Sen. Chuck Grassley put American lives at risk to spread a document he knew was a lie

Posted on July 21, 2023 (Updated July 22, 2023) by Mark Sumner

Sen. Chuck Grassley released an FBI FD-1023 form related to the Hunter Biden investigation. These forms are not intended to be public documents and it is highly unusual to release them publicly. These are the forms that the FBI uses to “record raw, unverified reporting from confidential human sources.” They do not represent the results of investigations, and “recording this information does not validate it or establish its credibility.”

These forms are not classified, but they are kept in confidence for a number of reasons that are mostly connected with protecting sources. The FBI has made it clear to Grassley repeatedly that releasing the form would have a negative impact not just on this case, but on every case that depends on confidential human sources.

Grassley released it anyway because he has placed what he sees as a momentary opportunity to hurt President Joe Biden over the needs of the FBI and the good of the nation. More than that, Grassley is doing this to forward a story that he knows is a lie.

The form, which is dated June 2020, claims to be sourced from a businessman who was introduced to leadership at Burisma energy in Ukraine in “late 2015 or early 2016” to help the company find a U.S. company to purchase. During a meeting with Burisma leadership, the source claims that he was told Hunter Biden was put on the company board to "protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” Asked why it isn’t Hunter doing the job of locating a U.S. form to purchase, he’s told that “Hunter is not that smart.” Finally the source is told by Burisma executive Mykola Zlochevsky that the company has to pay $5 million to Joe Biden and another $5 million to Hunter Biden because they are being investigated by Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, and Burisma needed Biden to “deal with Shokin.”

The story then jumps to a phone call in 2016. Or maybe it was 2017. As with the original meeting, the source can’t recall the year, though he recalls the dialogue word for word. This time Zlochevsky complains that Burisma was forced to pay Biden, using a term that the source describes as “Russian-criminal-slang,” and now that Trump has been elected their investment is worthless. However, Shokin has been fired, so there was no investigation and no one would ever know about the money they paid the Bidens.

Jump forward to 2019 when CHS again meets with Burisma executives and Zlochevsky brags to the source about how clever they were in hiding the payments to Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, and how no one will ever find those payments. According to the source, this is the kind of thing Ukrainian businessmen like to brag about in casual conversation.

Finally, it comes down to this bit where one of the Burisma executives tells the source:

"... he has many text messages and 'recordings' that show he was coerced to make such payments … he had a total of "17 recordings" involving the Bidens; two of the recordings included Joe Biden, and the remaining 15 recordings only Included Hunter Biden. … These recordings evidence Zlochevskiy was somehow coerced into paying the Bidens to ensure Ukraine Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin was fired.”

If any of this sounds slightly familiar, it’s because it’s the exact story that Rudy Giuliani told to The New York Times in May 2019. In that story, Hunter Biden was placed on the board of Burisma in 2014 not because he was clearly a well-placed American with years of experience in lobbying, investment banking, and corporate governance who might be essential to an energy company looking to expand internationally, but because his father could get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired.

And Shokin was fired in 2016. The Ukrainian parliament voted him out after Joe Biden made it clear that the United States was very concerned about Shokin and might withhold or delay assistance to Ukraine unless he was removed. That’s a real thing. Biden even bragged about it later, telling a group of foreign policy advisers that he confronted the Ukrainian president and demanded Shokin’s firing.

Except the reason that Shokin was fired was because he was not investigating cases of corruption and was instead either turning a blind eye or an outstretched hand when dealing with Ukrainian oligarchs who were making off with billions. Both the U.S. and the U.K. governments had been pressuring Ukraine about Shokin for over a year before Joe Biden’s visit. In fact, the thing that upset the U.K. government most was that Shokin was refusing to investigate one firm in particular: Burisma.

As the head of a Ukrainian anti-corruption organization told Radio Free Europe, Shokin had dumped the investigation of Burisma when he took office.

"Ironically, Joe Biden asked Shokin to leave because the prosecutor failed [to pursue] the Burisma investigation, not because Shokin was tough and active with this case," Kaleniuk said.

When The New York Times ran Giuliani’s version of the story in 2019, it took Bloomberg News just one week to rip it apart.

… at the time Biden made his ultimatum, the probe into the company—Burisma Holdings, owned by Mykola Zlochevsky—had been long dormant, according to the former official, Vitaliy Kasko.

“There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky,” Kasko said in an interview last week. “It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015.”

From the beginning of this whole affair, and in fact from the moment Giuliani set foot in Ukraine, it’s been obvious that in getting Shokin fired Joe Biden wasn’t protecting Burisma, he was taking action that put the company under renewed scrutiny. And in fact prosecutors did reopen their investigation of Burisma, reviewing multiple instances in which Zlochevsky was suspected of crimes.

All of this—all of it—was thoroughly covered just two years ago, including just how Giuliani generated his claims against Joe Biden and Hunter Biden in the first place.

Giuliani made a personal visit to an outgoing prosecutor, tried to convince him to play ball, and even called Trump directly while in the prosecutor’s office so that Trump could explain how excited he was about the “investigation” into Biden. The prosecutor even went so far as to add some new false claims, asserting that Joe Biden personally took a payment to act as an agent of a Ukrainian company.

That moment when Giuliani was making calls directly to the White House from the office of an outgoing official is the genesis of the idea that Joe Biden took some kind of payment from Burisma. Until that moment, it had come up nowhere. From no one.

Over the following months, Giuliani assembled a group of known criminals and former members of the pro-Russian government who had been ousted with the election of Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He found several willing to play along with his growing story, but they had a price: They wanted Trump to get rid of U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was too effective in fighting corruption. Trump gave them exactly what they wanted to get his false evidence against Biden, but even in 2019 the holes in the story were so big that the whole scheme was obviously a … scheme.

Now it’s back again and nothing has changed. The document that the FBI held was clearly authored by someone who was part of Giuliani’s plot, and it was clearly Giuliani himself who pointed out this document to Grassley and others. The document contains exactly the same false, easily disproved claims as the story the Times printed up for Giuliani and was obviously written with the sole purpose of providing some faux documentary evidence for the story Giuliani and Trump were pushing at the time. It’s all part of what Trump was trying to get Zelenskyy to say when he made his impeachment-worthy phone call to the Ukrainian leader.

The content of the FD-1023 form is a lie. What’s more, Grassley knows it is a lie. He knows this has all been investigated and found to be baseless accusations. And he knows that releasing this document causes real, genuine harm.

Protecting this type of information from wider disclosure is crucial to our ability to recruit sources and ensure the safety of the source or others mentioned in the reporting. CHSs are critical to cases across all FBI programs—whether it’s violent crime, drug cartels, or terrorism. It would be difficult to effectively recruit these sources if we can’t assure them of their confidentiality. And without these sources, we would not be able to build the cases that are so important to keeping Americans safe.

Grassley was sent a letter reminding him of exactly this issue and asking him expressly to remind everyone involved to keep in mind the importance of keeping these documents secure. Instead, Grassley did the opposite: He published the FD-1023 in blatant defiance of the FBI’s request.

Why did he do it? He did it for the same reason that Republicans had been seeking release of the document all along, and that was because they knew it would generate headlines like this:

Bidens allegedly 'coerced' Burisma CEO to pay them millions to help get Ukraine prosecutor fired: FBI form

Bidens allegedly 'coerced' Burisma CEO to pay them millions to help get Ukraine prosecutor fired: FBI form

Grassley purposely released a document that he knew was a lie for the purpose of attacking Joe Biden even though he knew it would put Americans in danger and damage the FBI’s ability to investigate actual crimes of all sorts.

To gain a moment of political attention, Grassley is creating an immeasurable risk. How can witnesses come to the FBI to make a confidential statement knowing that their identities and claims can be revealed for political expediency by someone who has no real interest in the truth?

There is a genuine broad streak of corruption in this case, and it runs right through Iowa.

Sign the petition: No more spending taxpayer money on frivolous GOP hearings.

NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week

Posted on July 16, 2023 by Associated Press

A roundup of some of the most popular but completely untrue stories and visuals of the week. None of these are legit, even though they were shared widely on social media. The Associated Press checked them out. Here are the facts:

___

Lauren Boebert filed articles of impeachment against Biden. That doesn’t mean he was impeached

CLAIM: President Joe Biden was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors in June 2023.

THE FACTS: Biden has not been impeached. The House voted last month to send articles of impeachment introduced by Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert to its Judiciary Committee and its Homeland Security Committee for review. Articles of impeachment, issued solely in the House, detail the charges against an elected official, but impeachment only occurs if the articles are approved by the chambers’ members. Some on social media are misrepresenting the House’s June vote to send the articles of impeachment to the committees, falsely suggesting it means Biden has already been impeached. One Instagram post features a Forbes video of Boebert introducing the articles to the House on June 20. A chyron on the video reads: “Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) introduces articles of impeachment against President Biden on House.” Despite the inclusion of real House footage with an accurate chyron, the post, which had received more than 94,700 likes by Friday, claims: “Biden is Impeached!!! Finally! For High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” But the introduction of the articles of impeachment, which accuse Biden of “high crimes and misdemeanors” related to his handling of the U.S. border with Mexico, are only the first step in the impeachment process. The constitutional equivalent of an indictment, they detail charges against an elected official. Impeachment occurs if the House approves the articles. If approved, the Senate then votes whether to acquit or convict the official. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, also a Republican, negotiated a deal with Boebert to send her articles of impeachment for review by the two House committees after she used a House rule called a privileged resolution in an attempt to force a snap vote, the AP has reported. A related resolution introduced by Republican Rep. Chip Roy on June 21 referred Boebert’s articles of impeachment for possible consideration by the aforementioned congressional committees, like any other bill. The House voted 219-208 along party lines the next day on this resolution. Neither committee is under any obligation to take further action on Boebert’s articles of impeachment.

— Associated Press writer Melissa Goldin in New York contribute this report.

___

No, Ron DeSantis’ high school yearbook quote does not mention ‘Sir-Mixes-a-Lot’

CLAIM: The quote below Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ high school yearbook photo reads: “My Mount Rushmore is Jesus, Sir-Mixes-a-Lot, and Nintendo 64.”

THE FACTS: An image of DeSantis’ entry in his yearbook was edited to add the quote. A spokesperson for the school district that oversees DeSantis’ alma mater confirmed to The Associated Press that the yearbook photo is authentic, but that there is no quote beneath it. Social media users shared the fabricated image, suggesting it shows the Republican presidential candidate was out-of-touch in his teen years. The image shows a black-and-white image of DeSantis as a youth with the “Mount Rushmore” quote below it. The misspelled “Sir-Mixes-a-Lot” is a reference to Sir-Mix-a-Lot, the rapper known for his 1992 hit “Baby Got Back.” “‘Sir-Mixes-a-Lot’ should automatically disqualify you from running for office,” reads one tweet that had received more than 32,000 likes by Friday. Sean Clark, a spokesperson for Pinellas County Schools, told the AP that DeSantis graduated from the district’s Dunedin High School in 1997. "This is a photo from the Dunedin High School yearbook; however, there is no quote within the yearbook photo beneath Governor DeSantis’ photo nor any other student within the yearbook,” he wrote in an email. Neither DeSantis’ office nor his campaign returned requests for comment.

— Melissa Goldin

___

Social media posts falsely suggest Australian birth-rate drop was caused by COVID vaccines

CLAIM: New data on the numbers of births in the Australian state of New South Wales shows that coronavirus vaccines “destroyed” human fertility.

THE FACTS: The data being cited doesn’t mention vaccines at all and doesn’t draw any link to their impact on birth rates. Demographic experts in Australia say a drop in the number of babies born in New South Wales hospitals, which is the focus of the chart, is explained by social and economic factors such as high housing prices, job insecurity and pandemic-era lockdowns. They also note that birth rates in Australia and other developed nations were already trending downwards years before COVID-19 vaccines were even created. Social media users are claiming new data shows birth rates are plummeting as a result of vaccines developed against the coronavirus. Many are sharing a screenshot of a post featuring a line chart titled, “Babies born in NSW hospitals.” The chart, which is partly cut off in the screenshot, purports to show the number of babies born per quarter in New South Wales hospitals from March 2010 to March 2023. The numbers fluctuate within a relatively narrow range over the years shown on the chart before plummeting dramatically. “The world is about to discover the COVID vaccines destroyed fertility,” wrote one user on Instagram who shared the screenshot. But the chart comes from an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald last month that makes no mention of COVID vaccines. Drawing from publicly available data published by the Australian state’s Bureau of Health Information, the story examines declining births at New South Wales public hospitals during the first three months of 2023. It found that the number of babies born at the hospitals was 15,868, down from a peak of 19,081 in 2021 and the lowest of any quarter since 2010. The article quotes a range of experts who argue that socio-economic factors are driving the birth declines. Liz Allen, a demographer at the Australian National University in Canberra who is quoted in the story, confirmed to The Associated Press that “cost-of-living pressures, housing affordability, insecure employment, gender inequality” are among things forcing young Australians to hold off having children. “The story of declining births in NSW is a complex social one, not a reductionist anti-vax fear mongering horror story,” Allen wrote in an email. Udoy Saikia, a social demographer at Flinders University in Adelaide who is also cited in The Sydney Morning Herald story, noted that during the 2020 pandemic lockdowns, some couples moved up plans to have children while working from home and having their movements restricted. “As a result, there was a significant increase in the number of births during the subsequent 2021 period, followed by a decline in birth rates in the latter half of 2022 and the first quarter of 2023,” he wrote in an email.

— Associated Press writer Philip Marcelo in New York contributed this report.

___

Parody tweet about the Titanic submersible falsely attributed to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

CLAIM: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene published a Twitter post reading, “How can the Titanic submersible run out of air if you breathe both in and out? I feel like this is more fake news BS.”

THE FACTS: Greene did not tweet this statement and there is no evidence she ever made such a comment. A spokesperson for the Republican congresswoman from Georgia also confirmed to The Associated Press that the quote is fake. The fabricated quote originated on a parody Twitter account that impersonates Greene. The quote was shared on social media on accounts claiming it was authentic. “How can the Titanic submersible run out of air if you breathe both in and out? I feel like this is more fake news BS,” reads a quote overlaying a photo of Greene, referencing the Titanic-bound craft that recently imploded, killing five. The image was shared by an Instagram account. That same account shared a screenshot of a tweet with the same quote, which included the handle @RepMTG_Press. The bio and title of @RepMTG_Press on Twitter say it’s a parody account. There is no record of the real Greene ever tweeting this statement from her account. Nick Dyer, a spokesperson for Greene, confirmed in an email to the AP that the tweet was not from her account.

Biden focuses on the economy while Republicans focus on revenge

Posted on June 27, 2023 (Updated June 27, 2023) by Kerry Eleveld

President Joe Biden kicked off a major infrastructure push Monday with the announcement of a $40 billion investment to make high-speed internet available across the country, particularly in underserved rural communities.

“High-speed internet isn’t a luxury anymore," Biden said from the White House East Room. “It’s become an absolute necessity.”

The broadband event initiated the second prong of a two-pronged strategy to till the ground for Biden's 2024 reelection bid. The White House's push to sell Biden's economic accomplishments comes after the president, first lady Jill Biden, and Vice President Kamala Harris joined reproductive rights groups last Friday to mark the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

The White House clearly sees the two issues that helped shape the midterms as the linchpins to Biden's reelection campaign. And while the Republican march to secure abortion bans at the state and national levels has kept reproductive freedom top of mind for voters, Biden's substantial legislative accomplishments and their economic impact remain largely under the radar of most voters. A February Washington Post-ABC News poll, for instance, found that 62% of Americans believed Biden had accomplished "not very much" or "little or nothing” while just 36% said he had done "a great deal" or "a good amount."

Biden plans to deliver a major economic address Wednesday in Chicago touting what the White House calls "Bidenomics," an effort to restructure the U.S. economy by investing heavily in the middle class. After that, top Biden officials will fan out across the country to highlight projects and programs the administration is funding to improve the lives of working Americans.

But in many ways, the White House is now in a race against time to not only educate voters about the impact of Biden's policies but make sure the results are felt by people on the ground.

That's a real challenge in some cases. During the broadband event, Biden pledged that everyone in America would have high-speed internet access by 2030, and NPR reports that a lot of the funding won't even be available until 2025, long after next year’s election.

But the White House also sees more immediate opportunities.

"When a bridge gets rebuilt really quickly on I-95 in Philadelphia, you feel that," White House Senior Adviser Anita Dunn explained Monday, referring to a critical stretch of highway that collapsed earlier this month and reopened last week, far sooner than predicted.

"When your insulin that used to cost $200 a month costs $35 a month, you feel those things," Dunn continued. "That is Bidenomics."

Dunn, along with White House senior advisor Mike Donilon, penned a memo released Monday arguing that Biden's focus on investing in the middle class was "turning the page" on top-down Reagan era policies directed at cutting taxes for the rich.

"Even as he faced an immediate economic crisis when he took office, President Biden recognized that it wouldn’t be enough to just return to a pre-pandemic economy that bore the scars of decades of failed trickle-down policies—an economy where corporations and the wealthy got massive tax cuts while critical investments in the American people were starved," read the memo.

“Decisively turning the page on the era of trickle-down economics — has been the defining project of the Biden presidency,” the memo continued.

The White House also drew a historical comparison between Biden's broadband initiative and FDR's Rural Electrification Act, which brought electricity to every home in the country in the 1930s.

"You know, what we’re doing is, as I said, not unlike what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did when he brought electricity to nearly every American home and farm in our nation," Biden remarked Monday. "For today’s economy to work for everyone, Internet access is just as important as electricity was or water or other basic services."

While Trump and House Republicans are focused on an impeachment revenge tour, Biden’s White House and campaign team have an opportunity to demonstrate they are tackling the kitchen table issues affecting most Americans. It’s rife with potential if they can command enough attention to make their case while Republicans are in full meltdown mode.

Impeach-A-Palooza 2023: Republicans search for someone, anyone, to impeach

Posted on June 26, 2023 (Updated June 27, 2023) by Mark Sumner

Last week, Republicans in the House were desperately seeking a reason to impeach President Joe Biden. That lead to Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Bobert exchanging insults on the House floor, competing bills that included claims that Biden was responsible for an international child trafficking ring, and Republican leadership even more desperately trying to find a way to avoid defending, again, the painful foolishness and delusional nonsense spewed by the member of its most powerful caucus.

Bobert and Greene’s struggle to one-up each other on the outlandishness of their call for a Biden impeachment came just a week after Rep. Bob Goode called for an impeachment of FBI Director Christopher Wray, which came a week after Republicans tried, and failed, to hold Wray in contempt of Congress, and a full month after Greene’s earlier attempt to impeach Wray, who was appointed by Donald Trump, for turning the FBI into “a Federal police force to intimidate, harass, and entrap American citizens that are deemed enemies of the Biden regime.” All of this came wrapped around the House decision to censure Rep. Adam Schiff (and boost his Senate campaign) because … reasons. Not good reasons. Just reasons.

Barely Speaker Kevin McCarthy now seems to have picked a target to satisfy his members’ impeachment bloodlust, if he could only find a crime.

As The Hill reports, McCarthy has proposed that the Republican demand for a human sacrifice might find its ceremonial victim in Attorney General Merrick Garland, but impeachment has that pesky requirement for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” meaning McCarthy needs more than a name, he needs a justification before he can start whipping up the vote.

So what does he have?

McCarthy wants to impeach Garland because a “whistleblower,” apparently from within the IRS, claims to have knowledge of a private WhatsApp message in which Hunter Biden tried to extract money from a Chinese businessman. That whistleblower also accused the Department of Justice of giving Hunter Biden “preferential treatment” in an examination of his taxes.

“If the whistleblowers’ allegations are true, this will be a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry into Merrick Garland’s weaponization of DOJ,” said McCarthy.

Unfortunately, for all the times that Republicans sling it around, there is no such crime as “weaponization of the DOJ” or the FBI or of any other department. It’s certainly true that these departments can be and have been aimed at individuals—see Martin Luther King Jr. and just about anyone who ever offended J. Edgar Hoover or Richard Nixon—but impeachment requires a crime, not a buzzword.

They need to find evidence that Garland has done something like intervene to repress evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Hunter Biden. That could be hard considering U.S. Attorney David Weiss just came off a five-year investigation into Hunter Biden that resulted in two minor charges of late payment of taxes and a charge of owning a gun while using drugs.

Weiss was appointed to this task by then-Attorney General William Barr, and the first two years of the investigation were carried out under Donald Trump. If there is anything unusual in the charges, it’s that Biden is being charged at all, because these are very rarely applied charges.

McCarthy admits that there are “clear disparities” between what Weiss found and the unsubstantiated reports Republicans are waving around as part of their fundraising campaigns. He’s demanding that Weiss come back to the House and explain the issues. Garland has said he’d be happy for Weiss to make such an appearance and talk about any issues with the IRS.

While he’s at it, maybe Weiss can explain how the reported attempt to extort a Chinese billionaire happened in 2017 while President Joe Biden was no longer vice president, no longer in the Senate, and not running for anything. As Garland explained on Friday, Weiss had full authority to pursue any evidence he found, including "more authority than a special counsel would have had." He also noted that the IRS whistleblower had claimed Weiss was prohibited from looking at evidence outside Delaware, which was untrue.

While McCarthy has Weiss at the House, he might also get in a few questions about why the last “key informant” that Republicans claimed to have, this one also throwing around unsubstantiated claims about Hunter Biden, turns out to be dead. And the guy who was at the center of that supposed deal turns out to have died over three years before Hunter Biden became involved.

Of course, the requirement for McCarthy to produce a crime on which to base impeachment is only what’s in the Constitution and the law. No big deal for this crew. Republicans can write up an impeachment because they don’t like the pattern on Garland’s tie and likely find a majority to pass it.

Donald Trump was impeached, twice, on clear crimes. First he was impeached for his attempt to extort Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy into providing false evidence against then-candidate Joe Biden. That effort not only caused delays in military assistance to Ukraine, it sent a clear signal that the United States wasn’t interested in stopping corruption. It was interested in causing corruption.

Trump’s second impeachment came from his involvement in the events of Jan. 6. Trump not only provided consistently false statements about the 2020 election, he incited violence and delayed necessary assistance to protect members of Congress and Capitol Police.

Republicans want to impeach someone, anyone, in order to gain a measure of revenge concerning Trump. That includes McCarthy voicing his support for expunging Trump’s twin impeachments. Everything they are doing is about showing their support for Trump and showing Trump supporters how willing they are to smite anyone who opposes him.

But this chart from last week shows their basic problem.

It’s not that Republicans aren’t getting plenty of opportunities to investigate their opponents. It's that Republicans keep doing all the crime. Whether it’s a special counsel or a U.S. attorney, years of investigations into Joe Biden and Hunter Biden have found no grand conspiracy or serious crime. But just a few months’ worth of investigating Trump turned up felonies literally in the dozens.

For that, Republicans want to prosecute the investigators. Maybe their “tough on crime” theme would work better if it were actually aimed at the criminals. Like Trump.

Meet the dumbest Republicans in the House—it’s not who you think

Posted on June 23, 2023 (Updated June 23, 2023) by kos

You would be forgiven if you thought Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert—last seen calling each other “bitch” on the floor of the chamber—were the dumbest Republicans in the House.

You wouldn’t be wrong to think Reps. Paul Gosar and Matt Gaetz ranked near the top, or any of the rest of the Freedom Caucus nihilists—like Chip Roy, Andrew Clyde, or even serial pathological liars like Reps. George Santos, Anna Paula Luna, or Andy Ogles.

But no, those aren’t the dumbest Republicans in the House.

The dumbest Republicans in the House are those who voted to impeach President Joe Biden, despite representing Biden districts. Their political fate already in jeopardy, they just threw away their reelection chances for a meaningless Boebert gesture. RELATED STORY: Republican disarray is somehow, miraculously, getting worse

Eighteen Republicans currently represent districts carried by Biden in 2020. They were either beneficiaries of low turnout in California and New York, or sitting incumbents who pulled off reelection thanks to midterm dynamics. In a sane world, they would be finding ways, the way Blue Dog Democrats do, to cast key votes against their leadership, thus building a narrative of “independence” they could sell to voters come election time.

Here are those 18 House Republicans that represent districts won by Biden, with the president’s margin of victory, courtesy of Daily Kos Elections:

Juan Ciscomani (AZ-6), Biden +0.1
Nicholas LaLota (NY-1) +0.2
David Schweikert (AZ-1) +1.5
Jen Kiggans (VA-2) +1.9
Young Kim (CA-40) +1.9
Thomas Kean Jr. (NJ-07) +3.9
Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1) +4.6
Marcus Molinaro (NY-19) +4.6
Michelle Steel (CA-45) +6.2
Don Bacon (NE-2) +6.3
Brandon Williams (NY-22) +7.5
George Santos (NY-3) +8.2
Lori Chavez-DeRemer (OR-5) +8.9
Michael Lawler (NY-17) +10.1
John Duarte (CA-13) +10.9
Mike Garcia (CA-27) +12.4
David Valadao (CA-22) +12.9
Anthony D’Esposito (NY-4) +14.5

Remember, the current Republican House majority is just nine seats, meaning that Democrats only need to flip five to regain the majority. It’s a target-rich environment, even before drilling down into Republican-held seats in narrow-Trump districts. Abortion, issues of freedom, and the improving economy are all conspiring to make the Republican hold on the House tenuous at best.

A smart caucus wouldn’t just spare these Biden-district Republicans tough, unpopular choices, but would openly give them opportunities to vote against their leadership. Legendary House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was a master of this, giving tough-district Democrats the opportunity to vote and rail against her. But it was all political theater: When she needed their votes, they delivered.

McCarthy isn’t as witless as this bunch. He would offer similar opportunities if he could. But it’s not up to him. It’s up to Donald Trump and his MAGA acolytes, none of which brook any dissent. You might think, “well, isn’t the dumb one Trump, for not giving those Republicans the ability to pretend to be independent?” Well, no! Trump doesn’t care about the Republican Party. All he cares about is his own power and self-aggrandizement. He’s actually playing the game smart, forcing those blue-district suckers to bend the knee, kiss his ring, and vote for their own political demise. Same with McCarthy: His speakership hangs on a thread, and he’s doing what he needs to do for his own political survival. He clearly has no interest in Republicans retaining the House if he’s not the one in charge.

This is why Thursday’s Boebert impeachment vote was so incredibly stupid. It has zero chance of passing, the Senate would dispose of it in two seconds if it did, and there’s no plausible reason for it other than retaliation. Republicans, desperate for anything on which to hang their efforts, have found nothing. Remember all the explosive revelations from the Hunter Biden hearings? No? Me neither. Nor does anyone else, because there were none. An impeachment effort without any hint of underlying crime would be such a calamitous disaster for Republicans, it’s amazing they don’t see the danger signs. The last thing Republicans need heading into 2024 is yet another reason for voters to hate them—not that that’s ever stopped them before.

And yet every single one of those Biden-district Republicans voted to impeach Biden. Well, they voted to refer the impeachment to the Judiciary Committee, but good luck explaining that distinction to voters. The correct vote was to squash the effort dead.

Thing is, we’ve seen that resisting Trump can be smart politics, particularly in areas where college-educated suburban voters are a key swing vote. Look at Georgia, where Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger both won reelection easily in the face of Trump’s fury. It wouldn’t be inconceivable for these Biden-district Republicans to win reelection by playing the same game. Sure, they’d still have to survive primary challenges, but they’d likely have better chances there than being reelected in a general election in most of these blue seats.

Voting with the Freedom Caucus nihilists is political suicide, and the fact that these 18 don’t seem to see this is bad enough. But voting to impeach the president that the voters in their district voted for? That’s a whole ‘nother level of idiocy.

Joining us on "The Downballot" this week is North Carolina Rep. Wiley Nickel, the first member of Congress to appear on the show! Nickel gives us the blow-by-blow of his unlikely victory that saw him flip an extremely competitive seat from red to blue last year—including how he adjusted when a new map gave him a very different district, and why highlighting the extremism of his MAGA-flavored opponent was key to his success. A true election nerd, Nickel tells us which precincts he was tracking on election night that let him know he was going to win—and which fellow House freshman is the one you want to rock out with at a concert.

Embedded Content

Republican disarray is somehow, miraculously, getting worse

Posted on June 23, 2023 by Laura Clawson

House Republicans aren’t getting anything done to benefit the nation or the voters, but they are achieving at a high level in at least one area: sheer disarray. Actually, make that two areas: sheer disarray and intense spitefulness.

The big talk among Republicans these days is impeaching President Joe Biden, with a split between people who want to impeach now without even pretending to have investigated and assembled impeachment-worthy evidence against him, and people who want to do it after a series of show trials designed to insert uncorroborated allegations into the public consciousness. Then there are the so-called “moderates,” who will whine to the press about the awful position they’re being put in—then fall in line when it’s time to vote on whatever the extremists have gotten Speaker Kevin McCarthy to back.

All of these groups are sharing their feelings with the press. The biggest splash this week was made by reports that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene called her former ally Rep. Lauren Boebert a “bitch” as the two joust over whose impeachment resolution will get the most attention and fundraising leverage. But it’s just one moment of hostility in a party with a lot of them.

Greene says Boebert “copied my impeachment articles and probably did it, it seems to me, because there’s a fundraising deadline coming up at the end of the month,” and that she will be forcing a vote on her own impeachment resolution soon. When she does, have no doubt that she will fundraise off of it—in fact, Boebert sucking up Greene’s planned fundraising juice is no small part of the fury here.

Greene, though, is at risk of being purged from the far-right House Freedom Caucus over her closeness to McCarthy, which is seen as compromising her far-right purity. For her part, Greene says she’s just being “more realistic” in her tactics.

Greene’s “more realistic” tactics will still put Biden-district Republicans on the spot, though, and they’re unhappy about how often that’s happened recently.

Campaign Action

“I am concerned,” about having to vote on impeaching Biden, Rep. Tony Gonzales told CNN. “One witch hunt for another witch hunt makes this place all about witch hunts. Meanwhile, the American public are focused putting food on the table, keeping their kids safe in schools, keeping inflation down. Real issues.” That’s nice talk, but since Gonzales participated in party-line votes on referring Boebert’s impeachment resolution to two committees and on censuring Rep. Adam Schiff, it has to be filed as just talk until he actually votes against a Republican witch hunt.

And Gonzales is going to face that again and again. Whether it’s Greene and Boebert with their separate efforts to force an impeachment vote, or committee chairs like Jim Jordan and James Comer taking a little longer to put a fig leaf of fraudulent “investigation” and “evidence” on their eventual impeachment efforts, House Republicans are not letting this go. Given their failure to show how they would productively govern the United States by passing meaningful legislation—even if it died in the Senate—attacks on the president, the president’s son, and top administration officials are all they have to convince their base they’ve done something with two years in control of the House.

Extremism is a powerful drug. And these people are so awful that infighting was probably inevitable the moment Republicans had power. It's a virtuous (from Democrats’ point of view) circle: Republican disarray begets failure begets more disarray.

So-called moderates like Gonzales are reportedly trying to get McCarthy to stop giving in to the Freedom Caucus, but giving in to extremists is what McCarthy does—especially since the deal he struck to become speaker on the 15th vote gave any single member the ability to call for a vote to replace him. McCarthy is spending as much time trying to save his own hide as he is trying to lead his party. Not that McCarthy’s party is leadable, even under someone far more adept than he is.

Take Rep. Matt Gaetz, sounding like the id of the Republican Party. Using privileged resolutions to force votes on things like impeachment, as Boebert did, is “actually going to be a new doctrine for us,” he told CNN.

“I sort of have had enough struggle sessions,” he said. “I’m ready for action, action, action.”

If that action involves Greene and Boebert trading insults, Greene at risk of being kicked out of the Freedom Caucus, McCarthy being eternally under pressure, and every Republican who represents a district that voted for Biden having to take unpopular vote after unpopular vote, I’m here for it.

This week on “The Brief,” we are joined by Christina Reynolds of Emily’s List. Reynolds is the Senior Vice President of Communications and Content at the progressive organization, which works to get women elected to office. On the anniversary of the outrageous Supreme Court decision to take away the reproductive protections of Roe v. Wade, Reynolds talks about what she is seeing up and down the ballot this election cycle.

Embedded Content

House Republicans desperately seeking reason to impeach Biden

Posted on June 22, 2023 (Updated June 23, 2023) by Laura Clawson

House Republican leadership isn’t happy with Rep. Lauren Boebert’s current impeachment shenanigans, but that’s not because they don’t plan to impeach Biden. They just don’t like the timing and the specifics. Speaker Kevin McCarthy knows that his members and the Republican base will demand a baseless impeachment while the party has a House majority, but he wants to at least pretend it’s not a foregone conclusion, and that Republicans only went where the evidence lead after sober consideration. (Ha ha ha.)

McCarthy’s line, offered to reporters on Wednesday, is: “What I am saying is these investigations will follow the information we get wherever it will take us.” He also repeated uncorroborated accusations against the president, though, in case you were tempted to believe that the fix wasn’t in.

House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, who is leading a series of “investigations” into the president and his son Hunter, is similarly pretending that impeachment is a giant question mark.

“We’ve never said impeachment, yes or no,” Comer told Punchbowl. “If it leads to impeachment, it leads to impeachment. Our investigation, we’ve still got several more months of work to do before I can issue a report … I don’t think what happens tomorrow [on the Boebert resolution] will have any impact. Nor will the plea-bargain deal with the president’s son.”

House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry insists, “The goal is not impeachment.” The real goal, he said, was information. “But if the information leads you to facts that require and demand accountability, that’s the only accountability.” And “yes,” Perry believes Republicans will uncover said “information” against Biden and support for impeachment will build.

Other Republicans are being even less circumspect.

“Ultimately, you’re going to see Biden impeached,” Rep. Andy Ogles told Punchbowl. “The question is when and is it soon enough for the American people?” Ogles, like Boebert and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, has introduced an impeachment resolution. Rep. Eli Crane said impeachment will “absolutely” be an outcome of the investigations.

The likelihood that McCarthy will be able to stifle the demands for Biden’s impeachment is only slightly higher than the likelihood that McCarthy will be remembered as an effective speaker. Under his leadership, House Republicans have few legislative accomplishments to tout, and the promised bombshell hearings on Hunter Biden and anything else they could dig up to undermine the president have flopped. Impeachment is what Republicans have left to pander to their base, mollify the people whose support McCarthy lobbied and traded for through 15 speaker votes, and pretend they have gotten something done.

But an impeachment could very well backfire on Republicans. They’ll be going into it, after all, with scant evidence and screamingly obvious partisan motivations. And unless they conduct impeachment hearings with a much higher level of professionalism than they’ve shown to this point, it’s going to be a clown show that reveals again and again that this is about revenge against Democrats for impeaching Donald Trump and about undermining the Biden presidency after Republicans failed to overturn the 2020 elections. Comer says his report won’t come out for “several more months,” which would likely put any impeachment proceedings into 2024. It might motivate their base, but it’s unlikely to be what independent voters want to see from the House of Representatives.

”How can you impeach someone with no evidence?” asked Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee. Raskin is pretty smart, so I’m going to assume that was a rhetorical question. He knows Republicans don’t care about evidence, and if they move forward on impeachment, even voters who aren’t paying very much attention will realize that.

Joining us on "The Downballot" this week is North Carolina Rep. Wiley Nickel, the first member of Congress to appear on the show! Nickel gives us the blow-by-blow of his unlikely victory that saw him flip an extremely competitive seat from red to blue last year, including how he adjusted when a new map gave him a very different district and why highlighting the extremism of his MAGA-flavored opponent was key to his success. A true election nerd, Nickel tells us which precincts he was tracking on election night that let him know he was going to win—and which fellow House freshman is the one you want to rock out with at a concert.

Embedded Content

McCarthy isn’t happy with Boebert’s impeachment shenanigans

Posted on June 21, 2023 by Joan McCarter

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy was not a happy camper in the Republican conference meeting Wednesday morning, thanks to the latest antics of Rep. Lauren Boebert, Colorado’s contribution to the debasement of Congress. On Tuesday evening, Boeber introduced a privileged resolution to impeach President Joe Biden on the made-up charge that he violated his oath by not stopping illegal immigration. The charge isn’t important, it’s the mechanism that’s got McCarthy’s knickers twisted.

Under House rules, privileged resolutions bypass the regular process—and leadership’s ability to determine what goes to the floor—and have to be voted on within two legislative days. There are only two legislative days left this week before Congress heads out to celebrate July 4 for the next 19 days. So this eats up time and energy that the House can’t really afford, not that they were going to accomplish much of anything in these two days. It also exposes the whole Republican conference as a clown car, and McCarthy’s weak leadership for what it is.

Democrats said they would move to table the motion, which puts McCarthy in the position, again, of having to rely on Democrats for help, which only serves to piss off the Freedom Caucus maniacs and their allies more, which will lead to exactly what is happening now: escalation.

.@RepMTG says she will speak to McCarthy later today on her push to impeach Biden, others. She says she addressed the conference about impeachment telling them it’s “the right thing to do.” She plans to convert all her articles to privileged resolutions.
— Mica Soellner (@MicaSoellnerDC) June 21, 2023

Greene has a raft of impeachment resolutions, and if she makes them all privileged, there’s another two weeks of work eaten up. She’s mad that Boebert upstaged her on this one, calling Boebert a “copycat.”

At the same time, Rep. Adam Schiff’s stalker colleague, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Freedom Caucuser, is pushing a second privileged resolution to censure him. Luna has sponsored six resolutions so far this year. Five of them are about Schiff. The first privileged one failed last week when 20 Republicans joined with Democrats to table it.

Which leads to the question of just how orchestrated all this is. It doesn’t seem likely, but the Freedom Caucus might just be organized enough to be planning this in another effort to gum up the works in the House and just to harass McCarthy.

The week before last, 11 of them shut the House down by blocking a rule vote—the first time that had happened in 21 years—and refusing to agree to let it pass until McCarthy sufficiently appeased them by agreeing to renege on the debt ceiling deal he had negotiated with Biden. It’s hard to credit those people with enough organizational skills or procedural knowledge to look at what Boebert and Luna are doing as strategy, but stranger things have happened.

All of which McCarthy brought upon himself. For one thing, he’s amplified and encouraged the border hysteria. That’s despite a substantial decline in actual illegal border crossings in recent weeks. He greenlit bogus investigations of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to determine whether he should be impeached. There are at least four impeachment resolutions out there against Mayorkas, one of them from Greene. This latest from her and Boebert will likely encourage all these yahoos to make their resolutions privileged too.

Which is what got McCarthy worked up. “There was a discussion about regular order in January,” he reportedly said in Wednesday morning’s conference meeting. “And going through committee—but now we have members doing privileged motions without going through committee or even speaking with the conference.”

“What majority do we want to be?” he said. “Give it right back in 2 years or hold it for a decade and make real change. How are we going to censure Adam Schiff for abusing his position to lie and force an impeachment and then turn around and do it ourselves the next day?”

Welcome to the bed you made, Kev. Enjoy the fact that you’re going to have to rely on the Democrats to bail you out again.

RELATED STORIES:

GOP rebels shut the House down

Do McCarthy and the misfits have a political death wish?

McCarthy is screwing over swing-district Republicans

FBI document GOP wants released to tarnish President Biden came from Rudy Giuliani

Posted on June 1, 2023 by Aldous J Pennyfarthing

Republicans are desperately searching for something they can smear President Biden with in advance of the 2024 election and, needless to say, it’s been slow going. Of course, if Donald Trump had been in D.C. politics for the past 50 years—as Biden has—the Library of Congress would currently be listed as a two-star brothel on Yelp. But Biden’s opponents have been busy turning over every rock they can find outside of Louie Gohmert’s head, and so far they’ve found bupkis.

In the wake of reports that Biden’s sketchy sexual assault accuser Tara Reade has mysteriously turned up in OG Trump fan Vladimir Putin’s Russia, it’s now been revealed that the “bombshell” document supposedly detailing a Biden pay-for-play scheme originated with—oh, sweet Fiddle-Pants McGee—none other than Rudy Giuliani.

Yeah, given ol’ Rudes’ preternatural talent for barmy bullshittery, we can probably put this “scandal” to bed, and hope against hope that no one tries to spank it with a Forbes magazine.

The Daily Beast:

Facing looming contempt of Congress proceedings, FBI Director Christopher Wray has offered to show House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY) a document—behind closed doors—that Comer believes exposes nefarious dealings by Joe Biden during his days as vice president. The document is reportedly from a collection that Rudy Giuliani gave to the Department of Justice in 2020, according to CNN reporter Zachary Cohen, and contains unverified information from confidential sources. Since Republicans seized power in the House, Comer has led a crusade to expose what he alleges to be misconduct by President Biden and his family—but has so far come up empty. After threatening Wray with contempt of Congress, Comer now says that Wray’s offer to show him the document in the FBI headquarters won’t suffice. “If the FBI fails to hand over the FD-1023 form as required by the subpoena, the House Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings,” Comer said, according to CNN.

More: The document at center of this dispute has origins in a tranche of docs that Rudy Giuliani provided to DOJ in 2020, sources tell @evanperez. The allegations, many originating from sources Ukraine, included 1 claiming evidence of corruption involving Biden when he was VP. https://t.co/GXcpCYEIVR
— Zachary Cohen (@ZcohenCNN) May 31, 2023

The claims were dubious enough that then-AG Barr directed that they be reviewed by a US attorney in Pittsburgh, in part because Barr was concerned that Giuliani’s document tranche could taint the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation overseen by the Delaware US attorney.
— Zachary Cohen (@ZcohenCNN) May 31, 2023

Former Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady oversaw the FBI investigation of the Giuliani claims. The document being demanded by Comer is among the products of that probe. While the document outlines claims from the informant, it doesn’t provide proof they are true, per sources.
— Zachary Cohen (@ZcohenCNN) May 31, 2023

For the nontweeters:

CNN REPORTER ZACHARY COHEN: More: The document at center of this dispute has origins in a tranche of docs that Rudy Giuliani provided to DOJ in 2020, sources tell @evanperez.

The allegations, many originating from sources Ukraine, included 1 claiming evidence of corruption involving Biden when he was VP.

The claims were dubious enough that then-AG Barr directed that they be reviewed by a US attorney in Pittsburgh, in part because Barr was concerned that Giuliani’s document tranche could taint the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation overseen by the Delaware US attorney.

Former Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady oversaw the FBI investigation of the Giuliani claims. The document being demanded by Comer is among the products of that probe. While the document outlines claims from the informant, it doesn’t provide proof they are true, per sources.

Wait, Rudy’s sources in Ukraine are certain they’ve found evidence of Biden corruption? Do tell!

Of course, there are good reasons to be skeptical of not only the document’s source, but of Republicans’ intentions as well. For one thing, it would be wildly inappropriate to make the document public, as doing so could endanger confidential sources. And for another, its release would prove exactly nothing.

The Washington Post:

Congressional Republicans say they know of a whistleblower within the Justice Department who alleges that President Biden received millions of dollars from a foreigner in exchange for a policy decision.

That’s all we know; Republicans are in an escalating battle with the FBI to get hold of the informant tip that they say will shed light.

The evidence: The document Republicans are requesting is a form the FBI uses to record unverified tips. The FBI stressed that in its response to Republicans: “The FBI regularly receives information from sources with significant potential biases, motivations, and knowledge, including drug traffickers, members of organized crime, or even terrorists. … Recording the information does not validate the information, establish its credibility, or weigh it against other information known or developed by the FBI.”

So why is the GOP so keen on getting its grubby hands on a document that reportedly came from Ratfucker Rudy and presumably contains wild, unverified accusations? Come on, you know why. For the same reason Donald Trump wanted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to simply announce an investigation into Joe Biden that could have been used to smear him in the 2020 election. After all, a real investigation would have turned up nothing. An announced, ongoing investigation, on the other hand, would have been a golden political cudgel that Trump could have wielded with abandon throughout the presidential campaign.

They want an unverified (i.e., likely bullshit) “official” accusation against Biden to hang around the president’s neck like a moldering albatross. It would be like giving the MAGA media a coloring book they could fill in with the most lurid hues imaginable.

So that’s why you get comedy gold like the following:

Chuck Grassley on Fox News: "We are not interested in whether the allegations against Vice President Biden are accurate or not." pic.twitter.com/yI8G26vQRw
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 1, 2023

SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY: “We aren’t interested in whether or not the accusations against Vice President Biden are accurate or not. We’re responsible for making sure the FBI does its job, and that’s what we want to know.”

FOX NEWS’ BILL HEMMER: “Okay, Senator, let me stop you there. You just said you read the document, is that right?

GRASSLEY: “Yes.”

HEMMER: “And what did it say?”

GRASSLEY: “Well, I’m not going to characterize it.”

He’s not going to characterize a document that damns the leader of the opposition party? Wow, that information must really be explosive.

Oh, but it gets better.

FOX: How damning is this document for Biden? GRASSLEY: I, I dont know that FOX: But you've read it GRASSLEY: Let's put it this way, there are accusations in it pic.twitter.com/HxZqg35QG6
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 1, 2023

HEMMER: “Senator, how damning is this document to the sitting U.S. president?”

GRASSLEY: “Well, it’s … I, I don’t know that.”

HEMMER: “But you’ve read it.”

GRASSLEY: “I read it. Let’s put it this way, there’s accusations in it, but it’s not for me to make a judgment about whether these accusations are accurate or not. It’s my job to make sure the FBI is doing their job, and that’s what this is all about as far as I’m concerned. The public’s business ought to be public.”

Hoo-boy! That’s convincing, huh? First of all, it’s clearly not the FBI’s job to burn sources in order to smear a sitting president with unverified allegations brought to the agency by his chief political opponent’s goofball lawyer. Secondly, if Grassley’s already read the document and can’t decide if there’s any “there” there, why does he think the American public would be any more discerning?

The truth is they want it released because they need to create at least a whiff of scandal to mask the refulgent stink lines pouring 24/7 off Donald John Trump’s purpling political corpse.

That’s clearly what Comer and Grassley’s performative—and very public—war with the FBI is all about, too. In fact, both Comer and Grassley already know what’s in the document, but instead of simply investigating the allegation, they’re determined to raise as much of a stink as possible.

The Washington Post:

The FBI did respond to the request for the document, saying that it opposed its release in part because it risked exposing its sourcing (a standard response) and in part because the allegation is just that: an allegation. The FBI isn’t new at this; it certainly understands why Grassley and (particularly) Comer are eager to have it released. An allegation encoded on an FBI form has a perceived weight that an allegation presented in a congressional press release doesn’t, even if that perception is unwarranted.

[…]

The logical implication from Grassley and Comer having seen the document is that their whistleblower is someone who had access to it; to wit, a current or former employee of the FBI or the government. (CNN reported on Wednesday that the document at issue may have been part of a number of files Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani gave the Justice Department in 2020.) Whoever the source was, they had a copy of the reporting document for years without more details about it being uncovered. Never mind that the allegation about Biden emerged in June of the year Donald Trump was seeking reelection, seemingly without Barr’s Justice Department developing a criminal case around it.

But Comer and Grassley have been aware of its contents for a month, and all they appear to have done is pester the FBI about it. Remember, Comer held a news conference in early May during which he alleged that foreign money had at times moved between members of Biden’s family. That was the product of months of investigations based on financial documents the Oversight Committee had retained.

In other words, Comer and Grassley are out on a very wobbly limb when it comes to these accusations. But hey, better luck next time, guys. Maybe Chuck can pin the dead pidgin in front of his house on Biden next. It would make at least as much sense as this.

Check out Aldous J. Pennyfarthing’s four-volume Trump-trashing compendium, including the finale, Goodbye, Asshat: 101 Farewell Letters to Donald Trump, at this link. Or, if you prefer a test drive, you can download the epilogue to Goodbye, Asshat for the low, low price of FREE.

House passes debt ceiling deal

Posted on May 31, 2023 (Updated June 1, 2023) by Joan McCarter

UPDATE: Thursday, Jun 1, 2023 · 1:34:30 AM +00:00 · Joan McCarter

Yep. They hate it.

Biggs is not happy that debt deal passed with more Democrats than Republicans "We were told they'd never put a bill on the floor that would take more Democrats than Rs to pass. We were told that."
— Sarah Ferris (@sarahnferris) June 1, 2023

UPDATE: Thursday, Jun 1, 2023 · 1:26:52 AM +00:00 · Joan McCarter

The deal passed easily, 314 to 177, with more Democratic than Republican votes. The best thing about a vote that big is that it will make Mike Lee and Rand Paul look more ridiculous when they try to hold it up in the Senate. Also that McCarthy owes so much to the Democrats. The Freedom Caucus guys are going to HATE that,

UPDATE: Thursday, Jun 1, 2023 · 12:39:59 AM +00:00 · Joan McCarter

Ugh. Yeah, they’re still yammering.

Mike Lee is on the House floor, huddling with Andy Biggs and Chip Roy
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 1, 2023

UPDATE: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 · 10:12:12 PM +00:00 · Joan McCarter

The closed rule—no amendments allowed, passed pretty easily 241-187. There were 52 Democratic yes votes, and 29 Republican noes. There might not be as many Dems in support when it comes to final passage, and they’ll probably hold out, letting Republicans go first and then determining how many of them will be needed to help pass it. The House is scheduled to pick up again at 7:15 PM, ET to proceed to final passage.

The debt ceiling/budget bill worked out between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy will hit the House floor Wednesday afternoon, in a massive blow to the Freedom Caucus maniacs who have been rooting for the nation to default on its debt and for economic catastrophe. Their short rebellion fizzled, and McCarthy may get at least 150 Republican votes on the plan.

The major part of the drama was over once Rep. Tom Massie, a Kentucky Republican, said he would vote the bill out of the Rules Committee. Freedom Caucus Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, and Ralph Norman of South Carolina couldn’t convince him to play spoiler, despite histrionics from Roy throughout the day and his dire warning that “The Republican conference has been torn asunder.”

SIGN: End the Debt Limit game of blackmail. Pass real reform.

What has been torn asunder is the control the Freedom Caucus thought they had over McCarthy. That was clear once members of the group started downplaying their one big card: the motion to vacate the chair. It takes only one member to start the ball rolling on ousting McCarthy from the speakership, and it became clear quickly that there was little appetite among the rebels to even try. Even “firebrand” Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene will likely vote for the bill in the end.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene likens raising the debt ceiling to a “shit sandwich” but is a lean yes. “I'm a dessert girl. Everyone loves dessert and that's impeachment, someone needs to be impeached,” she adds.
— Juliegrace Brufke (@juliegraceb) May 30, 2023

The deal pretty effectively neuters the Freedom Caucus and limits the damage House Republicans can do between now and Jan. 1, 2025. They can’t take the debt ceiling hostage again in the next year and a half, and they can’t shut down the government by refusing to complete spending bills without doing serious political damage to themselves.

From a progressive perspective, the bill isn’t great, and most in the Progressive Caucus probably won’t support it. They don’t have to. There will be enough Republican votes and votes from other Democrats to pass the bill. From a political and economic stability perspective, the bill is fantastic. It averts economic catastrophe and neutralizes the Freedom Caucus in one go. In other words, Biden wins in a big way.

House Freedom Caucus neutered by debt ceiling deal

McCarthy's speaker deals come back to haunt him

We have Rural Organizing’s Aftyn Behn. Markos and Aftyn talk about what has been happening in rural communities across the country and progressives’ efforts to engage those voters. Behn also gives the podcast a breakdown of which issues will make the difference in the coming elections.

Embedded Content