Are UFOs a national security risk? Hearing puts Pentagon on notice

Three former defense officials on Wednesday gave explosive testimony at a House hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs), warning that the sightings “potentially” pose national security risks. 

The witnesses before the House Oversight subcommittee — a former Navy pilot, a retired Navy commander and an ex-Air Force intelligence official — also stressed that the government has been far too secretive in acknowledging such incidents, prompting calls from lawmakers for the intelligence community to be more forthcoming.

“If UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it is an issue for science. In either case, unidentified objects are a concern for flight safety,” said Ryan Graves, a former F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot who founded Americans for Safe Aerospace, a non-profit group meant to encourage pilots to report UAP incidents. 

And all three witnesses replied “yes” when asked if the UAPs could be collecting reconnaissance information on the United States or probing the country’s capabilities. 

The hearing seemed to unite lawmakers in a push for answers on a topic that has largely been dismissed by politicians, who for decades have been hesitant to touch on UAPs — also known as unidentified flying objects, or UFOs — and other extraterrestrial life lest they become a laughingstock. 

A series of reports from The New York Times beginning in 2017 began to change that. The reports — exploring the Pentagon’s secretive Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program and DOD-documented UAP sightings. 

Lawmakers also worry that the sightings could be tied to military technology owned by adversaries but unbeknownst to most Americans. 

“UAPs, whatever they be, may pose a serious threat to our military and our civilian aircraft, and that must be understood,” said the subpanel's ranking member, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.). “We should encourage more reporting, not less on UAPs. The more we understand, the safer we will be.” 

The Pentagon has only given tentative information on UAPs, in 2021 releasing a report which found more than 140 inexplicable encounters. 

Videos released by the Defense Department have also shown unexplained happenings, including the now famous “Tic Tac” video, taken in November 2004 on a routine training mission with the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz off the coast of southern California. 

During the encounter, Navy ships and planes used sensors to track an oval-shaped flying object that resembled a Tic Tac breath mint, with four pilots visually sighting the apparatus that flew at high speed over the water before abruptly disappearing.  

Former Navy pilot David Fravor, the commander of the mission and the individual who filmed the video, on Wednesday told the committee that the object “was far superior to anything that we had at the time, have today or looking to develop in the next 10 years.” 

He added that he found it “shocking” that “the incident was never investigated” and said none of his crew were ever questioned.

And fellow witness Graves said during the hearing that he had seen UAPs off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.” 

He said the sightings were “not rare or isolated” – noting that UAP objects have been detected “essentially where all Navy operations are being conducted across the world,” and were also seen by military aircrews and commercial pilots. 

But Graves also estimated that only 5 percent of sightings are reported, which he attributed to stigma among pilots who feel it will “lead to professional repercussions either through management or through their yearly physical check.” 

But the most explosive testimony of the day came from David Grusch, a former member of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency whose previous allegations on UAPs and the government’s efforts to conceal them sparked Wednesday’s hearing. 

Grusch claimed that the Pentagon and other agencies are holding back information about UAPs and hiding a long-running program that is attempting to reverse engineer the objects. 

Grusch said that he “absolutely” believes the U.S. government is in possession of non-human technology, adding that he knows “the exact locations” of that material.

He also claimed that he has faced serious reprisals for his statements and had knowledge of those who have been harmed or injured as part of ongoing efforts to cover up extraterrestrial technology.   

Grusch in the past has claimed that the U.S. government has for decades recovered nonhuman craft with nonhuman species inside. 

He repeated similar assertions at Wednesday’s hearing, though he repeatedly told lawmakers he could not share details in a public setting and that his information was based upon what he had been told by others. 

Republicans and Democrats now want to get to the bottom of what these incidents mean for U.S. national security.  

“There clearly is a threat to the national security of the United States of America,” Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) said. “As members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these activities so that if appropriate we take action.” 

He later told reporters that lawmakers have “a responsibility now to move forward aggressively to get to the answers of these questions.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) told reporters that a bipartisan group of lawmakers will seek a closed meeting with the witnesses to discuss confidential information in a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF.  

And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said Wednesday's hearing was the “first of many” on the government's handling of information related to UAPs, which “is an issue of government transparency.” 

“I’m shocked, actually, at just the amount of information that came out because all the roadblocks that we were put up against,” he told reporters. 

“I think what’s gonna happen now, the floodgates — other people are gonna say, ‘You know, I’ve got some information, I’d like to come swear in,’ and that’s what we’re going to start doing.”

Tuberville finds himself at center of storm on abortion, white nationalism

Editor’s note: Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) says she supports Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-Ala.) hold on military promotions. A previous version of this story contained incorrect information. 

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) has placed himself at the center of a growing storm touching on abortion, the military and white nationalism, irritating colleagues and turning himself into a more high-profile political target.

The former Auburn University football coach turned first-term Alabama senator has annoyed fellow Republicans with a hold on military promotions, earning rare criticism from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — who loathes to publicly criticize a fellow GOP senator.

He then made his troubles worse by criticizing Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in a local NPR interview for wanting to get “the white extremists, the white nationalists” out of the military. Pressed on those remarks, Tuberville said he’d call white nationalists “Americans.” 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) pounced on those comments from Tuberville, one of former President Trump’s most vocal advocates in the Senate, labeling them “revolting.”

“Does Sen. Tuberville honestly believe that our military is stronger with white nationalists in its ranks?” Schumer said. “I cannot believe this needs to be said, but white nationalism has no place in our armed forces and no place in any corner of American society, period, full stop, end of story.”

Abortion politics

Tuberville’s battle with the military is about the subject of abortion, an issue that has repeatedly helped Democrats in elections and hurt Republicans since the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Tuberville has effectively blocked promotions for roughly 200 senior military officials in key regions over the Pentagon’s abortion policy, which allows service members to take leave and provides travel reimbursements for those who need to travel to get an abortion. That is a more common need since the end of Roe.

Tuberville has said he would lift the holds in exchange for a vote on legislation to change the Pentagon policy, but Democratic senators have been unwilling to give in on that point. Tuberville said he would lift the holds even if his bill did not pass — a likelihood since it would need 60 votes to overcome procedural hurdles.

“I find the senator’s approach to the men and women who are seeking advancement in our military to really be painfully wrong,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat, when asked whether Democrats would be amenable to voting to end the Pentagon abortion policy.

McConnell has made it clear he opposes Tuberville’s holds.

“No, I don’t support putting a hold on military nominations,” McConnell told reporters last week in response to a question about Tuberville’s blockade. “I don’t support that. But as to why, you’ll have to ask Sen. Tuberville.”

The military promotions in question include those in NATO and in the Indo-Pacific and would usually be passed unanimously all together. Austin argued in a letter last week the hold is also detrimental to military families and imposes “needless additional stress” on them.

Wrong direction

At the heart of Tuberville’s arguments on abortion and in the white nationalism remarks is that the military is moving in the wrong direction, specifically on recruiting and readiness.

He is quick to note the Army missed its recruiting goal in 2022 by 25 percent and attributes that to the leftward lurch in recent years and an attempt to freeze out Trump backers. 

In seeking to clean up his remarks about white nationalism to the NPR station, Tuberville’s office said he was being skeptical of the notion that white nationalists were in the military, not that they should be in the military.

Later, however, in a separate interview with NPR, Tuberville said he considered someone who was a white nationalist to be a “Trump Republican” and a “MAGA person.”

Though some Republicans have opposed Tuberville’s holds, they are largely brushing off the Democratic criticisms of his remarks about white nationalism.

One Senate Republican told The Hill the one-two punch isn’t creating internal consternation for the GOP conference, adding the remarks last week are viewed as an “isolated event” and downplayed it as “one member acting on his own.” 

At the same time, the Senate Republican said Tuberville might want to rethink his strategy.

“If you use holds strategically and you focus on an agency, there’s no reason why he can’t pick and choose,” the Senate Republican said. “I think he’d be wise to just go back and just identify the agency that Austin’s inaction is going to end up having a problem with and just create a problem for that agency versus a [Department of Defense]-wide issue. That’s going to be hard to hold up over time.” 

“That really should have been the way he went into it to begin with,” the Senate GOP member added.


Tuberville, despite the controversies, is well-liked by his conference. Commonly referred to around the Capitol as “coach,” Tuberville is seen frequently back-slapping colleagues before and after votes. Many Republicans see him as taking action with the holds that are well within his senatorial powers, regardless of whether they agree with him. 

“[Tuberville’s] serious about this. He’s very serious. It’s not just some show that’s going on,” said Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a fellow member of the Armed Services Committee who supports his hold though she has previously said it isn't necessarily the tactic she'd use.

His long-standing hold even has support in some corners of GOP leadership. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a McConnell ally, told reporters earlier this week the opposition is warranted. 

“One of the biggest problems around here is people aren’t held accountable when they overstep their authority,” Cornyn said, referring to the Pentagon. “I regret that it’s necessary, but I think it is.”

For now, how to end Tuberville’s hold remains very much in question to members of both parties as the senator said earlier this week “nothing” will push him to compromise on the situation, short of the Pentagon reversing its policy.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told The Hill Tuberville should end his hold and instead seek an amendment vote on the issue via the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

However, Tuberville told reporters earlier this week he doesn’t want to hold the NDAA up with this ongoing push and added he wasn’t interested in a handshake deal with the Biden administration and Democratic leaders on the matter.

“They did that with [Sen. Joe Manchin], and they lied to him,” Tuberville said, pointing to Manchin’s attempt to get permitting reform attached to last year’s NDAA. 

The abortion issue is also creating political headaches back home for Tuberville as the Biden administration may nix plans for the U.S. Space Command’s headquarters to move from Colorado Springs, Colo., to Huntsville, Ala. Multiple reports indicate the issue, headlined by the state’s restrictive law that bans nearly abortions, is at the heart of the potential decision.

“It’s not something that’s gone over super well [in the state],” one Alabama GOP source told The Hill, noting that is especially the case in Huntsville, where 10,000 jobs could be impacted. 

Other Senate Republicans believe that if Democrats accede to Tuberville’s request for a vote on the Pentagon policy to end the hold, it’s not out of the question that another GOP member could fill his void and announce a blockade of their own. 

“I’m not sure there aren’t other Republicans who would be more than happy to step in, particularly from strong pro-life places and say, ‘Wait a minute, I’m putting a hold on all these rascals until they change this policy,’” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said.  

As of this week, Tuberville told The Hill he has yet to hear from anyone on the other side of the aisle about reaching a resolution. Instead, Democrats this week launched another effort to advance the horde of military promotions via unanimous request. 

“I will come to the floor as many times as possible,” Tuberville said on the floor. “To this point, I hope I’ve been clear. I’ve laid out the conditions for my holds and when I will drop my holds. These conditions have not been met, and I will not drop this hold until they are met.”

House Republicans To Launch Climate Caucus After Biden Claims Global Warming Is Greatest Threat To American Security

House Republicans are preparing to launch a caucus designed to educate members on the effects of climate change.

The effort, led by Representative John Curtis (R-UT), will, according to The Hill, “give members information and new strategies for how to talk about” climate change and “possibly even change some minds” on the topic.

The climate caucus reportedly already has 45 members.

Curtis says he is seeking bipartisan solutions on matters such as limiting greenhouse gasses in other countries and supporting nuclear power.

Still, he believes other less popular options for the GOP “should be on the table.”

“I didn’t really know what solutions were good solutions. I didn’t know which ones I could support,” said Curtis.

“It felt like, and I think a lot of Republicans feel this way, I had to endorse the Green New Deal if I was going to … be part of the solution, and a lot of Republicans find that troubling.”

RELATED: Biden Tells Military Servicemembers Global Warming Is Greatest Threat To American Security: ‘Not A Joke’

Climate Caucus After Biden Declares Global Warming America’s Greatest Threat

President Biden, during a speech to Air Force personnel in the United Kingdom earlier this month, warned that global warming is the “greatest threat” facing America and that it is “not a joke.”

Biden claimed he was told this by Pentagon officials when he was serving alongside Barack Obama in 2009.

“When I went over to the tank in the Pentagon when I was first was elected vice president with President Obama, the military sat us down and let us know what the greatest threats facing America were, the greatest physical threats,” he told those in attendance.

“This is not a joke,” he insisted. “You know what the Joint Chiefs told us the greatest physical threat facing America was? Global warming.”

Curtis has been seeking to get his GOP colleagues to take the matter of climate change more seriously for some time now.

“This is a Republican bread and butter issue,” he said at a climate change town hall last September. “We care about the Earth, now let’s show it.”

“We have to stop being so afraid of this conversation,” he insisted.

“We’ve got good answers. We’ve got answers that don’t kill the economy. We’ve got answers that can be bipartisan,” Curtis said. “We’re in this. We want to be part of this.”

RELATED: CA To Spend Billions Clearing Forest Floors To Combat Wildfires After Media Mocked Trump For Suggesting It

Curtis Sought to Censure Trump

On Tuesday, The Political Insider reported that wildfires in California, something Democrats have consistently blamed on climate change despite their existence throughout history, are being fought through billions of dollars in funding meant to clear out forest floors.

Perhaps that topic will be addressed in the new Republican climate caucus.

Clearing forest floors to combat wildfires in California is something that was frequently suggested by former President Donald Trump.

He was ridiculed for such suggestions.

Curtis, shortly after the Capitol protest on January 6th, introduced a resolution to censure and condemn Trump.

“The events at the Capitol last week were abhorrent; all those involved must be held accountable, including President Trump,” he said at the time.

“Censuring the President and making it clear that Congress does not support any level of his involvement in the riots nor any attempts to undermine an election is a critical step in holding him accountable as more facts continue to unfold,” added Curtis.

The Utah Republican voted against impeachment, however, citing a lack of time for a full inquiry.



Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #16 on Feedspot’s “Top 70 Conservative Political Blogs, Websites & Influencers in 2021.”


The post House Republicans To Launch Climate Caucus After Biden Claims Global Warming Is Greatest Threat To American Security appeared first on The Political Insider.

Yevgeny Vindman receives Army promotion after Pentagon wipes retaliatory Trump claims from record

During the first of what would become two distinct Donald Trump impeachment trials, Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman became an important witness for doing what none of Trump's surrounding Republican partisans could muster: giving a full, under-oath accounting of the events surrounding Trump's linkage of congressionally mandated military aid to an at-war Ukraine to a brazenly corrupt pressuring of that government to announce an investigation of Rudy Giuliani-pushed conspiracy theories against Trump's presidential election opponent.

For that testimony, both Alexander Vindman and his brother Yevgeny, also a lieutenant colonel, faced the retaliation of the crooked White House. Alexander chose early retirement after Trump and cronies booted him from his post, forcibly escorted from the White House, and blocked him from further military promotion. Yevgeny filed a complaint charging that the White House's identical retaliations against him were spurred not just for his own cooperation with impeachment investigators but his own whistleblower reports against previous episodes of administration crookedness, a complaint that was backed by House Democrats and which is still being probed by the Pentagon's office of inspector general.

There is now at least some small amount of good news to report. Now that conservatism's least-organized organized crime family has been expelled, Army. Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman has been selected for the promotion he was previously due, and will now become a full colonel.

It wasn't necessarily going to turn out this way. Trump's team of crooks retaliated against each of the witnesses against them, in the Vindmans' cases penning new performance reviews designed to squash any military attempt to promote them. While there has yet to be any consequences for those retaliation efforts, the Vindman promotion is a signal that the Pentagon powers-that-be do indeed consider those reviews to have been retaliatory, rather than accurate. And that's a ... surprising amount of common sense from inside the military bureaucracy.

Indeed, Politico reports that Army assistant deputy chief of staff Maj. Gen. Michel Russell determined the evaluations to be "not objective," and in January those retaliatory reviews were wiped from Vindman's record.

As for brother Alex, he remains retired. In a Monday op-ed endorsing defamation lawsuits against conservative media liars, he writes that he made a mistake when he "did not respond forcefully to the threats and defamation" against him by Trump proxies, and that he "should have sued those who amplified [Trump's] campaign of defamation."

"When Fox News stars and more fringe networks like Newsmax and One America News Network make baseless and outrageous claims about “stolen elections,” “communist Democrats,” and “fascist main-stream media,” they are building on lies about individuals,” Vindman wrote. “They are galvanizing extremism on the back of defamation. Too many of those defamed individuals, including myself, have allowed extremist claims to go unanswered."

Report: National Guard Members Sickened After Being Served Undercooked Food While Guarding Capitol

Fifty Michigan National Guard troops have complained of “gastrointestinal” issues after being served undercooked meals and food contaminated with metal shavings, Fox News reports.

The tainted food complaints began in mid-February, were initially resolved, and resurfaced this past weekend.

In a letter to the National Guard, the entire Michigan delegation in the House reported that “contracted meals” were being used “to support the entire federal response stationed at the Capitol.”

“However, it is clear that these contracted meals are poorly prepared, oftentimes inedible, and highly inadequate to support our soldiers,” the letter states, urging them to switch contractors.

It goes on to describe as “completely unacceptable” the fact that “men and women serving in Washington D.C. are being hospitalized due to the food they are being provided.”

A spokesman for the National Guard indicated that 50 members had been treated for “gastrointestinal complaints,” but none were hospitalized.

The Detroit News reveals that “service members, who often stand outdoors for shifts of up to 12 hours, are increasingly spending their own money to eat because they don’t trust the food from the contractor.”

RELATED: Biden Suggests Former Military, Police Are Helping To Fuel Growth Of White Supremacy

Contaminated Food Is Just One More Way National Guard Troops Have Been Mistreated

National Guard troops receiving contaminated food comes just two months after they were hauled into the Capitol during President Biden’s inauguration, only to later be banished to a parking garage.

One Guardsman at the time accused lawmakers of using them as a prop, though the order came from the Capitol Police themselves.

“Yesterday dozens of senators and congressmen walked down our lines taking photos, shaking our hands and thanking us for our service,” he said.

“Within 24 hours, they had no further use for us and banished us to the corner of a parking garage,” the Guardsman added. “We feel incredibly betrayed.”

Lt. Col. Robert Carver, a spokesman for the joint task force that commands the Capitol security mission, told the Detroit News that the contaminated food problem is not “systemic.”

“So far we haven’t found substantial issues that we’ve recorded,” he told a reporter. “The contractors know that we are watching, and they have been cooperative and responsive to our concerns.”

One soldier last month wrote to a lawmaker, however, indicating “multiple soldiers have been getting sick and vomiting after eating, and most of the food is being thrown away,”

“Morale is very bad,” the message reads. “Many have served overseas and cannot believe the quality of food they are being fed here.”

RELATED: Democrats Seeking To Root Out ‘White Supremacists’ From The Military

Leaving in Mid-March

A spokesperson for the Pentagon believes the National Guard troops will be ending their mission in the nation’s capital sometime in mid-March.

“There’s no incidents to report,” the spokesperson told Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto. “Things are safe and secure right now.”

7,000 troops have remained at the Capitol during the Senate impeachment hearings, due to concerns about “civil unrest,” down from the 25,000 sent there during Biden’s inauguration.

Democrats have been actively smearing the military and veterans ever since the riot at the Capitol on January 6th.

President Biden last month suggested that former military and former police officers are helping to fuel the growth of white supremacy and white supremacist groups in America.

“You see what’s happening — and the studies that are beginning to be done … about the impact of former military, former police officers, on the growth of white supremacy in some of these groups,” Biden said during a town hall.

Leading up to Biden’s inaugural address, National Guard troops were vetted for ‘extremist’ views despite there being “no intelligence indicating an insider threat” to the event.

And last month, Democrat lawmakers reportedly sought to add language into this year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would keep alleged white supremacists from joining the military.

The post Report: National Guard Members Sickened After Being Served Undercooked Food While Guarding Capitol appeared first on The Political Insider.

Wednesday night owls: ‘Letting the Pentagon Loose With Your Tax Dollars’

Night Owls, a themed open thread, is a regular feature at Daily Kos .

Mandy Smithberger is the director of the Center for Defense Information at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO). At TomDispatch, she writes—Letting the Pentagon Loose With Your Tax DollarsCreating a National Insecurity State. Spending More, Seeing Less:

Hold on to your helmets! It’s true the White House is reporting that its proposed new Pentagon budget is only $740.5 billion, a relatively small increase from the previous year’s staggering number. In reality, however, when you also include war and security costs buried in the budgets of other agencies, the actual national security figure comes in at more than $1.2 trillion, as the Trump administration continues to give the Pentagon free reign over taxpayer dollars.

You would think that the country’s congressional representatives might want to take control of this process and roll back that budget—especially given the way the White House has repeatedly violated its constitutional authority by essentially stealing billions of dollars from the Defense Department for the president’s “Great Wall” (that Congress refused to fund). Recently, even some of the usual congressional Pentagon budget boosters have begun to lament how difficult it is to take the Department’s requests for more money seriously, given the way the military continues to demand yet more (ever more expensive) weaponry and advanced technologies on the (largely bogus) grounds that Uncle Sam is losing an innovation war with Russia and China.

And if this wasn’t bad enough, keep in mind that the Defense Department remains the only major federal agency that has proven itself incapable of even passing an audit. An investigation by my colleague Jason Paladino at the Project On Government Oversight found that increased secrecy around the operations of the Pentagon is making it ever more difficult to assess whether any of its money is well spent, which is why it’s important to track where all the money in this country’s national security budget actually goes.

The Pentagon’s “Base” Budget

This year’s Pentagon request includes $636.4 billion for what’s called its “base” budget—for the routine expenses of the Defense Department. However, claiming that those funds were insufficient, Congress and the Pentagon created a separate slush fund to cover both actual war expenses and other items on their wish lists (on which more to come). Add in mandatory spending, which includes payments to veterans’ retirement and illness compensation funds and that base budget comes to $647.2 billion.

Ahead of the recent budget roll out, the Pentagon issued a review of potential “reforms” to supposedly cut or control soaring costs. While a few of them deserve serious consideration and debate, the majority reveal just how focused the Pentagon is on protecting its own interests. Ironically, one major area of investment it wants to slash involves oversight of the billions of dollars to be spent. Perhaps least surprising was a proposal to slash programs for operational testing and evaluation—otherwise known as the process of determining whether the billions Americans spend on shiny new weaponry will result in products that actually work. The Pentagon’s Office of Operational Test and Evaluation has found itself repeatedly under attack from arms manufacturers and their boosters who would prefer to be in charge of grading their own performances. [...]



"Feminism isn't about making women stronger. Women are already strong. It's about changing the way the world perceives that strength."          ~~G.D. Anderson


It's not just the food service industry�27% of private-sector workers in the U.S. don't have the ability to stay home from work without losing a paycheck. We need to make sure our response to the coronavirus includes solutions that protect workers, their families, & communities.

— Senator Patty Murray (@PattyMurray) March 4, 2020


At Daily Kos on this date in 2004—FDR’s “Hundred Days” Honeymoon—1933:

Whether you count from the inaugural or, as historians do, from March 9, the Hundred Days, like the Hundred Years’ War, didn’t actually add up to a hundred, but they have nonetheless been the measure—usually in negative terms— for what succeeding administrations have accomplished. A study has even gone so far as to determine how effective presidents before Roosevelt were in their first 100 days. None came close. During the emergency session of Congress FDR called 15 major laws were passed and signed, all by June 16.

That legislation—some of it conservative, most of it moderate, none of it radical, all of it experimental—derived from no over-arching plan, and certainly not from any liberal ideology that Roosevelt presented during the campaign and brought with him into the White House. Rather than a package of legislation, as implied by the Hundred Days label, what Roosevelt and his "Brain Trust" of academics and economic theorists produced was a mish-mash, exactly what would be expected of experimentation in the face of a daunting crisis. "The notion that the New Deal had a preconceived theoretical position is ridiculous," said Frances Perkins, who would become FDR’s, Secretary of Labor from 1933-45, the first woman ever to serve in the Cabinet.

The experiments worked not just for what they actually achieved—which was a mixed bag—but also for how their very coming into being changed the nation’s somber mood. As Roosevelt said at his inaugural: "This nation asks for action, and action now"; "We must act, we must act quickly"; People want "direct, vigorous action." As Jonathan Alter wrote in The Defining Moment: FDR’s Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope, "In the argot of a later age, Roosevelt was relentlessly on message." He spurred hope in the face of despair by force of personality.

On today’s Kagro in the Morning show: What's so super about Tuesday? Well, Joan McCarter, for one thing. And you probably weren't expecting Sexy Vinyl Vixen Brit Hume! How Trump's been gaming the FVRA. Coronavirus, continued. Impeachment vs. pardons: Let's all say we believe it!

Embedded Content

RadioPublic|LibSyn|YouTube|Patreon|Square Cash (Share code: Send $5, get $5!)


Lt. Colonel Vindman Escorted Out Of The White House – ‘Reassigned’ To Pentagon

By David Kamioner | February 7, 2020

U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, a disappointing star Democratic witness in the House impeachment inquiry, has been fired from his White House National Security Council post and will return to the Pentagon for assignment.

He was escorted off  White House grounds mid Friday by security personnel. Numerous media sources confirm this.

Vindman gave contradictory and conflicting testimony in front of the House Intel Committee and was an easy witness to discredit. GOP committee member Jim Jordan was especially effective in challenging Vindman and highlighted the fact that during the Ukrainian phone call in question, and immediately after in swore deposition, Vindman stated he saw nothing wrong in the president’s conduct.

MORE NEWS: Disturbing new report reveals FBI had multiple informants in Trump’s presidential campaign

The Democratic response to the firing has been swift and negative, as Democrats again accuse the president of abusing his office and breaking the law regarding “whistleblowers” by firing Vindman. The Pentagon termed it a mere “reassignment.”

Vindman’s lawyer, David Pressman, opined, “There is no question in the mind of any American why this man’s job is over, why this country now has one less soldier serving it at the White House. LTC Vindman was asked to leave for telling the truth. His honor, his commitment to right, frightened the powerful.”

MORE NEWS: Buttigieg hit by New Hampshire feminists

The president cited another reason early Friday.
“You think I’m supposed to be happy with him? I’m not,” Trump said, adding that a decision would be made soon.
It was.

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
New video shows Pelosi practicing ripping up Trump’s State of The Union speech
Ex-Spokesman for Romney campaign says Trump guilty vote was ‘motivated by bitterness and jealousy’
Trump State of the Union speech a triumph

The post Lt. Colonel Vindman Escorted Out Of The White House – ‘Reassigned’ To Pentagon appeared first on The Political Insider.