Latest news with #CQ-RollCall
The Intercept
15 hours ago
- Politics
- The Intercept
How Democratic Leaders Quietly Support Trump's March to War With Iran
Support Us © THE INTERCEPT ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Some Democrats are fighting to stop war with Iran, but party leaders are silently acquiescing or, worse, supporting an attack. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., conducts a news conference in the U.S. Capitol in Washington on May 20, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images As President Donald Trump barrels toward a direct war with Iran, the most powerful Democrats in Congress are issuing statements that are at best tepid and confusing. At worst, they are cheering escalation. Even with some Democrats on Capitol Hill pushing for a War Powers Resolution and other legislation to stop Trump from attacking without congressional approval, the Democratic Party's most powerful politicians refuse to mount any meaningful opposition to a strike. Many outright favor direct U.S. involvement in yet another regime change war. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the Senate, where he is the minority leader, presents himself as a major opponent of Trump. As recently as June 15, for example, he boasted about his participation in the No Kings Day mass protest against Trump. Yet when it comes to the prospect of a direct war with Iran, Schumer is not only supporting Trump, but less than three weeks ago was goading the administration to be 'tough' on Iran and not make any 'side deals' without Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's approval. — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) June 2, 2025 'The United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response,' he said in a follow-up statement released on June 13, after Israel attacked Iran. 'The Iranian regime's stated policy has long been to destroy Israel and Jewish communities around the world.' Schumer did include a perfunctory nod to talks — 'a strong, unrelenting diplomatic effort backed by meaningful leverage.' The 'meaningful leverage' in question, however, is bombing Iran — something Schumer tacitly supports. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the House, responded to Israel's attack with a toothless statement that was vaguely supportive of war and packed with every pro-Israel cliche in the book. 'Our commitment to Israel's security is ironclad,' he said. 'It is clear that the Iranian regime poses a grave threat to the entire free world. There is no circumstance where Iran can be permitted to become a nuclear power.' Jeffries, too, mentioned diplomacy, but with no urgency. 'As soon as is practical, it is imperative to find a rigorous diplomatic path forward and avoid any situation where U.S. troops are put in harm's way,' he said. As with Schumer, 'diplomacy' is a box to be checked, a vague normative preference, but not a demand — and certainly not a requirement. A host of powerful Democrats issued strikingly similar statements. They repeatedly reinforced every premise of Trump's pending bombing campaign, namely the alleged imminent danger posed by Iran. This premise is undermined by U.S. intelligence assessments and leaks to both the Wall Street Journal and CNN, which suggest Iran hadn't decided to make a bomb and would be three years away from producing one if it did. If all of the statements look similar, it's because, according to DropSite and the American Prospect, many members of Congress are simply copy and pasting approved language from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the flagship pro-Israel lobby group. These outlets found that, in statements on congressional websites and social media, nearly 30 members of Congress used nearly identical language about how they 'stand with Israel' and another 35 gave their unequivocal support in similar terms but without the magic words. Among the influential Democrats pledging their unflinching support for Israel was Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Like many others, Meeks hauled out a talking point about how 'Israel has a right to defend itself' — meant to front-run any discussion of Israeli aggression by asserting the premise that any and all military action is inherently defensive. It's a dubious premise in most contexts, but especially Orwellian in this one since Israel preemptively attacked Iran based on claims of an 'imminent threat' in direct contradiction of US intelligence. Even if one thinks Israel has a 'right to defend itself' in the abstract, under no neutral reading of international law is Israel doing so by bombing another country without legal basis to do so. The decidedly unhelpful approaches by powerful Democrats don't end there. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, influential members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively, both issued mealy-mouthed statements trying to split the baby between 'diplomacy' rhetoric and reinforcing every pretense for U.S. involvement in Israel's bombing of Iran. These non-positions — or worse, positions in favor of unprovoked, almost certainly illegal war — are notable precisely because there are some lawmakers who are at least trying to do something to stop a direct, all-out conflict between the U.S. and Iran. According to the latest count by Prem Thakker, 37 members of Congress have thrown their weight behind some kind of effort to stop war. These fall into two camps. The first is a resolution in both the House and Senate that invokes the 1973 War Powers Act, which says that only Congress can declare war, a principle that has been routinely violated by U.S. presidents. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., is leading this push in the Senate, where few cosponsors have signed on. (Someone with knowledge of the effort told us that the organizers aren't accepting co-sponsors in a bid to gain bipartisan support first.) Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., are leading the sister effort in the House, and it has 28 supporters total, including Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. D-N.Y. A total of 27, or 12.7 percent, of House Democrats have lent the bill their support. There is another effort afoot, too: the No War Against Iran Act that was already in motion before Israel attacked Iran on June 13, though it was introduced after the attacks began. The Senate bill, spearheaded by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would prevent federal funds from being used for a war that's not approved by Congress. Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., are among its eight Senate supporters. Democratic leaders, however, are leaving their colleagues out to dry. Schumer, for instance, declined to join Sanders's bill as a cosponsor — despite having cosponsored the same effort in 2020. This tacit and open support for Trump's war aren't limited to active leadership; the upper echelons of the party establishment have been noticeably silent. Democratic elites by and large agree with both Israel's unprovoked attacks on Iran and Trump's direct involvement. Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama haven't publicly opposed Trump's reckless threats and build-up to war with Iran. Obama, for example, has re-emerged into the spotlight — but made no mention of Iran or Trump's push for war during a public appearance this week. Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton — despite frequently criticizing Trump for his military parade, detainment of a U.S. senator, and anti-abortion policies — hasn't spoken in opposition to a US war with Iran. And, likewise, 2024 Democratic nominee Kamala Harris, who has been speaking out against Trump, has yet to publicly criticize Trump's build up to bombing Iran. Surveying these responses — somewhere between muted disinterest and consent — there's only one plausible conclusion: Democratic elites by and large agree with both Israel's unprovoked attacks on Iran and Trump's direct involvement in this potentially catastrophic regime change war. It's unlikely most Democratic hawks will come out in open support of an attack that carries such political risks; like with Iraq 20 years ago, things could quickly go off the rails. Yet, even as party leaders seek to burnish their credentials as the 'resistance' to Trump, they're tacitly, and sometimes openly, giving Trump a green light to lurch America into yet another open-ended war of choice. Join The Conversation
New York Post
3 days ago
- Politics
- New York Post
Rep. Mike Lawler has better shot at defeating Gov. Kathy Hochul than Elise Stefanik: poll
Rep. Mike Lawler would have a better shot than Rep. Elise Stefanik in defeating Democratic incumbent Gov. Kathy Hochul in next year's gubernatorial race, a bombshell new poll claims. Lawler would fare better among moderates than Stefanik as both Republicans eye a possible race against Hochul in 2026, according to the survey conducted by Brock McCleary, founder of Harper Polling. Hochul leads Lawler 48%-41% on the initial ballot, but the race becomes a dead heat when participants were informed of their records, the poll showed. Hochul was still ahead, but by a margin of only 44%-43.4%, the poll said. 3 According to a new poll, Rep. Mike Lawler has a better shot than Rep. Elise Stefanik at beating Gov. Kathy Hochul in the upcoming New York gubernatorial election. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images The incumbent governor meanwhile leads Stefanik 50.1%-38.8% on initial ballots and 46%-42.6% after participants were informed of their records, according to the survey results, which were obtained by The Post. Lawler has an advantage compared to Stefanik in key downstate areas, the poll showed — with Lawler ahead of Hochul by 20 points on Long Island, while Hochul is up by slightly leaner 15 percentage points, the data showed. Stefanik leads Hochul 51%-36% on the island while Lawler leads 55%-35%, according to the poll. In the Hudson Valley, Hochul leads Stefanik by 13 points, but is only 5 points ahead of Lawyer, who is from the lower Hudson's Rockland County. The poll shows Stefanik trailing Hochul 40%-53% with Lawler in a much tighter race but still down 44%-49%. Interestingly, the poll finds Lawler running as strongly as Stefanik on her upstate turf. Stefanik has a 1-percentage point lead over Hochul — 49% to 48% — in the Albany/North Country/Central New York that includes her congressional district. But Lawler also leads Hochul by a point, 48%-47% in the same region. 3 Lawler did better than Stefanik among moderate New Yorkers, according to the poll. Save New York In the Western New York- Buffalo region, Stefanik has a 2-point edge over Hochul, 45%-43%. Likewise, Lawler leads Hochul by 3 points in the Buffalo region — 47% to 44%. Hochul is 41 points ahead of Stefanik in New York City, but 35 points ahead of Lawler, according to the poll. 'Self-identified moderates are a key voting group to win statewide in New York because, by party registration the moderates in this survey were 51% Democrat, 21% Republican and 28% independent,' said McCleary, who has polled for the National Republican Congressional Committee. 'Lawler performs 10 points higher than Stefanik on the gubernatorial ballot among moderates.' Stefanik has a 20-point higher name identification than Lawler with Republicans. McClearly said the survey was conducted for a right-leaning client that he would not disclose, not any particular campaign. The poll's findings did not release who would win a hypothetical GOP primary between Stefanik and Lawler. Other prior polls gave Stefanik, who is close to President Trump, a big edge in a GOP primary contest between the two congress members. McCleary said one thing is clear: Hochul is a vulnerable incumbent even in blue leaning New York. Nearly six in 10 voters — 59% — disapprove of her job performance, while just 38% approve. That's about the same rating as for President Trump in a Democratic-dominated state. Only 29% of voters support her running for re-election, while 66% prefer someone else. 'Hochul is a very unpopular incumbent — as unpopular as an incumbent can get,' the pollster said. 3 Hochul only led Lawler by 0.6% when respondents were informed of their records. Mattie Neretin – CNP for NY Post That means either Lawler or Stefanik could give Hochul a run for her money. In 2022, Hochul defeated former Long Island Rep. Lee Zeldin, the Republican nominee, by 6-percentage points in a hard fought race. Start and end your day informed with our newsletters Morning Report and Evening Update: Your source for today's top stories Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Harper Polling surveyed 600 likely voters from May 7-9. The poll a margin of error of plus or minus 4% percentage points. The Stefanik camp said the poll's findings were suspect. 'The upstate polling numbers alone are laughable,' said Stefanik senior campaign adviser Alex deGrasse, noting it's not credible that Lawler is running as strong upstate as Stefanik. He also said Stefanik's close ties to Trump is a plus, not a minus, with moderate voters. 'Those who say they should run away from President Trump and MAGA like Lawler and his campaign are mistaken. To win in New York you will need to energize the Trump Republican base and win independents and Democrats which Elise has done cycle after cycle,' deGrasse said. 'Elise is the strongest candidate – and frankly the only candidate – who can build upon the 2022 success of pro Trump candidate Lee Zeldin and finally end the tyranny of Kathy Hochul.' Lawler's camp declined to comment. Stefanik has given strong indications that she's running for governor. Lawler, too, is mulling a run and will soon decide whether to thrown his hat in the ring or seek re-election to his lower Hudson Valley House seat next year.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
'No Kings' protests: What to know about the June 14 rallies against Trump
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images No Kings Day protest at the Capitol Reflection Pool on Presidents Day, Washington DC, February 2025 This Saturday, June 14, is set to be the largest mass protest of President Donald Trump's second term so far. June 14 is a notable day for many reasons. In the United States, the day is known as Flag Day, commemorating the adoption of the U.S. flag on that day in 1777. It's the anniversary of the Army's founding, which will have happened 250 years ago this year. It's Donald Trump's 79th birthday. It will also be marked by the largest mass mobilization of protests and rallies since Trump's second term started in January. In celebration of Flag Day, the Army's anniversary, and his birthday, Trump has planned a large-scale military parade for Saturday through the streets of Washington, D.C. The parade will reportedly include over 6,000 soldiers, 49 aircraft, and 128 vehicles, including tanks, 25 horses, two mules, and a dog in "a spectacular military parade in Washington, D.C., like no other," according to an Instagram video posted by Trump. That won't be the only significant event that day. Across the country, and in a few places in Mexico and Canada, people are organizing No Kings protests and rallies in response to what many see as an increase in authoritarian power grabs and overreach from the current administration. Over 2,000 No Kings protests and rallies are scheduled for June 14. Here's what you should know about them. DOMINIC GWINN/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images No Kings Day protest in front of the Capitol building on Presidents Day, Washington DC, February 2025 The No Kings movement is in direct response to actions taken by the Trump administration that many see as corrupt, authoritarian, and morally wrong. "They've defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services," the movement's website reads. "The corruption has gone too far. No thrones. No crowns. No kings." The protests are being held on the June 14 to counterbalance Trump's military parade in Washington, D.C., which is seen by many as another sign of his administration's excess and corruption. Organizers are calling for the protests to be peaceful. "No Kings is a nationwide day of defiance," the website says. "From city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, we're taking action to reject authoritarianism — and show the world what democracy really looks like." Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images Hands Off Rally, St. Paul, Minnesota, April 2025 While the No Kings protests aren't directly related to the anti-ICE protests over recent immigration raids in Los Angeles and surrounding areas, the raids are an important issue to the movement. "Whether you're outraged by attacks on civil rights, skyrocketing costs, abductions and disappearances, the gutting of essential services, or the assault on free speech — this moment is for you," the website says, referencing mass arrests made by ICE agents in workplace raids in areas like the LA Fashion District. Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images No Kings Day protest on Presidents Day, Detroit, Michigan, February 2025 There are over 2,000 No Kings protests planned across the United States, with a few also scheduled to take place in Canada and Mexico. To find out where the closest one is, check out the movement's map. Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images 50501 Movement protest, Indianapolis, Indiana, April 2025 Trump will be in Washington, D.C., celebrating his birthday with a large military parade, something he has wanted to do since his first term as president. DOMINIC GWINN/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images Fox News coverage protest, Washington, D.C., June 2025 No, there will not be a No Kings protest in the nation's capital. According to the movement's website, it is avoiding Washington, D.C., because that is where Trump's parade will be. "Instead of allowing this birthday parade to be the center of gravity, we will make action everywhere else the story of America that day: people coming together in communities across the country to reject strongman politics and corruption," it says. Instead, No Kings is hosting a large march and rally in Philadelphia in an attempt "to draw a clear contrast between our people-powered movement and the costly, wasteful, and un-American birthday parade in Washington." Erin Clark/The Boston Globe via Getty Images No Kings rally at Hancock Adams Common, Quincy, MA, April 2025 Trump has said that he has no patience for anyone who wants to protest the parade in the capital. "If there's any protester that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force," Trump said, per NBC News. "I haven't even heard about a protest, but you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force."
New York Post
04-06-2025
- Health
- New York Post
House GOP summons five more Biden aides in probe of health coverup
WASHINGTON — House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer broadened his investigation of the alleged coverup of President Biden's mental decline Wednesday with interview requests for five more former White House advisers. Comer (R-Ky.) is requesting closed-door transcribed interviews with former White House chief of staff Ron Klain, former de facto West Wing communications chief Anita Dunn and longtime Biden advisers Bruce Reed, Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti. 3 House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer is expanding his panel's investigation of the alleged coverup of President Biden's mental decline. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images Advertisement 'The American people deserve full transparency and the House Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough investigation to provide answers and accountability,' Comer said. 'The cover-up of President Biden's mental decline is one of the greatest scandals in our nation's history. These five former senior advisors were eyewitnesses to President Biden's condition and operations within the Biden White House. They must appear before the House Oversight Committee and provide truthful answers about President Biden's cognitive state and who was calling the shots.' The oversight panel already has requested interviews with Biden's presidential physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor, first lady Jill Biden's former chief of staff Anthony Bernal and the president's former West Wing aides Annie Tomasini, Neera Tanden and Ashley Williams. Advertisement 3 Biden, 82, dropped out of last year's election after Democrats mutinied over his apparent cognitive slip. REUTERS 3 Former White House chief of staff Ron Klain is among the newly summoned former officials. EPA The initial cohort are in the process of setting dates for their sit-downs — under the threat of subpoenas if they balk at the request. Questioning by Comer's staff is likely to touch on President Trump's allegation that documents auto-penned during Biden's tenure may have been signed without his knowledge — a contention that currently lacks solid evidence despite some former Biden aides finding the theory plausible. Advertisement Comer previously led a far-reaching inquiry into Joe Biden's role in his son Hunter Biden and brother James Biden's international consulting work during and after their powerful relative's eight-year vice presidency — with that probe turning up evidence that Biden repeatedly interacted with his family's foreign associates in nations where he steered US policy, such as China and Ukraine, despite his public denials. The ongoing House probe is likely to expand to even more former Biden officials. Although former presidents can assert executive privilege over their communications with advisers, the current White House occupant — Trump — is able to override such immunity from questioning.
New York Post
01-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
GOP Sen. Joni Ernst gives mock apology to lefty critics for acknowledging everyone dies
Iowa GOP Sen. Joni Ernst has delivered a backhanded apology for acknowledging everyone dies during a town hall that included frustration over Trump Medicaid reforms. Ernst sparked controversy when she fielded a question about the Medicaid provisions in the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act and a heckler jeered that 'people will die!' during the gathering Friday in Parkersburg, Iowa. Ernst fired back in now-viral footage, 'People are not — well, we all are going to die. For heaven's sakes, folks.' Advertisement 3 Sen. Joni Ernst has been a staunch proponent of reining in government spending. Instagram/@Joni Ernst On Saturday, the Hawkeye State Republican followed up by posting a video on Instagram of her giving a mock apology. 'I would like to take this opportunity to sincerely apologize for a statement that I made yesterday at my town hall,' she said, initially sounding serious. 'A woman who was extremely distraught screamed out from the back corner of the auditorium, 'People are going to die!' ' Advertisement 3 The Iowa senator defended the Medicaid reforms that Republicans are eyeing. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images 'And I made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this Earth,' she went on. 'So I apologize, and I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the Tooth Fairy as well. 'But for those that would like to see eternal and everlasting life, I encourage you to embrace my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.' Ernst also ripped into the 'hysteria that's out there coming from the left' over the blowback to her comments about death. Advertisement The proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cleared the House last month and now heads to the Senate this week for consideration, features multiple Medicaid reform provisions, including work requirements. Medicaid, a federal health insurance program for low-income Americans, is distinct from Medicare, which is federal health insurance for the elderly. 3 Medicaid reforms have emerged as one of the key flashpoints in attempts to pass the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Getty Images for Caring Across Generations The mega-bill would require able-bodied individuals to work or volunteer for multiple hours each month to receive Medicaid benefits. Advertisement Overall, the suite of reforms could lead to 7.6 million people losing benefits and saving $723 billion more than a decade, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate. That's the bulk of the more than $1.5 trillion spending cuts in the massive bill. But the provision has drawn grumblings from several Republican senators such as Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), though it is not fully clear whether they will vote for it. The mammoth piece of legislation also imposes work requirements on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and makes other reforms to food stamps. Proponents argue that those measures are needed to root out waste and fraud. 'What you don't want to do is listen to me when I say that we are going to focus on those that are most vulnerable,' Ernst said, insisting the changes will protect those in most need. 'Those that meet the eligibility requirements for Medicaid, we will protect. We will protect them. Medicaid is extremely important here in the state of Iowa. If you don't want to listen, that's fine,' she said.
