Tag: congress
Rep. Jasmine Crockett

Nancy Mace Melts Down, Challenges Jasmine Crockett To Fistfight

On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee's organizational meeting to kick off the 119th Congress briefly devolved into chaos as one Republican member threatened to fight a Democratic member during the latter's allotted time.

While Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) was speaking about Rep. Nancy Mace's (R-SC) crusade against transgender people — which led to Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE.) being forced to use the men's bathroom in the House of Representatives — Mace blew up at Crockett and appeared to challenge her to a fist fight.

"Somebody's campaign coffers really are struggling right now, so she gonna keep saying 'trans trans trans' so that people will feel threatened," Crockett said, tossing her hair as she spoke. "And chile, listen, I want y'all to tell me why—"

At that point, Mace began shouting over Crockett as she spoke.

"Do not call me a child. I am no child. Don't even start! I am a grown woman! i am 47 years old! I have broken more glass ceilings than you ever have," Mace yelled as Crockett repeated that she was "reclaiming my time."

"If you want to take it outside, we can do that," Mace said as she slammed her mic down on a table.

At that point, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), who chairs the Oversight Committee, repeatedly banged his gavel, called "order" and demanded the two stop arguing. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL), who sits on the committee, posted to Bluesky that Comer ruled "threatening violence against another member is okay, as long as it's in the form of question."

Crockett: Somebody’s campaign coffers are struggling right now so she’s going to keep saying trans trans trans.. Child listen Mace: I am no child! Do not call me a child. I am a grown woman. If you want to take it outside

[image or embed]

— Acyn (@acyn.bsky.social) January 14, 2025 at 9:09 PM

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

President Elect Donald Trump

Trump's Election Win Was Tiny -- So Stop Knuckling Under And Shake It Off

It's important in a democracy that the losing side grapple with its defeat and learn the right lessons for next time. A certain amount of reflection and self-criticism is healthy, but we've blown past that point and are in danger of over-interpreting the 2024 results. Despite headlines proclaiming the GOP won in a "rout" or declaring that "This is the collapse of the Democratic Party,"

November's election was actually quite close. Trump received 49.9 percdent to Kamala Harris's 48.4 percent, a difference of a point and a half. That's a smaller margin than any winner since Richard Nixon in 1968. The popular vote margin in 2000 was also razor-thin, but the candidate who received more votes that year was not the Electoral College winner. If the same percentage of Hispanic voters that chose Hillary Clinton in 2016 had voted Democratic in 2024, Harris would have been the victor. The Republicans took control of the Senate, but their margin in the House was reduced.

This is not to say that the Democrats don't have lessons to learn. It seems pretty obvious that shaking off the outsized influence of "the groups" — the immigration rights, LGBTQ rights, anti-development, anti-police agitators is a good place to start. By all means, Democrats should convene conclaves and discuss all of that with their pollsters and greybeards.

But in the meanwhile, Donald Trump did not suddenly become more normal or less of a threat to democratic norms and institutions than he was on Nov. 3. Yet a fog of obfuscation has settled on the country, one in which Democrats are offering peace pipes, withholding judgment on some of the wilder Trump Cabinet nominees, and focusing on areas in which the two parties can work together rather than the ones on which they differ. The papers have been filled with chirpy articles offering how Trump can really make a difference on housing policy or public health or our energy future.

If the Democrats have concluded, with Rep. Jared Moskowitz, that "we (Democrats) were to the left of the American people" on immigration, fine. And if Democrats want to pay lip service, with Rep. Ro Khanna, to the DOGE initiative (if it even is an initiative), OK, though it would be nice if they noted that other commissions have addressed the matter of government waste and deficit spending to zero effect. The Grace Commission in the 1980s and the Simpson-Bowles Commission in the 2010s made substantive proposals to Congress and the president.

But in order for anything to happen, Congress and the president must take their duties seriously and, just perhaps, enact laws. Instead, our elected leaders said thank you very much for your service and ignored them. In keeping with the unseriousness of MAGA, this DOGE (the title is an acronym for Department of Government Efficiency but also a reference to, what else, an internet meme) is not even a congressionally authorized investigation, far less a new government agency. It's a chimera, and even before Trump has taken the oath, Elon Musk is already retreating from the fantastical claim of cutting the budget by $2 trillion.

Democrats and others should focus a bit less on last November's election and a bit more on what Musk has become. Not content with threatening to primary any Republican who dares assert independence from Trump, Musk has gone abroad seeking fascist-adjacent leaders to support and promote. The man Trump has entrusted with vast influence has endorsed the German AfD, a Russia-philic, extremist right-wing party that cannot seem to stop using racist and antisemitic slogans; agitated against the British government by spreading lies, promoted the cause of right-wing provocateur Tommy Robinson, and announced, as it were ex cathedra, that Nigel Farage is no longer acceptable as the leader of the Reform UK party.

Where are the calls for Trump to repudiate Musk?

Perhaps people are feeling defeated. After all, Trump himself just gave a press conference in which he repeated Kremlin talking points (totally false) about the origins of the Ukraine war. It's perfectly reasonable for Democrats and others to conclude that Trump is aligned with Putin and with the fascists worldwide who adore him. Remember how he responded to news that Putin's tanks had rolled into Ukraine? He thought it was brilliant. Maybe he's trolling when he threatens to use force to retake the Panama Canal or, God help us, Canada.

But maybe his authoritarian juices are rising as inauguration day beckons. It's impossible to say at this moment, but what is possible to say is that most Americans do not perceive Trump to be a would-be Putin. They may be OK with him firing some bureaucrats and deporting some illegal aliens, but they didn't sign up for unabashed authoritarianism.

Or perhaps they did. But one thing is certain — we'll never know unless the opposition shakes off its torpor. If Democrats and tech barons and newspaper owners and columnists keep pretending that Trump is really interested in health reform or housing initiatives and continue to sweep the dangerous and fascist messages under the rug, there is zero chance that the American people will understand what is happening.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

You Won't Believe...What Trump's Fluffers Once Said About January 6

You Won't Believe...What Trump's Fluffers Once Said About January 6

On January 6, 2021, as a violent mob stormed the U.S. Capitol and halted Congress’ counting of electoral votes, Fox News host Brian Kilmeade dashed off a desperate text to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

“Please, get him on TV. Destroying everything you have accomplished,” he wrote of Trump, who had summoned the enraged crowd to Washington, D.C., and incited it with lies that the 2020 election had been stolen as part of a plot to subvert that election.

Kilmeade expressed a drastically different view on Monday, as a new Congress prepared to count the electoral votes that would return Trump to the Oval Office.

In one of Fox & Friends’ few references to the January 6 insurrection that morning, he mocked Democrats who “want to point out how different” today’s events will be “from four years ago” when “democracy was in danger.”

Kilmeade added that the American people think that January 6, “as bad as that day was, it’s a small part of the Donald Trump story” and that it would be “put to bed even further after today happens.”

The Fox & Friends host is one of an array of right-wing media figures who said at the time that the January 6 insurrection was a calamity, that the rioters were criminals, and that Trump himself bore responsibility for their actions. But over the past four years, they have participated in the right’s Great Forgetting, making their peace with Trump’s attempted coup and supporting his return to the presidency.

When the right said January 6 was “deplorable” and its participants were “criminals”

“Remember what yesterday’s attempted coup at the U.S. Capitol was like. Very soon, someone might try to convince you that it was different,” The Atlantic’s David Graham wrote the next day. “The health of the republic depends both on what swift consequences come—for Trump and for others—and also on how people remember the participants’ actions later on.”

Graham’s warning proved prescient. As the attack unfolded and in its immediate aftermath, many media figures on the right joined those on center and left in condemning the attack — and Trump’s work to incite it — in the strongest possible terms. But they did not sustain their initial response.

“Shoot the protestors,” influential commentator Erick Erickson wrote that afternoon. He added that Trump should receive immediate consequences that would end his political career: “Waive the rules, impeach. Waive the rules, convict. Waive the rules, deny the ability to run for election again.”

Four years later, Erickson offered this take: “First, Happy January 6th to all who celebrate. Note to the media: The exit polling in November showed that most voters do not care. That you will try to make them care today is another reason trust in the media is beneath that of Congress itself.”

Fox chief political analyst Brit Hume likewise denounced Trump at the time for having “fueled the worst suspicions of his supporters with wild claims that the election was stolen. And now we see the result.” But on Election Day 2024, he declared this “a BS issue” because “the thing was over in a matter of hours.”

Erickson and Hume are among a long list of right-wing media notables who condemned January 6 — and even Trump for bringing it about — but came around to implicitly or explicitly support his return to the presidency, even as he showed no remorse for his own actions and valorized the rioters.

Rupert Murdoch, whose right-wing media empire is one of the most potent forces in Republican politics, wrote in an email to Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott on Inauguration Day 2021 that Trump’s election lies had been “pretty much a crime” that made January 6 “inevitable.” He added: “Best we don't mention his name unless essential and certainly don't support him."

On Fox, numerous hosts condemned the criminal acts of the mob and said its members deserved punishment, with some even describing such denunciations as morally necessary.

“Those who truly support President Trump, those that believe they are part of the conservative movement in this country, you do not — we do not support those that commit acts of violence,” offered Fox host and Trump adviser Sean Hannity. “Every good and decent American, we know, will and must condemn what happened at the Capitol.”

“The actions at the United States Capitol three days ago were deplorable, reprehensible, outright criminal,” Jeanine Pirro likewise declared. “Anyone watching this must condemn it.”

Fox contributor Marc Thiessen was among the few to single out Trump on the network’s airwaves, saying the then-president had been “responsible for what happened,” and he went much further in a Washington Post column.

“It was one of the darkest moments in the history of our democracy. And Trump is responsible for it,” he wrote. “Trump formed and incited the mob. He stoked their anger with self-serving lies. He betrayed his followers. He betrayed his office. And now he has blood on his hands.”

The organs of the upper-crust right were united in blaming Trump for the attack.

Murdoch’s Wall Street Journalwrote in a January 7, 2021, editorial that Trump should resign the presidency after committing “an assault on the constitutional process of transferring power after an election.” The New York Post editorial board wrote that “while the roots of this madness were many, with some blame across the spectrum, it’s fundamentally on President Trump.” And the editors of National Review said Trump “found a new low” by having “whipped up and urged on a mob toward the U.S. Capitol, where it breached the building and forced his vice president and lawmakers to flee.”

The hosts of the All-In podcast, which became a key venue of the MAGA tech right, were even more scathing at the time, describing Trump as “a complete piece-of-shit fucking scumbag” who had engaged in “insane, deranged, criminal, lunatic behavior” and had “disqualified himself from being a candidate at a national level.”

The Great Forgetting and what comes next

These comments reflected the widespread initial consensus that January 6 had been horrific — and that Trump had been responsible for it. In the first days following the attack, politicians of both parties, corporate leaders, and the public at large responded with revulsion and demands for consequences.

But that unity ultimately proved fragile. A coterie of Trumpists, led by former Fox host Tucker Carlson, worked diligently to unwind it, reframing the sacking of the U.S. Capitol as either unimportant — or a conspiracy driven by Democrats and the media in which the assailants were the real victims of a crackdown on “political dissidents,” as Fox’s Rachel Campos-Duffy put it last week.

As this fraudulent counternarrative became increasingly widespread, most other conservative media figures eventually chose to join the right’s Great Forgetting. They pretended that a president who they knew had tried to overturn the republic was fit to return to that office. And in so doing, they helped power Trump from his post-January 6 position of disgrace back to the GOP nomination and the presidency.

Trump’s return to office sets the stage for more authoritarian acts. He never repudiated his election lies or the attack they incited, instead valorizing the January 6 “hostages” and promising they will receive pardons as one of his first acts in office. And he is assembling a team to carry out the “retribution” he has promised to inflict on his political foes, including an FBI director who proposed legal action against the conspirators, “not just in government but in the media,” who he claimed “helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections.”

Trump’s authoritarian impulses may ultimately come to nothing. But with their actions after January 6, the leading lights of the right have already signaled their willingness to accept whatever he does.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Tulsi Gabbard

Senate Democrats Stall Hearings On Tulsi Gabbard Nomination

As the Senate GOP seeks to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence ahead of Donald Trump's inauguration in less that two weeks, Democrats are blocking the way to a confirmation date, according to Politico.

Per the report, "Committee rules stipulate that vetting paperwork for the nominees must be received by the panel at least one week before the confirmation hearings. But snow and office closures at the Office of Governmental Ethics have slowed civil servants from processing some of the necessary vetting paperwork for" the MAGA nominee.

Democrats are so far unwilling to waive the rules.

In addition to the "key paperwork" necessary for the former Democratic lawmaker's confirmation, CNN reports that an FBI check is also needed, "according to two sources familiar with the matter."

According to CNN, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton's (R-AR) spokesperson told the news outlet that Cotton "'intends to hold these hearings before Inauguration Day,' a timeline that would mean a hearing would need to take place either this week or next for Gabbard.'"

Critics of Gabbard, Politico notes, point to "her lack of intelligence experience, sympathetic comments about Russia and for once taking a secret trip to meet with Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad," as reasons the ex-Democrat is not suited for the job.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World