re-election, she said Trump will be focused on winning swing states, not California, leaving Golden State Republicans to run highly localized races.

“The issues that are affecting Californians the most aren’t coming out of Washington, D.C. – they are the silly things that are coming out Sacramento … that will make your life less affordable and your schools worse and worse.”

California has the second highest gasoline tax in the nation; home prices are high because environmental and other regulatory red tape is stifling construction; groceries are more expensive than they would otherwise be because the state has over-regulated farming and the high gas taxes lead to higher transportation costs, she argued.

“Instead of fixing those problems, the Democrats are focused on plastic straws, reusable cups and plastic [grocery] bags,” she said. “When our education system has fallen to 47th in the nation, something is wrong. When we are the poverty capital of the entire country, something is wrong. What [Democrats] are doing is not working.”

Patterson went on to cite a February survey by Edelman Intelligence showing that 53 percent of all of Californians and 63 percent of millennials in the state think they’re going to have to leave because the state has become unaffordable.

“This has all happened under one-party rule in California,” she said.

Instead of banking on the socialist label to help flip seats back into Republicans hands, Patterson said the party is committed to building the infrastructure and outreach needed to compete for independents.

Still, she noted, federal Democratic lawmakers who have supported their Sacramento colleagues’ tax-and-spend policies for years can’t suddenly start casting themselves as sensible centrists.

“The opportunity for local Republican candidates to contrast their value and vision with Democrats is how we will regain seats and our standing,” Patterson said. “The good news is that Democrats in California and across the nation are singing from the same songbook, and they’re out of tune with middle-class families.”

“While they continue to take Californians for granted, we’ll be working overtime to earn their confidence,” she pledged.

Susan Crabtree is a veteran Washington reporter who has spent two decades covering the White House and Congress.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), speaking in the context of the killing of 50 Muslim worshippers in New Zealand, suggested Sunday that people in America who “stay silent” and those who “support the Muslim ban” are facilitating a “white supremacy” agenda.

On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Tlaib was asked about a comment she made Friday, after news of the mass killing at two mosques in Christchurch broke.

“You said in a statement after the attack that you were angry at, quote, those who follow the white supremacy agenda in my own country that sends a signal across the world that massacres like this are a call to action,” said host Jake Tapper. “Who are you specifically talking about?”

“The ones that stay silent and the ones that support the Muslim ban,” she replied, in reference to President Trump’s 2017 travel orders and proclamations.

“Not only once, but twice, three times, did we in this nation say to the world and to everyone in this country that Muslims don’t belong here. From the fact that every time we talk about a wall, it’s not about a structure, but about xenophobia. It’s about racism.”

Read more

Source: InfoWars

People pay their respects at a memorial site for victims of the mosque shootings at the Botanic Gardens in Christchurch
A woman pays her respects at a memorial site for victims of the mosque shootings at the Botanic Gardens in Christchurch, New Zealand, March 17, 2019. REUTERS/Jorge Silva

March 17, 2019

By Doina Chiacu and Sarah N. Lynch

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump on Sunday championed a Fox News personality who made anti-Muslim remarks as his White House rejected any attempt to link the U.S. leader to a shooter who killed 50 people in two New Zealand mosques.

The violence against Muslims in New Zealand on Friday put a spotlight on Trump’s rhetoric about Islam and revived criticism of his handling of white supremacist violence.

“Bring back @JudgeJeanine Pirro,” Trump wrote in Twitter posts in which he blamed Democrats for trying to “silence a majority of our Country” and advocated supporters to “stop working soooo hard on being politically correct.”

At the same time, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney appeared on Sunday television news shows to tamp down criticism that Trump has not been strong enough in condemning hate speech and has fomented anti-Muslim sentiment.

“The president is not a white supremacist. I’m not sure how many times we have to say that,” Mulvaney said on “Fox News Sunday”.

On Friday, Trump condemned the “horrible massacre” at the mosques and the White House called the shooting a “vicious act of hate.” Asked by a reporter if he saw white nationalism as a rising threat around the world, Trump said: “I don’t really. I think it’s a small group of people.”

The accused gunman praised Trump in a manifesto as “a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.”

Mulvaney said the mosque massacres were the work of a disturbed individual and it would not be fair to align the shooter with Trump or any other politician. “I disagree that there’s a causal link between Donald Trump being president and something like this happening in New Zealand,” he told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Trump drew strong criticism in the days after a deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 when he equated white supremacists with counter-protesters and said “both sides” were to blame.

Pirro, a supporter of the president, was rebuked by Fox News last Sunday over comments she made questioning whether a Muslim congresswoman, Ilhan Omar, was more loyal to Islamic sharia law than the U.S. Constitution.

Pirro’s show, “Justice with Judge Jeanine,” was removed from its usual time slot on Saturday night. Fox News has not confirmed Pirro was suspended and said it would not comment further on the matter on Sunday.

“Nice message for the president to send three days after a deadly terrorist attack on Muslims – standing up for a host who was suspended for anti-Muslim bigotry,” Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman under Democratic President Barack Obama, said on Twitter.

Democratic lawmakers on Sunday called on Trump to defend Muslims publicly after the massacres and recognize the threat posed by white supremacists.

“His rhetoric doesn’t help,” Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democratic presidential candidate, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “At the very least, he is dividing people. They are using him as an excuse.”

On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump followed such statements as “I think Islam hates us,” with an effort a week into his presidency to ban citizens of several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. After court challenges, the administration revised the policy.

U.S. Representative Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim, noted that government data shows a spike in hate crimes in the last decade, citing mass shootings at a synagogue and a black church.

“He cannot just say it’s a small group of people,” she said on CNN. “We need to be speaking up against this and it has to start with him. He needs to do better by us and the country. He needs to speak up and condemn this very loud and very clearly.”

Hate crimes in the United States jumped 17 percent in 2017, according to FBI data.

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Mary Milliken and Lisa Shumaker)

Source: OANN

COMMENTARY

X

Story Stream

recent articles

The nation’s top elected Democrat, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has now declared publicly that her party will not impeach President Trump. In a lengthy Washington Post interview published Monday, Pelosi left the door slightly ajar, saying her decision could change if  “compelling” new evidence emerged. Still, hers was a significant announcement, signaling a major change in the party’s trajectory.

Why did Pelosi make the decision? Why now? What are the benefits and perils for her party and for Pelosi’s leadership?

The longtime congresswoman is a savvy strategist, and her decision was purely strategic. She made no apology for two years of unproven charges, no admission her party had been fundamentally wrong in its most basic and vocal claim since the 2016 election: that Donald Trump is not the legitimate president of the United States. He is illegitimate, they charge, because the election itself was tilted by Russia. The most incendiary charge is that Trump worked with the Russians to rig the results.

No one doubts that the Russians tried to interfere. They are a geopolitical enemy, eager to cause chaos and confusion. But questions arise regarding (1) what impact the Russians had (the consensus is “not much”) and (2) whether the Trump campaign cooperated with them. If Trump worked directly with a foreign adversary to undermine our Constitution, he does not deserve to be president. That was the main reason Robert Mueller was appointed as special counsel, to probe Russian interference and possible collusion with the Trump campaign.

Now, Pelosi is effectively saying, “Never mind.” She did so quietly, with no comment on the powerful charges her party has made against Trump. That’s too easy. What’s her explanation for backing off the incendiary charges? After all, if those charges are true, they should lead to impeachment.

Instead, Pelosi simply said, “He is not worth it.” What she meant, as she implied elsewhere in the interview, is that impeachment is not worth it to her party. She knows the proceedings would soak up all of the House’s time, dominate the media, and then fail in the Senate. Every Democratic presidential candidate would have to take a public stand on it, and the activist base would demand they support it.

Those stances might well be fatal in November 2020. Although impeachment is a big winner with Democratic primary voters, it’s a big loser with the larger electorate. Before turning an elected president out of office, most voters want clear and convincing evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Pelosi knows that, and she knows the Republicans lost public support when they tried to impeach Bill Clinton for lying under oath. She lived through that (she was elected to Congress in 1987), and she learned from it.

Why did Pelosi make her statement now? For two reasons: To get ahead of the Mueller report and to regain control of her caucus.

The special counsel’s report, which should be handed to Attorney General Bill Barr soon, is almost certain to present no evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians. If there were any hard evidence, it would have already appeared in indictments and sentencing recommendations. It hasn’t.

The Democrats must share that expectation. After shouting for two years about “Trump-Russia Collusion,” they have pivoted and begun muttering about “obstruction of justice.” We still don’t know if the Mueller investigation will present any evidence of the latter. Unless there is something big there, the Democrats will need to explain their “collusion delusion,” not to their activist base, but to the wider public, especially persuadable independent voters.

Pelosi was also seeking to regain control of her caucus. Its surging left-wing and headstrong committee chairs are determined to push forward on impeachment, and to do so without any direction from Pelosi or her deputy, Steny Hoyer. She has decided to confront them now, both to demonstrate her control and to ensure Democrats retain control of the House in 2020.

The debacle within her caucus over Ilhan Omar’s repeated anti-Semitic remarks shows how fragile Pelosi’s hold is. Passing a straightforward resolution against anti-Semitism should have been easy, even if there was no stomach for calling out Omar by name. Yet it proved impossible. The left blocked it. To pass anything, the leadership had to include the obligatory swipe at Trump, along with a laundry list of other groups facing bigotry charges. The result was a resolution so vacuous that Omar herself called it a victory.

Pelosi is also trying to rein in powerful committee chairs, specifically Jerrold Nadler (Judiciary Committee) and Adam Schiff (Intelligence Committee), who are directing massive investigations clearly aimed at impeachment and inflicting personal damage on the president. Reps. Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and others on the left want the president in the dock now. But voters will reasonably ask, “How is this helping the country? How is this leading to good legislation? Isn’t this just partisan harassment?”

If Mueller’s report offers little ammunition for further investigation, then the Democrats will feel the backlash for two years of overheated, misdirected rhetoric. Revving up more high-profile investigations will only compound the problem. Pelosi knows that, and she knows she is House speaker only because the Democrats won a lot of “purple” seats in 2018 with centrist candidates like Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania.

If she leads these Lambs to the slaughter, she’s out of a job, and her party is out of power. That’s why she is trying to head off a serious congressional move to impeach the president.

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he is founding director of PIPES, the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

House Democrats have vowed to move forward with impeachment proceedings against President Trump despite Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s proclamation against it.

Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Al Green (D-Texas), John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) all bucked Pelosi, declaring they would push for Trump’s impeachment ahead of the 2020 election regardless of what she said.

“These are really, really serious criminal activity that [Trump] has been allegedly doing out of the Oval Office. That’s something we should be investigating,” Tlaib reportedly said Tuesday.

Yarmuth went further, saying Trump’s impeachment was inevitable and only a matter of time.

“I don’t think right now there’s any way that we could 218 votes on the floor of the House for an impeachment resolution, but I think that’s not a matter of whether, it’s a matter of when,” Yarmuth said.

Socialist AOC expressed disappointment in Pelosi’s comments and hinted that Democrats may ignore her.

“I happen to disagree with that take,” Ocasio-Cortez said in response to Pelosi’s remarks. “But you know, she’s the speaker…I think we’ll see.”

According to Green, Pelosi is putting “political expediency ahead of moral imperative,” which is why he still plans to force articles of impeachment against Trump for the third time.

“There will be another vote on impeachment,” Green said in a C-SPAN interview. “If you desire to stop me, you but only have to change the rules so that I can’t bring a vote on impeachment.”

Waters, who backed Green’s last two impeachment efforts, said Pelosi’s comments were “not new.”

“Everybody knows what I’ve said. Everybody knows that I’ve been for impeachment. None of this is new,” she said.

Pelosi made clear that she had no intention of overseeing impeachment against Trump unless something “overwhelming and bipartisan” surfaces to compel such a move.

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it,” Pelosi told The Washington Post Monday.

Pelosi tried mitigating the political fallout caused by overzealous Democrats eager to impeach Trump after Democrats regained control of the House in January, such as when Tlaib declared she would “impeach the motherfucker” only days after being sworn into Congress.

But conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh have said Pelosi is simply delaying impeachment until Trump is reelected in 2020.

Just last week, a Quinnipiac University National Poll found the majority of Americans don’t want Trump impeached.


Twitter: Follow @WhiteIsTheFury

Adam Schiff now says he will hold off on impeaching President Trump, because the Mueller probe will most likely show no Russian collusion.

Owen exposes the hypocrisy of those that have pushed the fake Russian collusion narrative.

Source: InfoWars

The left-leaning fact-checking website Snopes butchered facts about a PAC controlled by Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her top aide in a story published Thursday.

Ocasio-Cortez and Saikat Chakrabarti, her former campaign chair and current chief of staff, obtained majority control of Justice Democrats in December 2017. The PAC, which had raised more than $1.8 million before her June 2018 primary, has been widely credited with manufacturing her upset victory over incumbent Democrat Joe Crowley.

Snopes writer Dan MacGuill falsely claimed in his story that Chakrabarti, who served as executive director of Justice Democrats in 2018, “was not an official agent or officer” of the PAC. He also failed to acknowledge the fact that he and Ocasio-Cortez are members of the PAC’s three-member board of directors, according to archived versions of the Justice Democrats website and corporate filings obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Justice Democrats’ board of directors on March 23, 2018. (Screenshot/Wayback Machine)

Justice Democrats’ board of directors on March 23, 2018. (Screenshot/Wayback Machine)

Former Federal Election Commission member Brad Smith told TheDCNF that Ocasio-Cortez and her top aide “could be facing jail time” if they knowingly and willfully withheld their control over Justice Democrats from the commission in order to bypass campaign contribution limits.

Snopes joins CNNABC NewsNBC NewsThe Washington PostBusiness Insider and Market Watch in failing to disclose the facts surrounding Ocasio-Cortez’s control over the PAC in stories about the freshman Democrat’s mounting campaign finance scandals.

Trump Derangement Syndrome has become the out-of-touch-with-reality political platform perfectly embodied by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Archived copies of the Justice Democrats website reveal Ocasio-Cortez and Chakrabarti held “legal control over” the PAC starting in December 2017, and that Chakrabarti was one of its “major players” up until January 2019.

Ocasio-Cortez and Chakrabarti continue to serve as “governors” of Justice Democrats, according to the PAC’s filings with the Washington, D.C. Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Saikat Chakrabarti listed as governors of Justice Democrats on March 8, 2019, at 2:28 pm. (Screenshot/DCRA)

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Saikat Chakrabarti listed as governors of Justice Democrats on March 8, 2019, at 2:28 pm. (Screenshot/DCRA)

MacGuill did not return a request for comment.

Following the publication of this article, Snopes updated its article stating that Ocasio-Cortez’s attorneys confirmed that she served on the board of Justice Democrats until June 2018 and that Chakrabarti had also served on the political action committee’s board until January 2019.

Snopes also issued a correction notice at the bottom of its article:

Correction [8 March 2019]: This article previously stated that Saikat Chakrabarti was not an official agent of the “Brand New Congress” PAC or “Justice Democrats” PAC. The article should have stated that he was at one time executive director of the Justice Democrats, and a director of Brand New Congress, but was never listed as treasurer for those committees, in FEC filings.

Notably absent from the correction notice is any mention of Ocasio-Cortez serving on the board of Justice Democrats during her primary campaign.

David Knight dissects how Ilhan Omar, U.S. Representative for Minnesota, and Rashida Tlaib, U.S. Representative for Michigan, are using their position in the United States congress to lobby for international causes, especially the decades old anti-Israel / pro-Palestine debate.

Source: InfoWars


Current track

Title

Artist