Poll shows how misguided House Republicans are about a government shutdown

Fresh off their crackerjack idea of launching an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, House Republicans are greasing the skids for a government shutdown. In their view, it's both righteous and popular. Not kidding.

“We’re going to have a shutdown, it’s just a matter of how long,” Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina said Thursday. “We believe in what we are doing. The jury will be the country. And the jury is fed up with reckless spending.”

On Friday, the progressive consortium Navigator Research released fresh polling on voters' views of a government shutdown and the government's spending priorities.

Seventy-seven percent of voters believe a government shutdown this fall would hurt the economy either a lot (45%) or somewhat (32%). A measly 13% of voters said it would not hurt the economy.

🚨 NEW POLL: 77% of Americans believe a government shutdown this fall would hurt the economy, including… 🔵 84% of Democrats 🟢 74% of independents 🔴 71% of Republicans … as well as 83% of those who rate the economy negatively, but support Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. pic.twitter.com/8FLPOMJtIn

— Navigator Research (@NavigatorSurvey) September 15, 2023

And while Republicans think shutting down the government in an attempt to slash spending is a righteous cause, the spending cuts they are proposing are deeply unpopular.

At least 3 in 4 voters oppose cuts to the following: Social Security, nutrition assistance for children and vulnerable families, K-12 education, funding to provide safe and clean drinking water, and investments in life-saving medical research for children, cancer patients, and maternal health.

Bottom line: The more righteous House Republicans feel about their shutdown and their rationale for it, the better it is for Democrats. No one wants a shutdown but House Republicans, and they seem more than happy to own it.

Sign and send the petition: Pass a clean funding bill. No GOP hostage taking.

Kerry talks with Drew Linzer, director of the online polling company Civiqs. Drew tells us what the polls say about voters’ feelings toward President Joe Biden and Donald Trump, and what the results would be if the two men were to, say … run against each other for president in 2024. Oh yeah, Drew polled to find out who thinks Donald Trump is guilty of the crimes he’s been indicted for, and whether or not he should see the inside of a jail cell.

House Freedom Caucus plans to shut down the government, blame it on the Senate

In 15 days, funding for all federal government operations will expire, barring a miracle (or House Speaker Kevin McCarthy having a personality transplant that turns him into a competent leader, which puts us back in miracle territory). A guy who lets people like Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz pressure him into trying to impeach President Joe Biden based on the hallucinations of Rudy Giuliani isn’t likely to transform into a competent strategist.

The House returned from its six-week August recess Tuesday afternoon ready to do one of the easiest things Congress ever has to accomplish: spending a lot of money on the Pentagon. They failed—massively—as the extremist zealots refused to let the bill come to the floor. They didn’t do it because they’re opposed to the bill. They did it because they can, as a power flex.

No one in the House seems capable of coming up with a plan to stop them. “It’s stupid,” Idaho GOP Rep. Mike Simpson complained to Politico. “We’ve been seeing this coming for the last three or four months. I just didn’t think we were dumb enough to get there,” he said. Simpson should know better, coming from Idaho of all places, the sinkhole of GOP stupidity.

Another senior GOP member told Semafor that what happened with the “Five Families” in the “Godfather” movies is coming. “The whole family kills each other,” they said. “I think we’re close to that right now. We are in maybe the Godfather II stage.” The member is probably referring to the fact that GOP leadership in the House decided to emulate “The Godfather” by calling the various factions in the House the “Five Families.” For real. Talk about self-fulfilling prophecies.

Two of those five are working on a supposed solution. A few members of both the Main Street Caucus, made up of supposed moderates, and the Freedom Caucus started meeting Wednesday to hatch some sort of stopgap funding plan, including spending cuts and border security funding.

Since Freedom Caucus guy Chip Roy of Texas is one of the negotiators, don’t expect it to work. What he’s in it for is a shutdown that they can blame on the Senate. He admitted it.

SHUTDOWN: @chiproytx says at Family Research Council he views a shutdown as inevitable because of Senate intransigence. He says GOP uniting around push for border policy changes as reason for fight

— Erik Wasson (@elwasson) September 15, 2023

The Senate will not accept a stopgap bill or a continuing resolution that slashes funding. For one thing, it’s called a continuing resolution because what it does is continue current funding. Roy knows that. His whole group knows that. A shutdown is exactly what the Freedom Caucus wants, for whatever reason.

“We’re going to have a shutdown, it’s just a matter of how long,” GOP @RepRalphNorman says. “We believe in what we are doing. The jury will be the country. And the jury is fed up with reckless spending.”

— Ben Siegel (@bensiegel) September 14, 2023

The “jury” does not want that. Seventy-one percent of Republicans “believe a government shutdown this fall would hurt the economy,” according to the latest polling from Navigator Research. Other Republicans understand that. “Have we ever not got blamed for a shutdown? ... I’m worried about the basic functions of government,” said Republican Rep. Kelly Armstrong of South Dakota.

Making matters even worse for McCarthy, he lost another vote Friday when Rep. Chris Stewart’s planned resignation was supposed to take effect. That leaves just a four-vote margin for McCarthy.

The glaring solution—and the inevitable one—is reaching out and compromising for Democratic votes. It’s the only way this gets solved. But at this point, it’s going to take Republicans reaping the disaster of a shutdown to force them to do it.

Sign the petition: Denounce MAGA GOP's baseless impeachment inquiry against Biden

RELATED STORIES:

Ron Johnson derails months of bipartisan Senate work on spending bills

House hardliners brag about 'chaos' as government shutdown looms

What did McCarthy gain by caving on impeachment? Nothing

What do you do if you're associated with one of the biggest election fraud scandals in recent memory? If you're Republican Mark Harris, you try running for office again! On this week's episode of "The Downballot," we revisit the absolutely wild story of Harris' 2018 campaign for Congress, when one of his consultants orchestrated a conspiracy to illegally collect blank absentee ballots from voters and then had his team fill them out before "casting" them. Officials wound up tossing the results of this almost-stolen election, but now Harris is back with a new bid for the House—and he won't shut up about his last race, even blaming Democrats for the debacle.

A look ahead at Pennsylvania’s special election on Tuesday

For the third time in less than eight months, a special election will decide control of the narrowly divided Pennsylvania House of Representatives and provide political reinforcements to either the commonwealth’s Democratic governor or its Republican-controlled Senate.

On Tuesday, voters in the heavily Democratic 21st legislative district will choose a replacement for former state Rep. Sara Innamorato, who stepped down in July to focus on her bid to be Allegheny County’s next county executive. Her resignation bumped Democrats from a one-vote majority in the chamber to a 101-101 tie with Republicans.

The Democratic nominee is Lindsay Powell, director of Workforce Strategies for InnovatePGH, an economic development nonprofit, and a former aide to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and former Pittsburgh Mayor William Peduto. She faces GOP nominee Erin Connolly Autenreith, a real estate agent and chairwoman of the Shaler Township Republican Committee. Her father, Thomas Connolly, served as mayor of nearby McKees Rocks in the 1980s.

PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMMISSIONER RESIGNS AMID CRIME WAVE

The winner will complete the remainder of Innamorato’s two-year term and be up for reelection in November 2024.

District 21 is located in the heart of Allegheny County in southwestern Pennsylvania and includes parts of Pittsburgh as well as the suburbs of Etna, Millvale, Reserve and Shaler to the north. Innamorato won the district in 2022 with 63% of the vote. Allegheny County has Pennsylvania's second-largest population and votes reliably Democratic, supporting Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden in the last two presidential elections with 57% and 60% of the vote, respectively. U.S. Sen. John Fetterman received 63% of the county vote in 2022 over Republican nominee Dr. Mehmet Oz.

In the 2022 midterm election, Democrats won a majority in the Pennsylvania House for the first time since 2010, but Republicans occupied more seats by the time the term began in January because of three vacancies that were created after the election. Two Democratic members resigned to assume other offices –- lieutenant governor and U.S. representative — while a third died before Election Day and was reelected posthumously.

Democrats regained their numerical majority in February after winning special elections to fill the three vacancies. Two additional vacancies, one by a Republican who was elected to the state Senate and another by a Democrat who resigned amid sexual harassment allegations, forced another round of special elections in May that would once again determine control of the House. Those elections resulted in the 102-101 Democratic edge that stood until Innamorato’s resignation in July.

Yet another special election that could determine control of the Pennsylvania House may be in the works early next year if Democratic state Rep. John Galloway is elected to a district judgeship in November, as expected.

The House is scheduled to reconvene on Sept. 26.

Here’s a look at what to expect on election night:

ELECTION DAY

The special election for Pennsylvania state House District 21 will be held on Tuesday. Polls close at 8 p.m. ET.

WHO GETS TO VOTE

Voters must be registered in House District 21 to participate in the special election. The deadline to register was Sept. 5.

DECISION NOTES

Under its current boundaries, District 21 heavily favors Democrats. Innamorato won the 2022 general election with 63% of the vote. She performed best in the southern half of the district, which includes parts of Pittsburgh, where she dominated most of the city’s 6th, 9th, and 10th wards with between 80% and 89% of the vote.

The Republican that year, Frank Perman, carried only 16 of the district’s 79 wards, all of them in Shaler Township. This year, Autenreith would have to outperform the 50%-59% Perman scored in the eastern and western parts of Shaler, as well as cut into the Democratic lead in the rest of the township, which is conceivable considering she is the local Republican committee chairwoman. But to win, she would also have to force Powell to underperform in Pittsburgh and neighboring wards, which is a tall order considering the area’s voting history.

The AP does not make projections and will declare a winner only when it’s determined there is no scenario that would allow the trailing candidate to close the gap. If a race has not been called, the AP will continue to cover any newsworthy developments, such as candidate concessions or declarations of victory. In doing so, the AP will make clear that it has not yet declared a winner and explain why.

PENNSYLVANIA SENATE RECONVENES FOR UNUSUAL AUGUST SESSION AS 2-MONTH BUDGET STALEMATE CONTINUES

Pennsylvania has automatic recounts in statewide races if the margin between the top two candidates is 0.5 percentage points or less. In district races, Pennsylvania law allows recounts if three voters in the district request and pay for the recount, regardless of the winning margin.

The AP may declare a winner in a race that is eligible for a recount if it can determine the lead is too large for a recount or legal challenge to change the outcome.

WHAT DO TURNOUT AND ADVANCE VOTE LOOK LIKE

As of Monday, there were 47,682 voters registered in Pennsylvania’s House District 21, according to the Pennsylvania Department of State’s website. Of those, 59% are Democrats, 26% are Republicans and 11% are not affiliated with any party.

The AP's preliminary turnout estimate as of Thursday is 16,000 votes, based on the results of previous contests in the district as well as those of other Pennsylvania House special elections this year in comparison to the turnout in those districts in the 2022 general election.

In the 2022 general election, 27% of ballots were cast before Election Day. The Democratic incumbent won 84% of those advance votes. As of Thursday morning, 3,600 ballots had been cast, with 82% by registered Democrats and 12% by registered Republicans.

HOW LONG DOES VOTE-COUNTING USUALLY TAKE?

In the 2022 general election in District 21, the AP first reported results at 8:39 p.m. ET, or 39 minutes after polls closed. The election night tabulation ended at 10:33 p.m. ET with about 98% of total votes counted.

The charges filed against Hunter Biden are a travesty

On Thursday, Hunter Biden was formally charged with three felony violations related to his purchase of a firearm in 2018. Should he be found guilty on all three charges, President Joe Biden’s son faces up to $750,000 in fines and a potential 25 years in prison.

There is absolutely no doubt that Hunter Biden was using cocaine when he filled out an ATF firearms transaction record. There’s no doubt that he lied about this both when he filled out the form and when he affirmed to the dealer that the form was accurate. There’s no doubt that while owning the gun over a period of just 11 days, Hunter Biden was in violation of regulations against owning a firearm while addicted to illegal drugs. Biden admits to his 2018 addition in his memoir. The law extends back to any time in the last year. So … case closed.

Except that part of what makes a justice system a justice system is equal application of the laws to everyone. And what’s happening in this case is the opposite. Hunter Biden isn’t really being prosecuted for lying when he filled out a form five years ago. He’s being prosecuted for being Joe Biden’s son.

Just one year before Hunter Biden scribbled his name on that Form 4473, the General Accounting Office carried out a review of how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was dealing with those who lied when applying for a firearm.

Campaign Action

In that year, 112,090 were denied a gun during the application process for submitting “falsified information.” Of those, 12,710 were referred to the ATF for further investigation. And of those, the total number actually prosecuted was … 12.

That’s just 0.01% of those whose forms were rejected for providing false information. What’s more, the cases were referred for prosecution “when aggravating circumstances exist, such as violent felonies or multiple serious offenses over a short period of time.” None of those circumstances apply to Hunter Biden.

But it’s worse than those numbers might indicate. Hunter Biden was not caught lying on his form during his application. He wasn’t really caught at all. The only reason that prosecutors know about his addiction to cocaine during this period is that Hunter Biden wrote about his struggles with addiction in a 2021 memoir. So he’s being retroactively prosecuted for being honest about the difficulties he experienced and being forthright about his failures.

Biden wasn’t one of 112,090 who were singled out as lying on his form. He was one of 27 million who filled out that form and went on. Now the Department of Justice is backing up five years to charge Hunter Biden with something—for the purposes of charging Hunter Biden with something.

The recommendation of that GAO review in 2017 was that the ATF was spending too much time investigating falsified forms since follow-up prosecutions were so rare. Instead, the GAO recommended that the agency concentrate on keeping track of false information and making information about rejected forms available to local law enforcement. The DOJ concurred with GAO's recommendation.

Following the recommendations of the GAO, the number of cases referred for investigation in the year Hunter Biden made his purchase was greatly reduced, from 12,710 to just 478 referrals. That’s 0.002% of those who applied for a gun that year. But wait. It gets worse.

When The Washington Post took a look at this issue last year, they did so because the ATF and DOJ were being bombarded with tweets insisting that Hunter Biden be charged.

The controversy prompted us to request statistics from the Justice Department to determine whether someone falsely filling out the form faced much of a risk of prosecution.

It took months to obtain the data. The answer, it turns out, is no.

According to the Post, most of the cases prosecuted for lying on the form “concerned obvious instances of ‘straw buyers’” where someone was sent into a store to buy a gun for someone else who couldn’t legally purchase a gun, because they had already been convicted of a violent crime. Which seems like exactly the sort of thing the law was designed to catch in the first place.

But of all the statistics that show just how selective “justice” is being in the case of Hunter Biden, the results of a Freedom of Information request sent to Delaware for the year in which the purchase was made may be the most damning.

The provided information shows that in fiscal year 2019, only three Form 4473 cases were referred for prosecution in Delaware. The U.S. attorney for Delaware—that would be David Weiss, the same U.S. attorney in charge of the investigation into Hunter Biden—opted to prosecute none of these cases. None.

Confronted with three other cases involving the exact same charge in the same state, in the same year, Weiss decided to file no charges. But Hunter Biden is getting three charges and the possibility of 25 years.

That really is some very special justice.

Kerry talks with Drew Linzer, director of the online polling company Civiqs. Drew tells us what the polls say about voters’ feelings toward President Joe Biden and Donald Trump, and what the results would be if the two men were to, say … run against each other for president in 2024. Oh yeah, Drew polled to find out who thinks Donald Trump is guilty of the crimes he’s been indicted for, and whether or not he should see the inside of a jail cell.

A member of the secret panel studying Wisconsin Supreme Court justice’s impeachment backed her rival

One of the former Wisconsin Supreme Court justices tapped to investigate impeaching newly elected Justice Janet Protasiewicz for taking Democratic Party money accepted donations from the state Republican Party when he was on the court.

The former justice, Republican David Prosser, gave $500 to the conservative candidate who lost to Protasiewicz, did not recuse from cases involving a law he helped pass as a lawmaker and was investigated after a physical altercation with a liberal justice.

Prosser is one of three former justices tapped by the Republican Assembly speaker to investigate the criteria for taking the unprecedented step of impeaching a current justice. Speaker Robin Vos has floated impeachment because Protasiewicz accepted nearly $10 million from the Wisconsin Democratic Party and said during the campaign that heavily gerrymandered GOP-drawn legislative electoral maps were “unfair” and “rigged.”

The impeachment threat comes after Protasiewicz’s win this spring handed liberals a majority on the court for the first time in 15 years, which bolstered Democratic hopes it would throw out the Republican maps, legalize abortion and chip away at Republican laws enacted over the past decade-plus.

It also comes at the same time that Assembly Republicans passed a sweeping redistricting reform bill Vos described as an “off ramp” to impeachment and Senate Republicans voted to fire the state's nonpartisan elections director. Both moves take on heightened importance in Wisconsin, one of a handful of swing states where four of the past six presidential elections have been decided by less than a point.

Vos won’t say who he’s chosen for the secret, three-judge impeachment review panel, but Prosser confirmed to The Associated Press that Vos asked him to participate. None of the other eight living former justices, six of whom are conservatives, have told the AP they have been picked. Justices are officially nonpartisan in Wisconsin, but in recent years the political parties have backed certain candidates. Others, like Prosser, formerly served in partisan positions.

A former liberal justice, Louis Butler, said he was not asked. Four former conservative justices — Jon Wilcox, Dan Kelly, 7th U.S. Circuit Court Chief Judge Diane Sykes and Louis Ceci — told the AP they were not asked.

Ceci, 96, is the oldest living former justice. He served on the court from 1982 to 1993 and served one term as a Republican in the state Assembly in the 1960s.

Ceci, interviewed at his suburban Milwaukee home in a retirement high-rise, said he doesn’t know anything about the impeachment threats Protasiewicz faces beyond what he reads in newspapers. Vos has not approached him about serving on the panel, he said.

A seventh former justice, Janine Geske, told the Wisconsin State Journal she was not asked. Vos said former Justice Michael Gableman, whom Vos fired from leading an investigation into the 2020 election, was not on it.

The most recently retired justice, conservative Patience Roggensack, declined to comment to the AP.

“I can’t talk to you right now,” she said Thursday, adding that she was on her way to a college class before hanging up.

Roggensack and Prosser voted to enact a rule allowing justices to sit on cases involving campaign donors. In 2017, a year after Prosser left the court, Roggensack voted to reject a call from 54 retired justices and judges to enact stricter recusal rules.

Roggensack, in 2020, sided with the conservative minority in a ruling that fell one vote short of overturning President Joe Biden’s victory in the state. And she endorsed Dan Kelly, the conservative opponent to Protasiewicz in this year’s election. Prosser donated $500 to Kelly, who replaced Prosser on the court after he retired.

Prosser served on the Supreme Court from 1998 to 2016 and also spent 18 years before that as a Republican member of the Assembly — two years as speaker.

There were numerous times during Prosser’s years on the court where he did not recuse himself from cases involving issues he had voted on as a member of the Legislature.

Prosser did recuse himself from cases involving the constitutionality of a cap on medical malpractice damages because he was speaker of the Assembly when the cap was instituted. But in 2004 he changed course and authored the majority opinion upholding the law he helped pass. He dissented from a 2005 Supreme Court ruling overturning the law.

Prosser also refused a request to recuse in 2015 from considering three cases related to an investigation into then-Gov. Scott Walker and conservative groups that supported him. The groups in question had spent $3.3 million to help elect Prosser in 2011.

He defended hearing the cases, saying that because the money was spent four years earlier, enough time had passed to make them irrelevant.

Prosser then voted with the majority to shut down the investigation.

Prosser was also embroiled in one the court’s most contentious periods in 2011, accused by a liberal justice of attempting to choke her. Impeachment was never raised as a possibility, even though police investigated but no charges were filed. The Wisconsin Judicial Commission recommended the court discipline him but nothing happened because the court lacked a quorum when three justices recused.

In 2016, Prosser received $25,000 of in-kind contributions from the Wisconsin Republican Party. Less than three weeks later he resigned with nearly three years left on his term.

Vos said Prosser’s past wouldn’t affect his ability to fairly offer advice on how to proceed.

“First of all, all he is doing is giving advice on whether or not someone ought to recuse and the criteria for impeachment,” Vos said. “That has nothing to do with what happened before when he was on the Supreme Court.”

Prosser said the charge given to him by Vos was investigating “whether there’s a legitimate reason for impeaching” Protasiewicz.

When asked whether he thinks the panel should include liberals, Prosser said, “I’m really not going to answer that question.”

“I really don’t know what the process is going to be, who’s going to be doing the writing,” Prosser said. “I just really don’t know.”

No matter who is on the impeachment review panel, Democrats say the process is a joke.

“The entire concept of having a secret panel deliberating in secret to advise an Assembly speaker on an unconstitutional impeachment on a justice who has yet to rule on a case is a farce,” said Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler. “This is a charade.”

Vos said impeachment may be warranted if Protasiewicz doesn’t step down from hearing two Democratic-backed redistricting lawsuits seeking to undo Republican-drawn legislative maps.

Vos argues that Protasiewicz has prejudged the cases. She never said how she would rule on any lawsuit.

Under the Wisconsin Constitution, impeachment is reserved for “corrupt conduct in office or for the commission of a crime or misdemeanor.”

It is up to each justice to decide whether recusal in a case is warranted, and the conservative majority of the court adopted a rule saying that justices don’t have to recuse if they accepted money from parties arguing a case. Other current justices have also been outspoken on hot-button issues before they joined the court and all but one have taken money from political parties.

When asked Thursday if the panel would include liberals, Vos dodged the question.

“I’m trying to have people who are respected as smart,” Vos said. “And I think that you will find very quickly that the people that we asked are both of those categories. Hopefully they come back to us with their recommendations so that the Legislature has even more good information to act on whether or not it’s required for us to proceed with some kind of impeachment proceedings."

Watch Republican congressman tie himself in knots presenting Biden ‘evidence’ on Fox

The far-right wing of the Republican Party has compelled House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to call for an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. The biggest problem with this move? After nine months of Republican-led House committee investigations into the president and his son Hunter, the GOP has come up with bupkis.

Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo took time away from purposefully misinforming the public about Trump’s false election-fraud claims to discuss the impeachment inquiry into President Biden. Her guest was Missouri Republican Rep. Jason Smith. In a clip tweeted by journalist Aaron Rupar, Bartiromo asks Smith what he thinks is “the most damning evidence that you all have to suggest bribery.” She proceeds to reiterate some vague circumstantial evidence as well as some completely unsubstantiated claims made using big financial numbers.

And Smith responds, “Those are all great questions that we need answers to.”

How about that for mental jujitsu?

RELATED STORY: House Republican admits he can't find any Biden crimes

Gone are the days when Smith was calling the evidence-based impeachment of former President Donald Trump “outrageous attacks from the liberal mob majority that consistently puts politics before people.” He said that Trump’s “impeachment circus should have never been started” and was “a complete disgrace to our country,” but when it comes to Republicans starting their own “circus,” he has no qualms whatsoever.

Here are a couple more times Republicans had a chance to offer up real evidence:

Rep. James Comer has spent most of the Biden administration’s time in office running an investigation into the Biden family—and he’s turned up nothing.

And here’s Florida man Matt Gaetz, who represents the Sunshine State’s 1st Congressional District, arguing that the non-evidence he has is, actually, indeed evidence. You just have to look at it the right(-wing) way.

Sign the petition: No to shutdowns, no to Biden impeachment, no to Republicans

RELATED STORIES:

Matt Gaetz’s impeachment schtick didn’t fly with CNN anchor

Impeachment inquiry reveals pathetic truth about 'what MAGA is fighting for'

Kerry talks with Drew Linzer, director of the online polling company Civiqs. Drew tells us what the polls say about voters’ feelings toward President Joe Biden and Donald Trump, and what the results would be if the two men were to, say … run against each other for president in 2024. Oh yeah, Drew polled to find out who thinks Donald Trump is guilty of the crimes he’s been indicted for, and whether or not he should see the inside of a jail cell.

Biden Energy secretary blames ‘poor judgment’ on her staff blocking EV chargers with gas cars

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm blamed her staff's "poor judgment" on a recent incident when police were called on them for clogging electric vehicle (EV) chargers with a gas-powered car.

During a House Science and Technology Committee hearing Thursday, Granholm was pressed by Rep. Scott Franklin, R-Fla., over the incident that occurred in Grovetown, Georgia, during Granholm's four-day EV road trip in June. Granholm's staff angered EV drivers after they blocked open chargers with a non-electric car, according to a 911 call of the incident obtained by Fox News Digital.

"Let me just say, I have a fantastic young staff, just fantastic," Granholm told Franklin when asked about the incident. "It was poor judgment on the part of the team."

"I can only imagine they wanted to continue moving," she added in response to Franklin's question about why her staff blocked the charger.

GOP REP CALLS FOR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY INTO BIDEN ENERGY SECRETARY GRANHOLM: 'SHE LIED, UNDER OATH'

Granholm also sidestepped blame during the back-and-forth with Franklin on Thursday, saying that it was not her that was "saving the spot." However, the charger was ultimately saved for her to use in an effort to avoid waiting in a long line.

The 911 call of the incident indicated that Granholm's staff forced several people to wait extra time to use the chargers.

BIDEN ENERGY SECRETARY REVEALS STOCK OWNERSHIP OF EV LOBBY GROUP FOUNDING COMPANY

"I'm calling because I'm in the Grovetown Walmart at the charging station and there's literally a non-electric car that is taking up a space and said they're holding the space for somebody else," the woman who made the 911 call told a police dispatcher in the recording. "And it's holding up a whole bunch of people who need to charge their cars."

"There are other people who are waiting to charge and they're still here and they're not in electric cars," she continued. "The sign says you can't park here unless you're charging."

The incident was first reported earlier this week by NPR, which joined Granholm on the trip. According to the report, Granholm's office organized the trip to "draw attention to the billions of dollars the White House is pouring into green energy and clean cars."

While Granholm's team planned the trip far in advance to prepare for charging stops, the Georgia stop underscored logistical issues that continue to face zero-emissions cars which Granholm, President Biden and Democratic-led states are aggressively pushing.

Since taking office, the Biden administration has taken a number of steps to force an economy-wide transition from traditional gas-powered cars to electric alternatives as part of its climate agenda. Biden set a goal for 50% of all new car sales to be electric by 2030.

In April, the EPA proposed the most aggressive tailpipe emissions ever crafted, which it said would cause 67% of new sedan, crossover, SUV and light truck purchases to be electric by 2032. Months later, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued fuel economy standards that forces automakers to substantially increase fuel efficiency in new cars, a move that will likely drive prices higher.