Conservative Blogger
Monday, April 3, 2017
After golf with Trump, Paul says 'very optimistic' about ObamaCare repeal
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a top conservative critic of House Republicans’ failed plan to replace ObamaCare, concluded his golf outing Sunday with President Trump by saying party members are “getting closer” on a compromise repeal plan and that he remains “very optimistic.”
The president’s invitation for Paul to play at Trump National Golf Club is a sign that he is trying again to negotiate with congressional conservatives who failed to back the originial ObamaCare overhaul plan, after weeks of attacking them.
“We had a great day with the president,” Paul said after playing with Trump and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney at the northern Virgina club. “We did talk about some health care reform. I think the sides are getting closer and closer together. And I remain very optimistic that we will get an ObamaCare repeal.”
Paul, an eye doctor and Tea Party favorite, has his own ObamaCare replacement plan, which he argues goes further than the Republican House leadership plan to fully repeal and replace the 2010 health care law, under which consumers are facing rising costs and fewer policy options.
White House official Stephanie Grisham said earlier Sunday that the threesome would discussing several issues at the club but that health care would be “a big topic.”
Mulvaney is a founding member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, which led the opposition to the Republican overhaul plan that failed last month in the GOP-controlled House.
Trump has been critical of the Freedom Caucus and the majority of its roughly 35 members who were influential in stopping a vote on House overhaul plan.
Trump warned caucus Chairman Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., in a closed-door Capitol Hill meeting about not supporting the overhaul plan, saying, “Oh Mark, I'm coming after you.”
And in just the past few days, the president and the White House have singled out the Freedom Caucus and specific members for their non-support -- including Michigan GOP Rep. Justin Amash and South Carolina GOP Rep. Mark Sanford, who is sponsoring the House version of Paul’s overhaul plan.
On Thursday, Trump tweeted: “The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast. We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!”
Also that day, The Post and Courier newspaper in South Carolina reported that Trump dared Sanford to vote against the overhaul bill.
Sanford said that Mulvaney told him: "The president asked me to look you square in the eyes and to say that he hoped that you voted ‘no’ on this bill so he could run (a primary challenger) against you in 2018."
On Saturday, White House social media Director Dan Scavino Jr. tweeted: “Donald Trump is bringing auto plants & jobs back to Michigan. @justinamash is a big liability. #TrumpTrain, defeat him in primary.”
Trump in recent days has also expressed a desire to revisit repealing and replacing ObamaCare, one of his major campaign promises.
“Talks on Repealing and Replacing ObamaCare are, and have been, going on, and will continue until such time as a deal is hopefully struck,” he tweeted Sunday before the golf outing.
Trump invited Meadows and Texas GOP Sen. Mike Lee, another influential Capitol Hill conservative, to his Florida resort Mar-a-Lago the weekend before the scrapped House vote in an effort to win their support.
Trump ready to address North Korea nuclear program with or without China
President Trump has said the United States is ready to act alone against North Korea’s nuclear program if China does not take a tougher stance, just days before he hosts Chinese President Xi Jinping at his Mar-a-Lago estate in South Florida.
Trump made the comments in a Financial Times interview posted Sunday on the newspaper’s website.
“We will talk about North Korea," Trump said. "And China has great influence over North Korea. And China will either decide to help us with North Korea, or they won't. And if they do that will be very good for China, and if they don't it won't be good for anyone."
Trump added that the United States could "totally" handle the situation in North Korea without China's help. While China provides diplomatic and economic support to its neighbor, it claims that its influence over Kim Jong Un's government is limited.
However, Trump also made clear again that he won’t reveal his foreign policy strategy through the news media.
"I'm not going to tell you (my plan). You know, I am not the United States of the past where we tell you where we are going to hit in the Middle East," he said.
Still, Trump attempted to make clear he’s not an isolationist opposed to alliances.
“I do believe in alliances,” he said in the interview. “I believe in relationships. And I believe in partnerships. But alliances have not always worked out very well for us.”
The relationship between the United States and China has been uncertain since Trump's election.
During his campaign he accused China of unfair trade practices and threatened to raise import taxes on Chinese goods and declare Beijing a currency manipulator, though it is unclear whether Trump will follow through with either threat.
Trump told the newspaper that he doesn't "want to talk about tariffs yet, perhaps the next time we meet."
Trump's ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, also offered tough talk on China, saying on ABC's "This Week" that the U.S. is pressing China to take a firmer stand regarding North Korea's nuclear program.
U.N. resolutions have failed so far to deter North Korea from conducting nuclear and missile tests. Last year, the North conducted two nuclear tests and two dozen tests of ballistic missiles.
"They need to show us how concerned they are," Haley said. "They need to put pressure on North Korea. The only country that can stop North Korea is China, and they know that."
Asked what the U.S. would do if China doesn't cooperate, Haley said: "China has to cooperate."
Former Defense Secretary Ash Carter, however, said he doubted that Beijing will cooperate.
"I've been working on the North Korea problem since 1994," Carter said on ABC. "And we have consistently asked Chinese leaders ... because they uniquely have the historical and the economic relationship with North Korea to make a difference.
"They haven't used that influence, and so it's hard for me to be optimistic with that," he said.
Trump senior adviser Kushner travels to Iraq, White House aide says
President Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, is in Iraq and is traveling with the chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joe Dunford, a White House aide confirmed to Fox News Sunday.
Kushner was invited by Dunford to travel with him to the Middle East.
Other details about the trip have not been released. A senior administration official told the Associated Press that Kushner wanted to see the Iraq situation for himself and show support to Baghdad.
Kushner's West Wing portfolio is robust. He has been deeply involved with presidential staffing and has played the role of shadow diplomat, advising on relations with the Middle East, Canada and Mexico.
Last week he launched a task force meant to modernize government using lessons drawn from the private sector.
And though Kushner had no previous diplomatic or government experience, Trump also tasked him with trying to broker a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
"If you can't produce peace in the Middle East, nobody can," Trump told Kushner at a gala a few days before his inauguration.
His visit marked an early foray for the Trump administration into the situation in Iraq and came just two weeks after Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said he was assured by the president the U.S. will accelerate its support for his country's struggle against the Islamic State.
Al-Abadi met with Trump and Kushner in Washington last month and said he had the impression that the Trump administration would take a more aggressive approach, although he did not say what that might entail.
McConnell vows Gorsuch will be confirmed this week, Schumer predicts he won't get 60 votes
The Senate's top Republican and Democrat were split on Sunday over the possibility of Judge Neil Gorsuch being confirmed to the Supreme Court ahead of a scheduled Senate vote this week.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., vowed on "Fox News Sunday" that "we’re going to get Judge Gorsuch confirmed this week."
Gorsuch, President Trump’s pick to fill the high court seat of conservative Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, will almost certainly have enough votes to pass the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee Monday, but will struggle to get 60 votes for final confirmation by Friday.
Should Democrats attempt a filibuster, McConnell was expected to seek a change in Senate rules allowing a simple majority to confirm the nomination.
On Sunday, McConnell did not tip his hand over whether he would use the so-called "nuclear option," telling "Fox News Sunday," "We’ll know through the course of the week ... It’s in the hands of Democrats."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., predicted on NBC's "Meet the Press" that Gorsuch would not pass the 60-vote benchmark and argued that Trump should huddle with Democrats and Republicans to "try to come up with a mainstream nominee."
"Look, when a nominee doesn't get 60 votes, you shouldn't change the rules, you should change the nominee," said Schumer.
Later Sunday, two Democratic senators split over whether to support Gorsuch. Joe Donnelly of Indiana said he would vote in favor of Gorsuch's confirmation while Sen. Jon Tester of Montana announced he would not back the federal appeals court judge based in Denver.
Donnelly became the third Democrat to break with the party as Republicans line up behind President Donald Trump's choice for the high court.
With 52 Republican senators, eight votes from Democrats or the Senate's two independents would be needed to advance the nomination and prevent a filibuster. So far, only Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia — all representing states Trump won in November and all up for re-election next year — have said they will vote to confirm Gorsuch.
Tester represents a state won by Trump and faces re-election, too, but he said Gorsuch did not directly answer questions when the two met or during the confirmation hearing. Tester said he based his decision on the judge's past cases, noting that he found troubling Gorsuch's record on privacy and that he believes Gorsuch places corporations over people.
Donnelly called Gorsuch, 49, "a qualified jurist who will base his decisions on his understanding of the law and is well-respected among his peers."
Sunday, April 2, 2017
LGBTQ Activists Cartoons
 |
LGBTQ activists held "dance party" protest outside Ivanka Trump's D.C. home |
 |
| Soros |
LGBTQ activists held "dance party" protest outside Ivanka Trump's D.C. home
Hundreds of people protested in front of Ivanka Trump’s Washington D.C. home on Saturday for “climate justice.”
LGBTQ activists hosted a “dance party” protest to “send the clear message that our climate and our communities matter,” a detailed Facebook event said.
A crowd of protesters took to the streets with signs to protest President Donald Trump’s administration’s stance on climate change, the Daily Mail reported.
“The entire Trump Administration has shown a blatant disregard for our planet and its inhabitants,” the event page read. “Also, in case you hadn't heard, Trump revoked protections for LGBTQ government employees and removed LGBTQ questions from the census.”
Barricades were put up in front of Trump’s home by police, although it was uncertain if she and her family were home during the protest, WUSA reported.
Police told WUSA that the event had ended peacefully.
New York lawmakers miss deadline to pass state budget
 |
| New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo a Democrat. |
Mr. Cuomo issued legislators a new deadline: Pass the budget by midnight on Sunday or he will pass an extender of the current budget instead.
Mr. Cuomo’s extender would last until May 21, when the U.S. Congress is expected to pass its budget resolution.
The governor said this would have the benefit of giving lawmakers more clarity about potential cuts to New York from a new Republican congress and president.
In a statement minutes after midnight on Saturday, Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, said the basic outlines of the roughly $160 billion spending plan for the new fiscal year were resolved, but policy issues that lawmakers intend to pass with the budget weren't.
Two obstacles were a measure to remove minors from the criminal-justice system and a replacement to 421-a, the expired law that gave real-estate developers tax breaks in exchange for including affordable housing in their real-estate portfolios.
Senate showdown, will GOP use 'nuclear option,' to confirm Gorsuch?
 |
| Sen. Mitch McConnell details efforts to replace ObamaCare |
It’s always a numbers game on Capitol Hill. Which side possesses the most votes. After all, that’s the essence of democracy.
The Founders feared direct democracy -- and various other forms of republican democracy. So they tempered the power of the majority.
Unlike the House, the Senate was the deliberative body. There, the minority could often prevail -- entailing a supermajority to shut down filibusters.
Neutralizing a Senate filibuster used to take 67 votes (two-thirds). The Senate dropped that to a three-fifths requirement in 1975. However, a two-thirds vote is still necessary to alter the Senate’s rules.
This is why the numbers game is so important. It’s clear that a majority of senators want to confirm Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. But it’s doubtful that a supermajority of 60 senators are willing to shut off debate on President Trump’s nomination.
This brings us to the so-called “nuclear option,” a fundamental obliteration of the Senate’s structure requiring a supermajority to overcome a threatened Democratic filibuster of Gorsuch.
It’s unprecedented for the Senate to successfully filibuster a Supreme Court pick. Defeat a nominee on the floor? Yes. Look at what happened to President Reagan’s nomination of Robert Bork for the high court in 1987. Bork scored a scant 42 yeas when 51 ayes were necessary for confirmation. Require a Supreme Court nominee to secure 60 votes to shut off the filibuster before confirmation? Well, that’s a mixed bag.
Neither of President Obama’s selections for the court -- Justices Sonia Sotomayor nor Elena Kagan -- faced a “cloture” vote to end a filibuster. But the Senate confirmed both picks with supermajorities. Sotomayor secured 68 yeas. Kagan marshaled 63 yeas.
However, when President George W. Bush tapped Justice Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court in 2006, Senate Democrats (then in the minority) demanded a cloture vote to end a filibuster. Alito scored 72 yeas on the procedural vote. The Senate then confirmed Alito, 58-42.
This is what riles Senate Republicans. The GOP sports only 52 members right now. Two Democrats have announced their support for Gorsuch: Sens. Joe Manchin, West Virginia, and Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota.
Both are moderate Democrats in red states who face potentially brutal re-election campaigns next year. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., insists that if someone is going to sit on the High Court for life, they should command 60 votes on the Senate floor.
“It’s going to be a real, uphill climb to 60,” Schumer predicted for Gorsuch.
“It’s the most powerful court in the world,” said Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa. “If you’re seeking to be an associate justice on the Supreme Court, you ought to be able to rack up 60 votes. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.”
Republicans know they face a deficit to defy the Democrats’ filibuster of Gorsuch. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is unwavering.
“We are going to get Judge Gorsuch confirmed,” he said. “It will really be up to (Democrats) how the process to confirm goes moving forward.”
Embedded in McConnell’s remark is a gambit to deploy the “nuclear option” to confirm Gorsuch. After all, it’s about the numbers. So if McConnell doesn’t have the numbers, he’s willing to do something drastic to promote Gorsuch.
“If the nominee cannot get 60 votes, you don’t change the rules,” Schumer argued. “You change the nominee.”
The 60-vote threshold is dubious for Supreme Court justices. All recent justices proved they could command 60 votes at some point in the process. But the ceiling for Gorsuch so far is at 54 votes.
So what exactly is the nuclear option?
Schumer is wrong about one thing. The nuclear option is not a rules change. It’s a change in Senate precedent. The chamber currently has 44 rules. But as mentioned before, altering those rules requires 67 votes, seven more votes than necessary to invoke cloture and stop debate on Gorsuch’s nomination.
So with only 52 Republican senators, McConnell can’t switch Senate rules. But he could set a new precedent.
See, the Senate also operates on precedent -- a set of parliamentary criterion based on things that happened before. So, if you can’t change the rules, perhaps establish a new precedent.
Democrats opened Pandora’s Box on the nuclear option in November 2013 when they held the majority in the Senate. Senate Democrats didn’t have 67 votes to change the chamber rules. But then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, enacted a new precedent of how many votes are necessary to extinguish filibusters on executive branch nominees except Supreme Court picks.
As we say, it is a numbers game. Reid had the numbers -- a simple majority -- to form a new precedent for those types of nominees.
It’s a numbers game today, too. McConnell has 52 Republicans on his side. He could conceivably launch the nuclear option to constitute a new precedent to require but a simple majority to end filibusters of Supreme Court nominees -- rather than the old bar of 60 votes. All McConnell needs are 51 Republicans to go along to with his gambit.
McConnell must be sure he has at least 51 of his 52 members willing to do the deed. Fifty yeas would suffice if Vice President Pence comes round to break the tie. It’s unclear whether McConnell has those votes. Some Republican senators are leery of re-opening Pandora’s Box to authorize a new precedent. Senators are generally reluctant to change the chamber’s long-standing traditions for a quick-fix today.
One school of thought is that McConnell could let the issue percolate over the upcoming, two-week Easter and Passover recess. This could gin up support among Republicans or even let the Democrats marinate for a while about the consequences.
But Fox is told by multiple, senior Republican sources that should the Democrats not help Republicans count to 60 on Gorsuch, McConnell has the votes on his side to deploy the nuclear option. It’s likely this will all go down on Thursday with a prospective confirmation vote on Friday.
It likely looks like this:
The Senate Judiciary Committee meets Monday to vote the Gorsuch nomination out of committee and dispatch it to the floor. Actual debate on Gorsuch begins in the Senate on Tuesday. Also on Tuesday, McConnell files a “cloture petition” to end debate on Gorsuch.
By rule, cloture petitions require an intervening day before they’re “ripe” for a vote. So a vote to end debate on Gorsuch likely comes Thursday.
Let’s say Gorsuch fails to get 60 votes to end the filibuster Thursday. That’s where McConnell trips the nuclear wire. From a procedural standpoint, the Senate must be in what’s called a “non-debatable” posture.
In other words, a failed cloture vote is just that. There’s no more debate. This parliamentary cul-de-sac is important because it’s practically the only procedural locus in which McConnell could initiate the nuclear option. Any other parliamentary disposition prevents McConnell from going nuclear. But this unique place -- following a failed cloture vote -- is practically throbbing with political isotopes.
McConnell could switch his vote to halt debate so he winds up on the “prevailing side” of the cloture vote. In other words, the Democrats won. The “nay” side prevailed. By briefly siding with the Democrats since they won that round, grants McConnell the right to demand a revote on that same issue.
This is where McConnell lights the fuse.
All McConnell must do is make a point of order that the Senate needs only a simple majority (51 votes) to end debate on a Supreme Court nominee. Naturally, whichever GOP senator is presiding over the chamber would rule against McConnell. After all, that’s not the precedent.
But McConnell would then appeal that ruling, forcing another vote. At that stage, the Senate is voting to sustain the ruling of the presiding officer. But if 51 senators vote no (remember, McConnell wants to establish a new precedent), the Senate has rebuked the chairman’s ruling and set a new precedent. Only 51 yeas are then necessary to break a filibuster on a Supreme Court nominee.
That is the nuclear option.
McConnell could summon Pence to preside over the Senate should he have two defectors on his side. Bizarrely, it’s possible Pence could rule against McConnell’s point of order -- adhering to Senate precedent. But Pence could then vote to break a 50-50 tie to establish a new precedent should it come to that.
The Senate would then re-take the failed cloture vote on Gorsuch. Presumably Gorsuch secures 51 yeas to end debate. And then Democrats, fuming at the GOP’s political artifice, would require the Senate to burn off 30 hours before a final vote to confirm Gorsuch on Friday night.
The Senate usually grants opponents of an issue 30 hours of debate once the chamber votes to end debate.
Prepare for nuclear fallout.
Republicans will claim that Democrats opened Pandora’s Box with their version of the nuclear option in 2013. Democrats will counter they had to because of Republican filibusters back then. Republicans will declare they had no other choice but the nuclear option because Democrats filibustered Gorsuch.
Democrats will contend it never should have come to this. The GOP should have granted President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing.
Regardless, 51 votes will be the new precedent to break filibusters on Supreme Court picks. This is the nuclear option. It may be inevitable. As Stephen King wrote, “there were too many shaky hands holding the lighters near too many fuses.”
Trump vs. Freedom Caucus: President takes names, starting with Amash
 |
| Freedom Caucus member talks next efforts to repeal ObamaCare |
“Donald Trump is bringing auto plants & jobs back to Michigan,” tweeted White House social media Director Dan Scavino Jr. “@justinamash is a big liability. #TrumpTrain, defeat him in primary.”
Most of the ultra-conservative caucus’ roughly 35 members withheld their support for the Republican House leadership’s overhaul plan, which kept it from even getting a final vote in the GOP-led chamber, despite Trump’s rigorous dealmaking efforts.
The president invited caucus leaders to the White House and met with them and others in the House Republican conference on Capitol Hill in the days before the scheduled final vote.
Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., purportedly agreed to cancel the vote, instead of forcing non-supporters to cast “no” ballots on the record. However, Trump still appears bent on political revenge, with the White House suggesting support for a more moderate conservative against Amash in next year’s midterm elections.
“The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast,” Trump tweeted Thursday. “We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!”
Also that day, The Post and Courier newspaper in South Carolina reported that Trump dared Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., to vote against the overhaul bill.
Sanford, who with Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul has a competing ObamaCare replacement bill, said White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney told him: "The president asked me to look you square in the eyes and to say that he hoped that you voted ‘no’ on this bill so he could run (a primary challenger) against you in 2018," according to the paper.
The Freedom Caucus members who opposed the House leadership plan say it doesn’t go far enough to repeal and replace ObamaCare, and they largely appear entrenched in that position.
“Trump admin & Establishment have merged into #Trumpstablishment,” Amash, a Tea Party favorite seeking a fourth term, tweeted Saturday in response to Scavino’s tweet. “Same old agenda: Attack conservatives, libertarians & independent thinkers.”
Previously, Amash had tweeted that instead of draining the swamp, Trump was being sucked into it.
Amash and Stanford are not the first Freedom Caucus members on Trump’s political hit list. Trump told caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., at the closed-door Capitol Hill meeting: “Oh Mark, I'm coming after you.”
Daniel Jacobson, a former Obama White House lawyer, argued Saturday that Scavino's tweet violates federal law about mixing official business with politics.
"This violates the Hatch Act. WH staff can't use an official or de facto govt Twitter acct (which this is) to call for defeat of a candidate," he tweeted.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
-
The problem with the courts is the same as the problem with many of our other institutions. Called the Skins...
